Acharya has the habit of interpreting vague Egyptian images that may or may not apply to Horus to adduce her parallels.   She also ingores the need to date her sources to the pre-Christian era.  I will repost my critque a representiative sample of Dude's Krishna and Horus parallels to illustrate why his parallels are bogus.  Then I will crtique most of the rest of her Horus parallels and supplement these with a critique of her Buddha parallels.

I have only had time research and refute two of the most important Krishna parallels to illustrate Dude's flawed research.  I repost my prior comments:

KRISHNA:
***The moment Chrishna was born, the whole cave was splendidly illuminated::: The moment Jesus was born, there was a great light in the cave
_________________________________________________________________
Nonsense!  The Bible locates Jesus’ birth in a stable, not a cave.   The baby Jesus is located in a “house” (Matthew 2:11), not a cave.  Only later tradition speculates that Jesus was born in a cave near Bethlehem.  But that speculation is based on the cave's location, not on influence from the Horus mythology.

***Chrishna was crucified, represented with arms extended hanging on a cross, Jesus was crucified, represented with arms extended hanging on a cross.
__________________________________________________________________No auch event occurred in the Gita or in any recognzed Hindu scripture.
To quote Edwyn Bryant, a Rutgars Professor Hinduism: “There are no crucified gods in Hinduism.  Acharya needs to read a `religion 101 course.’ “
There are carvings that porray figures with holes in the foot or breast.  But Hindu scholars identify these as chakra symbols, not crucifixion nails.  Crucifixion nails are not drilled through the breast.  Crucifixion was a Roman means of execution and was unknown in ancient India!  In any case, Krishna was unknown in first century Palestine.

HORUS:
***Horus was baptised by water by anup:::Jesus baptised by water by John.
_______________________________________________________________
Hardly!  Horus died and was cast in pieces in the water, and his parts were fished out by the crocodile god at the request of Isis.  That’s hardly a baptism that resembles Jesus’ simple imnersiion in the Jurdan!  In any case, Jewish baptism was simply an outgrowth of Jewish ritual immersions and has nothing to do with Horus!

***Horus born in Annu, the place of bread:::Jesus born in Bethlehem, the house of bread.
______________________

A mere coincidence, especially since "Bethlehem" means "house of bread," not "place of bread."  Jesus' family were proud of their descent from David and  Bethlehem is the city of David.  Jesus' relatives used to travel around Palestine celebrating this fact and explaining the significance of Jesus' Davidic genealogy.
The alleged birthplace of Horus is irrelevant.  What is relevant is the ancient Mesisanic prophecy about Bethlehem in Micah 5:2.
"
***Horus the good shepherd with the crook upon his shoulders:::Jesus the good shepherd the with lamb or kid upon his shoulders
________________________________________________
I challenge your claim that Horus is called “the Good Shepherd.”   Identify the text and its date.  In any case, the Bible never portrays Jesus ‘with a lamb or kid on His shoulder.”  That image comes from later Christian art which has no relevance to Horus or the formative period of Christianity.  What do you expect a shepherd to do with immobile lambs?

***The seven on board the bark with Horus:::The seven fishers on board the bark with Jesus
_______________
Jesus crossed the Sea of Galilee various times with variious numbers of disciples.  The fact that 7 others were present on one occasion is insignificant.   

***Horus as the lamb::: Jesus as the lamb
_____________________________________
The Bible identifies Jesus as the Passover Lamb.  This is based on several parallels between Jesus’ death and Jewish Passover customs.  It has nothing to do with Horus. 

***Horus as the lion::: Jesus as the lion
__________________________________
The poetic designation of Jesus as the "Lion" from Judah in Revelation 5:5 is based on Genesis 49:9 and has nothing to do with either Horus or the earthly Jesus' self-understanding.

***Horus as the black child:::Jesus as the little black bambino
____________________________________________________
Rubbish!  There is no biblical evidence identifying Jesus as “the little black bambino.”

***Horus identified with the tat or cross:::Jesus identified with the cross
___________________________________________________________
Horus was never crucified and the “tat” is not identified with the Roman instrument of crucifixion.  Strictly speaking, Jesus is not “identified with the cross’” He was crucified on a Roman cross.

***Horus 30 yrs old at his baptism:::Jesus 30 yrs old at his baptism
_________________________________________________________
Wrong again!  Jesus was born before Herod's death in 4 BC.  The best estimate is that Jesus was born in 7 BC and baptized in 28 AD.  This would make him 34 or 35 at His baptism.

***Two mothers of child Horus who were sisters:::Two mothers of child Jesus who were sisters
________________
Nonsense!  Jesus had one mother, Mary.   

***The star, as announcer of the child Horus:::The star in the east that indicated the birthplace of Jesus
________________________________
The Bethlehem “star” fulfills Balaam's prophecy of Numbers 24:17 and has nothing to do with Horus.  Matthew draws several parallels between Balaam's prophecy and Jesus' birth.

***Horus the morning star:::Jesus the morning star.
____________________________________________
Jesus is nowhere labeled “the morning star” in our Gospels.  *

***12 followers of Horus as har-khutti:::12 followers of Jesus as the 12 disciples
__________________________________________________________________One Egyptian source identifies “4 disciples of Horus”.  Another source identifies 16 followerss of Horus.  But no Egyptian source identifies  12 disciples of Horus!
You are confused by an Egyptian depiction of the 12 zodiac signs.


***Anup and Aan the two witnesses for Horus::: John and John as witnesses for Jesus
_____
Wrong on both counts!  For neither Horus nor Jesus are just two “witnesses” distinguished.  Jesus has many witnesses.

I have demonstrated the absurdity of invoking the most striking Horus parallels as grounds for rejecting Jesus' existence and Dude has not engaged the specifics of my points.  He instead requested my critique of his other parallels.  I have had time to research most of the rest and here are my arguments:

***Horus the krst:::Jesus the christ,
______________________________
“Christos” just means “anointed.”  and so is not significant unless applied to a latter-day king.  In the Bible the title derives from Old Testament messianism, not from Horus.  Besides, Acharya can’t even establish this as a title for Horus!  Prove me wrong, Dude!  At least 50 epithets are applied to Horus.  It would be shocking if there were no parallels to the many titles applied to jesus.
.
***Horus the manifesting son of god::: Jesus the manifesting son of god.
______________________________________________________
Jesus’ self-understanding as “the Son of God” is an expression of His descent from King David.   As such, the title “Son of God” derives from 2 Samuel 7:14 and has nothing to do with Horus.

***Horus the sower and Set the destroyer in the harvest field:::Jesus the sower of the good seed and satan the sower of tares.
______________________
Seth is the divine benefactor of lower Egypt and is not the equivalent of “Satan,”, a term which means “adversary.”  Jesus tells a few seed
parables which are very original and are inspired by rabbinic models, not by Horus!

**Horus the afflicted one:::Jesus the afflicted one.  {Aren’t we aall?]
***Horus as the type of life eternal:::Jesus as the type of eternal life.
___________________________________________________.
Too vague and universally appllicable to religious figures to be meaningful.  

***Horus who came by the blood, the water, and the spirit::: Jesus who came by the blood, the water, and the spirit.
___________________________________

The expression “came by blood” just means that they were born and hence is worthless as a basis of comparison.  Jesus came by water only in the sense of His baptism.  Jesus was ritually immersed and Horus was not.  The Concept of the Holy Spirit is a distinctly Judaeo-Christian concept. So this comparison is absurd.  The relevant New Testament text is 1 John 5:8.

***Horus of the two horizons::: Jesus of the two lands
__________________________________________

this is so sillly.  Jesus enters several lands, not just two--Egypt, Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Syria, and Perea.

BUDDHA:
***Buddha was born of the virgin Maya who conceived him without intercourse::: Jesus was born of the virgin Mary who conceived him without intercourse.
_________________________________________________________
Wrong!  The pre-Christian accounts of Buddha’s ancestry presuppose nothing abnormal about his birth, and speak merely of his being ell born on his parents’ side traceable to 7 generations.  Buddha’s mother was not a virgin; she was married before the conception.  Only in the post-Christian era do traditions evolve that she had taken vows of sexual abstinence during her marriage, but even then she is abstinent only during the midsummer festival.  So this parallel too is irrelevant to the formative period of Christianity.  

***When Buddha was an infant, he spoke to his mother and said, I am the greatest among men:::When Jesus was an infant, he spoke to his mother and said, I am Jesus, the son of god.
__________________________________________________________________
Another bogus parallel!  In the Bible the infant Jesus never speaks and so makes no such claim.

***Buddha ascended bodily to the celestial regions, when his mission on earth w
fullfilled:::Jesus ascended bodily to the celestial regions, when his mission on earth was fullfilled.
__________________________________________________________________
Jesus rose bodily and eventually “ascended.”  In Buddhism,  Nirvana is not a “place” nor is “ascension” a relevant concept.  The Buddha is said to have teaversed on his death-couch all 9 of the trance levels--twice, and then his body was cremated!  

***Buddha is alpha and omega, without beginning or end, the supreme being, the eternal one:::Jesus is alpha and omega, without beginning or end, the supreme being, the eternal one.
__________________________________________________________________
This is just another typical example of how Acharya lies and distorts to concoct her parallels.Greek is not the language of eastern Buddhists.   “Alpha” and “omega” are letters of the Greek alphabet.. Besides, the earthly Jesus never claims what this comparison alleges.  The New Testament claim that God or Jesus is Alpha and Omega can only be found in the Book of Revelation (e. g. 1:8).  But here it is based on Isaiah 41:4, 6; 48:22), not on Buddhiist mythology!

Don

I will now summarize my six grounds for dismissing Dude's parallels.
(1) Dude clams his parallels were directly based on written texts.  Yet he actually quotes a New Age author without acknwledging this.  This is important because that author's parallels (Dude's) are totally contrived at lesst half the time.   Many are not  based on  texts, but rather on obscure art in which the details are as hard to identify as the intended referents.  That is why I challenge Dude to site the original source, knowing very well that he cannot.  

(2) In the 19th century, undisciplined historians collected parallels between Jesus and other savior figures without regard to the question of whether first-century Palestinian Jews were even familiar with these figures.  We now have an excellent picture of alien religious influences in Palestine.  There is no evidnece that these Jews were familiar with Savior figures (Horus, Krishna, Buddha)  cited by Dude and his source. Even if they were, these Jews loathed pagan deities and would never attempt a syncretistic merger with Jesus.  This point is axiomatic among academic specialists in the field of religious influence.  Dude is practically a biblical illerate who knows nothing about the cultural scene in first-century Palestine.  It is arrogant of him to assume he can ignore the findings of the specialists in this field.  EVEN MORE ABSURD IS HIS DISMISSAL OF JESUS' EXISTENCE WITHOUT EVEN INVESTIGATING THE NON-CHRISTIAN EVIDENCE FOR JESUS' HISTORICITY!   Thus, Dude is the paradigm of the myopic New Age Ghetto mentality.

(3) 19th century historians also created their Jesus parallels without regard to the question of whether these texts pre-date  Jesus.   Many of Dude's do not and are thus irrelevant to the question of influence on our picture of the historical Jesus.    

(4) As I have demonstrated, Dude's source often warps the terms to express alleged parallels.  When the true language behind these parallels is grasped, the legitimacy of the parallels often vanishes.  

(5) Many of Dude's parallels are easily explained from a Jewish background, especially the Old Testament, which renders irrelevant the alleged parallel to a foreign savior figure.  Christianity is far more thoroughly Jewish in outlook and background than most Christians realize.  Prior Christian anti-Semitism might not have been so severe if this simple truth were more widely recognized.

(6) In a future post, I will make the case that the Gospel portrait of Jesus not only establishes His existence, but also His legtimacy.

Freud acknowledged Carl Jung as his best student.  Jung was well versed in world mythology and developed an intriguing theory of archetypes to explain the universality of religious and cultural imagery, despite the fact that most of these cultures had never experienced meaningful interaction.  Archetypes are the mind's innate tendencies to organize perception around specific images.  Jung was a mystic who had many paranormal experienced.   He insisted that he didn't BELIEVE in God; rather, he KNEW God through the archtypes that shape our mystical experiences.  Jung's theory has great potential to explain the best of interreligious parallels without tne need for direct cultural influence.

ADDENDUM: I just noticed your recent supplementation of alleged paralleles in reply #39 of your thread on Jesus.   You originally claimed that you relied on original ancient rather than modern sources.   But in fact you rely on discredited New Age pseudo-scholars who demonstrate an appalling lack of knowledge of the parameters of cultural options in first-centuiry Palestine.  Your new "parallels' are subject to the criticisms I express in this post.  

Your parallels are generally contrived, even bogus, and yet, you quote no ancient texts at all.   Thus, your research lacks integrity.    YOU CANNOT QUOTE THE ANCIENT TEXTS BECAUSE THE ALLEGED PARALLELS GENERALLY DON'T EXIST IN SUCH TEXTS.  Prove me wrong!  Quote all the ancient texts word for word that imply what your parallels allege and I will reply point by point to your new parallels.  

Your googled new Age source claims that there was no first-century Nazareth.  
Your naive acceptance of this absurdity just shows how sloppy your research is, not to mention your appalling lack of respect for modern SECULAR scholarship.
We have NON-CHRISTIAN Jewish sources for Nazareth's existence in the first cnentury!  For example, the priestly family named Hapizez fled there from Jerusalem after the Roman legions closed in on Jerusalem in 66 AD (Mishmaroth 18).  There are many casual references to trips to Nazareth in the first few Christian centuries.  Archaeologists have even been able to establish the village's approximate area (60 acres) and population (about 480)!   Jesus' hometown of Nazareth is legitimately attested in the Gospels.  It was a source of ridicule by Jesus' opponents because of its small and rustic character.  If Christians wanted to invent Jesus' hometown, they would have chosen a less embarassing locale. 

Don

To take this in another direction for just a moment,

Great spiritual masters such as Jesus have opened or even created channels in in our bodies of subtle energy, allowing us to come closer to the Divine through their uplifting message. If you have activated any sensitivity to your bodies of subtle energies through meditation, prayer, tantra, or whatever, you know you are more than a porous sponge, but have channels where energy can rise with PUL, --or fall, when faced with those influences the world recognizes as negative.

Try doing a retrieval while thinking like Nero.  Think Platonic or Socratic thoughts and see if those will get an inner response from your spirit. Try meditating or prayer without love at your center and see if you can feel uplifted by the response of energies around you.

Jesus' message of Love was a new concept for people of that time.
Of course Love existed before his time, but people were made conscious of it more fully by his teachings.  Where would we be without it? His ideas took hold at a particular time and inspired some people to challenge the lions of opposing downward forces. Without his message, society was made of slaves and masters; when his message was established by his example of dieing for it, Life changed.
Something happened at that time; to whom are you giving the credit?
(I'm not a Christian according to many congregations of today. Titheing for the pastor's new car or attending 'Bar-B-Qs for Jesus' haven't attracted my involvement either.  )

Bets

 

Don.  This is a message from your girl Acharya after she was shown the criticism and critiques you gave to her work.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------

From: Acharya S <acharya_s@...>   
Subject: Fwd: Comment and question  acharya_s   

 
Hi there - 
 
Some "Berserker" is obsessively trashing my work on the board: 
 
http://www.afterlife-knowledge.com/
 
If any of you kind listers would like to go there and straighten this guy out, please do so. I don't have the time or inclination to spend on him. The first thing you could point out is that it seems he hasn't 
read "Suns of God," which addresses practically all of these shallow criticisms. Another thing is that he spends a great deal of time denigrating me with ad hominems, rather than addressing the facts I 
bring up, which is a sign of intellectual weakness. He also has to fall back on the "nobody believes her" argument, which is like "everyone believes Jesus was a real person." A non-argument. His 
claim that the first century Palestinian Jews could not know about all these characters is ridiculously ignorant of the vast intercourse of the time between cultures. Gee, there was this HUGE library collected at Alexandria, with books from around the known world. Alexander had thoroughly opened up the lines of communication to India three centuries previously. Also, I don't address the "Palestinian" Jews so much as the Alexandrian Jews and others of the Diaspora (does this know-it-all know about the Diaspora?) Are you trying to tell me that 
Jews of Alexandria--who made up about 50% of the population of that city--never went into the library there or attended the university? 
 
It's ridiculous. The other of this smart aleck's arguments can be as easily refuted. 
 
Regardless of the anal nitpicking, the fact will remain that Jesus Christ appears nowhere in the contemporary historical record, despite the repeated claim in the New Testament that he was widely famed. The fact will also remain that much of the gospel story was already in existence long before the Christian era, in bits and pieces, before it was amalgamated into the Christ myth. Also, the sayings that supposedly distinguish a "real guy" were in existence--and can be found in pre-Christian texts--long before Jesus supposedly lived. There is nothing new under this sun (god). Jesus Christ is a mythical character. You can rail against me until the veins pop out of your neck, but nothing will change that fact....... 
 
From my previous BCC to you, perhaps you can tell that I can readily demolish this persons  "arguments," which are shallow indeed. Talk about sloppy research! He seems to have gone nowhere further than encyclopedias for his "expertise!" 
   
Do feel free to join my discussion groups, as in the "to" line of the message I bcc'ed to you. In any event, I would heartily recommend that you read "Suns of God," which handily deals with and refutes all of these infantile criticisms. Naturally, I haven't heard from the likes of Price and Licona--perhaps they have eggs on their faces, but I doubt 
it, because their egos and arrogance are too big. 
   
My pen name is not "pretentious." I took it mainly because WESTERN WOMEN could never be called "Acharya," as that is a spiritual title reserved for the pious Hindu priests. This angry, ranting berserker cannot understand humor, obviously. Nor does he realize that his reaction to my pseudonym is precisely when I took it.   
   
Again, Suns of God shows that this fool's hostile ranting is completely erroneous 
   


 

lol Don... I never even heard of Acharya until you brought her name up in your first post on this thread.  My initial source for the information was from Jordan Maxwell.

There's a bit in "Up The Down Staircase" where the main character (played by Sandy Dennis in the movie, but I forget her name in the book) talks about having been marked down on some project in college for mis-interpreting something by Frost or Sandburg, one or the other, and she writes to the author, who writes back saying she is absolutely correct.  She shows it to her professor, who says the author is wrong!

Can't imagine why that just came to mind...

Dude, listen to this exerpt from Howard Storm's NDE.  Then, read his book like Don suggested:

I asked, for example, "What about the Bible?"  

They responded, "What about it?"


About the bible, Storm, an avowed atheist questioned his beings of light:

"I asked if it (the bible) was true, and they said it was. Asking them why it was that when I tried to read it, all I saw were contradictions, they took me back to my life's review again – something that I had overlooked. They showed me, for the few times I had opened the Bible, that I had read it with the idea of finding contradictions and problems. I was trying to prove to myself that it wasn't worth reading.

I observed to them that the Bible wasn't clear to me. It didn't make sense. They told me that it contained spiritual truth, and that I had to read it spiritually in order to understand it. It should be read prayerfully. My friends informed me that it was not like other books. They also told me, and I later found out this was true, that when you read it prayerfully, it talks to you. It reveals itself to you. And you don't have to work at it anymore."

Granted, that was his experience.  I have already pointed out flaws in your arguments from the bible where a nobleman was quoted in a story, and the quotes appeared barbaric.  Your inference was that Jesus was barbaric, which was untrue.  The bible either old or new testament has wisdom in it that may be found, as Storm mentions as spiritual truth that can resonate with an open mind.  If the bible is picked apart out of context, contradictions will abound a plenty - so what?  

Please spare us from bringing Acharya here to further this debunking nonsense.  Read Dave's comments carefully.  Though intelligent and talented, you still have much to learn, my friend.

M

M