The New Fundamentalism

 I just watched a video on YouTube...

https://youtu.be/-79H-gvfU6o

Does anyone else see how stupid this is? The level of credence this Humphreys guy is given for all this conspiracy theory conjecture is ridiculous. Rational people can't accept the biblical narrative?

Humphreys gives scholarship a bad name. And I thought Higher Criticism was off the mark! This is the same line of thinking that dismisses the book of Daniel because it has prophecies that are so accurate, "they just can't be true. They have to be interpolations, or written after the fact." 

I guess in this age where being skeptical is the new fundamentalism, it's easy to make a claim and draw a crowd and never have to back up your notions with actual facts and nobody ever questions the rhetoric. Talk about holy men and charlatans! Humphreys is like a shaman to the skeptic. He shows up and bugs his eyes and rattles his bones and all the gullible skeptics just nod their heads. Is this what passes for rationality these days?

Jesus Myths?

The view that Jesus of Nazareth never existed, but rather was a composition of earlier pagan gods, is not new at all. It started in the 1700's and has persisted to this day, being perpetuated by YouTube atheists like Matt Dillahunty and debaters in the comments section of posted videos.

I was recently challenged to abandon my antiquated notions and research three ancient persons: Horus, Mithras, and Apollonius of Tyana. I decided to stay away from Christian sources for my research. If I stuck to non-partisan historical sites, I felt my findings would be more readily received by the skeptics I'm trying to reach.

I'll just lay out my findings so far on this. My sources are...

https://www.ancient.eu/Horus/
https://www.ancient.eu/Mithra/
https://www.livius.org/sources/about/philostratus-life-of-apollonius/

Horus was an Egyptian deity with a falcon's head, or in some references just looks like a falcon. Horus was born to Isis and Osirus, circa 6000 to 3150 BCE.

Tom Harpur wrote The Pagan Chist, where he drew from 18th 19th and 20th century authors to draw parallels which do not hold up under scrutiny...

"To cite only a few examples, Harpur asserts that both Horus and Jesus were born in a cave - this is false, Horus was born in the Delta swamps and Jesus in a stable; both births were announced by an angel - also false, as the concept of the angel, a messenger of God, is absent from Egyptian beliefs; Horus and Jesus were both baptized - false, baptism was not practiced by Egyptians; both Horus and Jesus were tempted in the wilderness - false, Horus battled Set in many different regions, including the arid desert while the gospel stories make clear that Jesus was tempted in the desert or the wilderness; Horus and Jesus were both visited by Three Wise Men - false, Horus is never visited by wise men and, even more damaging to Harpur's 'scholarship', there are not 'three wise men' mentioned in the Bible which only references `wise men' who bring three kinds of gifts; Horus and Jesus both raised the dead back to life - false, Horus had nothing to do with raising Osiris or anyone else from the dead."

"Horus was a redeemer of health and humans in their earthly form; not of souls needing salvation from sin and eternal punishment."

Ok, so when you look at Horus' story objectively, the similarities are desperate concoctions.

Mithras gets a lot of attention these days, especially since Zeitgeist the Movie came out. I have to admit, this movie originally threw me for a loop. Maybe Christianity really did repurpose this ANE deity. Until I did some digging.

"Mithra's name was invoked in inscriptions during the Achaemenid Empire (c. 550-330 BCE), notably during the reign of Artaxerxes II (404-358 BCE) and he was still acknowledged during the Sassanian Empire (224-651 CE). After the Sassanian Empire fell to the invading Muslim Arabs in 651 CE, Zoroastrianism – including worship of Mithra – was suppressed..."
"He is linked to the Vedic god Mitra and is often associated with the Roman Mystery Cult of the god Mithras which flourished c. 100-400 CE throughout the Roman Empire, but these are two different deities, although Mithras is loosely derived from Mithra. Although the Roman Mithras and his cult have often been claimed as the precursor and model for Jesus Christ and Christianity, there is absolutely no historical evidence to support the assertion."
"There is no evidence that Mithras – nor even Jesus for that matter – was born on 25 December. Mithras is depicted as emerging from a rock and never as an infant nor in any way associated with a virgin birth or a visitation by any magi. Mithras is never represented with any disciples at all, celebrated no “Last Supper”, and did not die on a cross – in fact, there are no depictions of Mithras dying at all.

The fact that the claims of Dupuis and de Volney are outright lies, however, has not stopped them from being repeated by anti-Christian writers and pundits from the time of the 1872 CE publication to the present day."

I first heard of Apollonius of Tyana in a debate where Bart Ehrman drew all sorts of parallels between Apollonius and Jesus, which only works if you twist everything to make it fit
To begin, Apollonius and Jesus were alive at the same time. Well, sort of. They both were born roughly the same time, but Jesus died around 33CE, rose from the dead, and His disciples immediately continued His spiritual movement to this day. Apollonius died some time around 100CE, way too late. By that time the Christian community had grown throughout the Mediterranean. Rather than being an influence on Christianity, the teachings of Apollonius were in direct conflict with those of Christ. Apollonius was more of a Greek philosopher and mystic, more like Pythagoras. Actually, when the apostle Paul was debating the Greeks in the book of Acts, I wouldn't be surprised if he was dealing with the teachings of Apollonius. But that's just my opinion. But it does pique my curiosity. I'll have to do some more digging in that direction.

Agnostic Bart Ehrman, while being antagonistic of Christianity, and admits to attempting to crush the faith of every Christian who enrolls in his class, concedes on the historicity of Jesus. I plan on reading his book Did Jesus Exist? I hear it does a great job of dispelling the arguments of mythicists.