15
Mar
08

Deacon Blue vs. Nsangoma

turin-jesus.jpgSo, I was visiting one of my favorite blogs yesterday and made the “mistake” of responding to a comment on one of the topics to correct a gross misrepresentation of history (I guess in hindsight it wasn’t a mistake, because now I have a topic for today). The commenter decided to get a bit obnoxious and when I mentioned I didn’t want to take the commentary off topic with our discussion, he basically turned it around to say that I was simply running away because I would lose the argument. Since his nonsense involves the assertion that Jesus never existed, I don’t feel like that is shit I can let stand. Since I really don’t want to take the comments on that blog off topic, I have decided to reprint the comments of myself and Nsangoma here, respond to the points I wasn’t able to before out, and I will invite him to continue the debate here, where it is appropriate.

Oh, by the way, the original blog post that started all this (and which has nothing to do with Jesus, oddly enough), is at the field negro blog, and it is the March 13th post titled “Hillary You Are Breaking My Heart.” Please check it out when you have a chance.

Now, on to the debate:

NSANGOMA SAID:
Jesus is a myth; Jesus is an anthropomorphism of the Sun. Any Negroe (Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr included) telling you that Jesus existed, is lying. Anthropomorphism, as in the Sun took on human form and dwelled here on earth with human-kind for 33 years.

DEACON BLUE SAID:
Kinda like saying Cleopatra didn’t exist man. It was only 2,000 years ago and the man made a splash (and we have reliable history of people’s existence for shite even older than J.C.). Even if you don’t believe he was the son of God, at least give Jesus props for actually being on planet earth. Still, even when you lose me with your line of thought or raise my hackles, Nsangoma, I have to admit you sound awfully cool saying it.

NSANGOMA SAID:
deacon blue, let us be clear. There is no evidence of the physical existence of a Jesus. There is historical physical evidence of a belief in Jesus, but no historical physical evidence that Jesus ever existed.

DEACON BLUE SAID:
How much physical evidence do we have of anyone that far back in the day? Anyone have the prophet Muhammad’s body, either? Or busts of him? Much of what we know of the existence of any ancient personage is historical. There is plenty of documentation about Jesus, dating back to within less than a human lifetime of his ministry…whereas we rely on stuff about Alexander the Great and others as “accurate” that was often written generations or centuries after the person died.

I’m just sayin’, ya know? But I respect the fact that you think he was too fringe to be proven and that you don’t trust the source materials…even if I disagree with you. And I sure don’t want to drag this too far off topic. 😉

NSAGOMA SAID:
… And I sure don’t want to drag this too far off topic. 😉
deacon blue 11:56

Why of course you do not, you will lose. The New Testament of the so-called Holy Bible was written a minimum of 70 years after Jesus supposedly existed. And it was written by people who never met this Jesus, who supposedly existed. Saul was struck blind by the Sun; he is the light of the world. Solar metaphors.

DEACON BLUE SAID:
I’m not interested in a pissing match. Keep your intellectual arrogance if you must. I was being civil (or so I thought). I admit it, you have a bigger dick. (But I use mine with more finesse).

___________________________________

OK, I admit my last comment was a tad snarky, but I had been pretty accommodating until that point. Fact is, I’m not interested in a pissing match. But I’m also not interested in someone trying to undercut my religion based on some absolute bullshit.

My “you have a bigger dick” comment at least had the virtue of getting him to shut up in the commentary since I presume he is under the impression that I am now cowed by his pseudo-intellectual claptrap (a shame, since most of the commenters at the blog are pretty astute). Fact is, I think Nsangoma is either a bully or someone who was bullied in childhood and now wants payback by metaphorically holding people down and hitting them with his verbal/written arguments until they yell “uncle,” and then sometimes hitting them once more thereafter just for good measure.

Now, Nsangoma, I’m going to respond to your earlier points. And if you’re so damn sure of yourself, come here and try to knock my socks off, man.

___________________________________

Point #1: Jesus is a myth

Highly unlikely that someone made up Jesus to create a new religion, generated so many conversions and spawned so much written material about his life…and no one refuted his existence. The Roman historian Josephus mentions Jesus and, if I recall, there are Hebrew texts from the time that refer to Jesus as some kind of sorcerer stirring up trouble in the region.

Point #2: Jesus is an anthropomorphism of the Sun

This is the kind of shit people come up with when they get some education, start thinking they’re smarter than everyone else, and get wild notions up their asses. This idea is ridiculous. Are we to believe that at a time when there is Judaism, innumerable temples devoted to the Roman/Greek gods and who knows what else, someone decided to just create a new sun god?

Apollo is an anthropomorphism of the sun. Jesus is not. In addition to the metaphors about light, Jesus was said to be the “way and the truth” and it was said that if “you knock he shall open the door” and he was the “good shepherd” and much more. According to Nsangoma’s logic, someone not only made a new sun god, but also made him the god of roads and doors and the patron deity of animal husbandry. Jesus was about much more than light.

If one is going to argue against the divinity of Jesus, one would be better to claim he was an updated rehash of Osiris, an Egyptian god associated with resurrection. Claiming he is an embodiment of the sun is nonsense.

Point #3: There is no evidence of the physical existence of a Jesus.

Unless you were a ruler or other kind of high-flying muckity-muck and people mentioned you on all the papyrus scrolls and made busts and statues of your ass, there isn’t much physical evidence of anyone in the ancient historical record.

But the New Testament documents of the time around Jesus were widely distributed and word of him spread quickly, particularly after his death and resurrection. That no historian of the time refuted Jesus’ existence, and the fact that some mention him, is proof enough he existed.

The church had to start with a fairly sizable number of people in order to be able to grow and spread as fast as it did. Those people would have been people who had been with Jesus or seen him. If Jesus hadn’t existed, there is no way any sizable number of people would have believed in him and formed a religious experience around him because you don’t gather around someone who never existed. Even cults have to have a real person to gather around, much less major religious movements.

Point #4: The New Testament of the so-called Holy Bible was written a minimum of 70 years after Jesus supposedly existed. And it was written by people who never met this Jesus, who supposedly existed.

Actually, the oldest known, surviving copies of New Testament documents date to around 70 years after Jesus’ ministry. Those documents were almost certainly based off older copies and the original texts, which would have likely been written less than a generation after Jesus’ ministry and death. Those would have been written by the authors to whom they were ascribed, all of whom traveled with Jesus.

Furthermore, the accuracy and reliability of these older copies is almost irrefutable (that is, they are very accurate to the original copies) as there are thousands of copies of New Testament documents from a variety of regions and in a variety of languages, which show the same information being transmitted. Pretty impressive for a time and day when no one had phones and photocopiers.

By contrast, the only ancient document that even comes close to having so many copies that remained true to the original through the ages was the Greek Iliad.

In point of fact, most of the ancient history we simply take as truth is based on documents for which the oldest surving copies date to centuries after the chronicled events. Thus, the proximity of the original New Testament documents so close to Jesus’ life means that anyone who wished to refute them (i.e. I was around then and I know there was no Jesus) could have put an easy end to Christianity long before it gained momentum. We trust ancient documents about people like Alexander the Great and Ramses that have fewer copies to corroborate things and which were removed by hundreds of years, yet doubt documents that were 70 years after the fact. Talk about hypocrisy and ignorance.

OK, Nsangoma, the ball is in your court now. Take your best shot. Hell, swing at me a few times. I can take the hits. My savior’s reputation has survived the efforts of the Hebrew priesthood, the Romans and many others to sully it, and the spiritual legacy he left behind has endured and prospered and spread across the world in a way that can only be explained by the fact it resonates with truth. It isn’t going away just because you want it to.

Advertisements

19 Responses to “Deacon Blue vs. Nsangoma”


  1. 1 An Anonymous Field Negro
    March 15, 2008 at 9:22 am

    1. They were refuting Jesus’s existence from the beginning. Just read the words of those early Christian church fathers, who’s only defense against pagan accusations of mimicry, was that the devil somehow instituted savior-god worship before Jesus came on the scene. (examples: Justin Martyr, Origen, and Tertulian) I guess it was a case of the proverbial copying of the copy before it came into existence.

    2. Oh man. Josephus’s Antiquities Jesus passages? People are still using that one? No copy of Josephus’s Antiquity of The Jews contains those two Jesus passages before the 4th century. It was added later and first mentioned by Eusebius in the 4th century. In the words of Romulan Senator Vreenak from Star Trek, “IT’S A FAAAAKKKKKKEEEEEE!” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qKcJF4fOPs). No biblical scholar, worth his salt, would actually use that as evidence for a historical Jesus. By the way, Josephus was a Mitzvot law abiding, devout Jewish priest. (Josephus’ Antiquity of the Jews, first referenced by Origen, DOES NOT CONTAIN NOR MENTION THAT PASSAGE, cited work: Origen Contra Celsum)

    2a. Then again, maybe you agree with Eusebius that it’s OK for Christians to lie to gain converts to further the Kingdom of God. Most scholars credit Eusebius with adding that line of text to Josephus’s work.

    P.S. Are not the basic tenets of Christianity supposed to be supported by the doctrine of faith? Why would evidence be necessary when faith is supposed to be all that is required? You can’t have it both ways. If irrefutable evidence were presented to you (and you actually agreed), I find it highly doubtful, that you individually, would have a crisis of faith.

  2. 2 Deacon Blue
    March 15, 2008 at 4:18 pm

    Howdy, Anonymous Field Negro, and thanks for the pointed questions and comments. Here goes:

    1. They were refuting Jesus’s existence from the beginning. Just read the words of those early Christian church fathers, who’s only defense against pagan accusations of mimicry, was that the devil somehow instituted savior-god worship before Jesus came on the scene. (examples: Justin Martyr, Origen, and Tertulian) I guess it was a case of the proverbial copying of the copy before it came into existence.

    First, who are the “they” we are talking about specifically? Seems that the Hebrew priesthood and Roman leaders were more into refuting Jesus’ divine nature than his existence.

    And which early church fathers are you referring to? From my point of view, the early church fathers are those who established the base church…the apostles and others around them, and I don’t recall them defending themselves against such claims. They preached Jesus, and him risen, and helped move the Jews (as many as were listening with an open heart anyway) toward a recognition that their savior had come. I’m not familiar with correspondence in which those early church founders defended any so-called mimicry, though if you want to point me to them, I’d be happy to educate myself.

    Frankly, I don’t see Jesus as a mimic of anything. He was someone who fit the prophecies of the Messiah in a multitude of ways (whether you believe the connections or think they were made up after the fact). If I were trying to establish a new religion based on the Messiah, I can’t think of anyone who in their right mind would establish a guy who taught and kept peaceful for the most part and who died having done nothing but heal and talk about the kingdom of God. The Jews were expecting (and wanting) a kick-ass Messiah. If someone made Jesus up to create Christianity, they would have given the Jews a person who at least roused the masses to fight and they would have done something other than having him endure the most undignified type of execution of the times. Jesus is unique, not a mimic.

    As for the Satan issue, I believe in Satan. And therefore I believe that I am in the midst of a spiritual battlefield. I fully expect that Satan would, like Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama, pull out every dirty trick in the book…and then some.

    2. Oh man. Josephus’s Antiquities Jesus passages? People are still using that one? No copy of Josephus’s Antiquity of The Jews contains those two Jesus passages before the 4th century. It was added later and first mentioned by Eusebius in the 4th century. In the words of Romulan Senator Vreenak from Star Trek, “IT’S A FAAAAKKKKKKEEEEEE!” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qKcJF4fOPs). No biblical scholar, worth his salt, would actually use that as evidence for a historical Jesus. By the way, Josephus was a Mitzvot law abiding, devout Jewish priest. (Josephus’ Antiquity of the Jews, first referenced by Origen, DOES NOT CONTAIN NOR MENTION THAT PASSAGE, cited work: Origen Contra Celsum)

    OK, here I will cop to the fact I am NOT a bible scholar (and never claimed to be). I’m not even that strong in ancient history. Most of my college electives were things like History of Central American Wars, Japanese Literature, African Literature and Earth & Life in Science & Art. If I’m relying on bad evidence, my apologies. I’ll have to go back and hit the books some more. But you should still point me to something that claims Jesus never existed. I find it ludicrous that people could have founded a religion on someone who didn’t exist and get that far with it and never get called out on it.

    2a. Then again, maybe you agree with Eusebius that it’s OK for Christians to lie to gain converts to further the Kingdom of God. Most scholars credit Eusebius with adding that line of text to Josephus’s work.

    Again, I’ll have to do some more research to advance my own knowledge. I’m not familiar with Eusebius. I’m a journalist by trade and more familiar with healthcare and environmental issues. I’m not a seminary graduate.

    I don’t agree with lying to gain converts. That’s completely counter to the way of God. Lies are in and of themselves sins and we don’t use sin to gain converts if we are approaching evangelism from a godly angle.

    P.S. Are not the basic tenets of Christianity supposed to be supported by the doctrine of faith? Why would evidence be necessary when faith is supposed to be all that is required? You can’t have it both ways. If irrefutable evidence were presented to you (and you actually agreed), I find it highly doubtful, that you individually, would have a crisis of faith.

    Ah, but I’m not trying to have it both ways. I came to Christ in faith, with my heart and soul and not my intellect. No one can think their way to Jesus (although it’s very easy for folks to think their way out of salvation, just like it’s so easy to think one’s way out of a multitude of things that are better for us than the more pleasurable alternatives). I don’t need evidence to believe in God, Jesus or the Holy Spirit. But I am fully on board with Sun Tzu about “know your enemy and know yourself and you need not fear the result of a thousand battles.” I don’t know as much as I should, but knowing about the evidenciary basis of things and knowing about the world and other faiths is important both to bolstering my own faith and relating to people outside of it.

    Think of it this way: A prosecutor has to rely on facts. Evidence. But that doesn’t mean that he or she doesn’t also go on gut instinct to pursue a case and whip out emotional/subjective material when possible to sway a jury. I rely on my faith, but I don’t eschew evidence.

    You’re right. Irrefutable evidence wouldn’t give me a crisis of faith. A moot point anyway, since there is no more irrefutable evidence against God/Jesus/etc. than there is for it. Irrefutability is a myth. It wasn’t that long ago that we got taught in school that the proton, neutron and electron were the smallest units of matter…and look at all the subatomic particles we know about now.

  3. March 16, 2008 at 2:29 am

    Interesting blog, Deacon. Keep the faith!!!! And, keep arguing your point.

    NSAGOMA (all capital letters, I noticed) is probably a bully or was bullied. Hence, the use of capital letters.

    I have all the evidence that I need in my heart. It’s called faith.

  4. 4 Deacon Blue
    March 16, 2008 at 3:03 am

    Thanks, TrailerParkBarbie. In my case, it’s more acting on my faith than keeping it that’s the challenge. 😉 Been pretty sedate and very passive in my faith walk for the past decade-plus, up until the spirit moved me into this strange and wonderful realm of bloggin.

    Now, as for Nsangoma, I just don’t know. But let me tell y’all where we stand with him right now…

    The first comment to this blog post is by Anonymous Field Negro. At first, I thought it might be the Field Negro himself, author of the blog where all this started. But after more consideration, it didn’t sound much like him, and he’s at a conference where he’s probably barely got enough time to deal with his own blog, much less take time out to comment here right now.

    Also, while the tone is more polite than Nsangoma was using at Field’s blog toward me, it has a similar ring of his intellectual ammunition. On the other hand, it could be someone else who wanted to chime in. My son and I put the odds thus: 60% chance it was Nsangoma, 30% it was someone else who frequents the Field Negro, or 10% chance it was the Field Negro himself.

    For the sake of argument, if it was Nsangoma, why hide behind a different name? If it is him, then this supports my bully theory. He got his nose bloodied, and like so many bullies, no longer wanted to be quite so forward.

    If it isn’t him, though, why hasn’t he shown his face here yet?

    Several times since he tried to make me look like a punk at Field’s blog and since I issued the challenge to debate me here instead of off topic in commentary at that other blog, he has sniped at me with little nits and swipes that are, I suppose, meant to bait me. I’ve told him I have no interest in responding to him off topic and to come here and man up, or just shut up. In the interests of giving him his air time, though (and keeping something lively going here for a short while), here are his three off topic comments so far to try to rile me up since I issued my challenge:

    ______________________________________

    deacon blue, that Jesus, https://holyhell.wordpress.com, looks like a white boi to me.

    What was that Mary was heard to say?, “God my baby daddy.”

    ______________________________________

    deacon blue, please demonstrate Extra-Biblically, dat God am Mary baby daddy.

    ______________________________________

    deacon blue, the western world is moving into the post-Christian era; you need to start running and catch up.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/science/20tier.html

    http://www.answers.com/topic/post-christian

    _______________________________________

    So, apparently, Nsangoma has run out of academic arguments to throw at me, because he’s resorting to some pretty weak shit now. Taunts aren’t going to fire me up, man…come here and show some brains. You started off hot out of the starting gate, and it seemed promising that you might pose a challenge, but so far I’m seeing a whole lot of hiding and not a lot of spark.

  5. March 16, 2008 at 8:31 pm

    Well, ya know, bees sting, lose their stingers, then die. They hurt like hell when their piercing your skin but one good whack at ya is all they really have in them.

    Maybe, he is a “bee” type.

    I’ve had people come on my blog to argue. They might get one or two swipes in but lose their bravado when challenged for a logical debate or discussion. It’s so easy to do the Badass swagger when you can so easily hide behind your computer screen. Don’t you agree?

  6. 6 Deacon Blue
    March 16, 2008 at 8:41 pm

    I don’t know. I guess maybe it’s just my personality but even online debates/disagreements/fights/etc. sort of get my heart pumping, in a similar way as a potential physical or verbal confrontation outside the Internet.

    Sure, I agree with you that the computer screen adds a HUGE dose of shielding and enables people to rattle their sabers more, but I guess I’ve never understood how some people can take conflict and confrontation and debate so blithely just becuase it’s not face-to-face.

  7. March 16, 2008 at 9:59 pm

    In total agreement with you, Deacon.

    I think what totally blows me away, though, is that many people who are self-proclaimed experts and debaters online will never speak up for their beliefs off line. I think it’s really scary to meet people day after day and not have any idea what is really in their hearts and minds. There is no way of knowing whether the meek, mild-mannered, faith professing co-worker/neighbor/etc. that you think that you know is actually a raving lunatic on the internet.

    And, like you, online debates/arguments/etc. get my pretty riled up, too. Especially, when the person just slinks off like a childish brat.

    I do like your blog. I like the fact that you profess your faith for all to read about but make it clear that you have faults. I believe that a lot of people have the wrong idea of what being a Christian is about. I’ve had people say to me, “I can’t live a Christian life because I drink/smoke/gossip, etc.” They have been taught by some of the larger organized religious bodies that they must have a life without any sin to be a Christian. And, even though, I think we should strive to rid ourselves of sin, it’s impossible to be sinless.
    Christ died for our sins. We MUST believe that. That is the essence of our Christian belief. God, our Father, loves us as we are. If we had to be without sin to be saved, then I’d have to throw in the towel right now.
    I was raised up in a church that was all hellfire and brimstone. I was soooo scared of God that I couldn’t bring myself to love him. How could I love a being that was so frightening? I am so grateful that I left that “sect” when I left home and got out on my own. God is love not fear.

    OK…sorry, I got revved up and off topic.

  8. 8 Deacon Blue
    March 16, 2008 at 11:15 pm

    Barbie (if I may be so familiar after a few comments back and forth), don’t worry about getting off topic around here. I get concerned about doing it at blogs where there are a couple dozen or hundred posts already and enough people off topic. My traffic here is pretty good for a new blog, but not enough that I’m getting tons of commentary.

    Just nice to have a post go past a few comments for once. 😉

    But I agree with you 100% about how so many churches and churchgoers really scare people off, making them think they’re not good enough…when in fact none of us are good enough unless we’re using Jesus’ spiritual credit.

  9. March 17, 2008 at 4:56 am

    I like your blog, you did a good job handling old boy on Field Negro’s blog. I used to get into those types of debates on message boards and the like, but that is tiring. I realized that no matter which point you refute, the people will continue to use it despite the evidence or argument you provide because they want to believe what they want to believe.

    Anyway, I’m going to add you to my blogroll, add me if you feel the urge.

  10. 10 Deacon Blue
    March 17, 2008 at 2:30 pm

    Thanks, Big Man…and I’m totally on-board with your thinking. 99% of the time, the discussion is just going to go nowhere fast in such cases. What’s funny is this is the second time I’ve gotten into a situation like this recently (I’m not exactly a very confrontational person), and both times it got launched from me making what I thought was an innocent and even humorous comment. Last thing I was trying to do in either case was get drawn into something messy. 😉

    First time was at the blog “Stuff White People Like” and one commenter posted this:

    I think it’s unfair to say that white people “don’t get it” or “can’t take a joke”. After all, white people invented humor, along with the wheel, Jesus Christ, the hairless vagina, hundreds of uses of peanuts (including peanut butter), and the dog.

    Now, I’m thinking this guy is being funny for the most part, though I decided I’d take the chance to hit people with a small black history lesson and return the humor. So I said:

    Sorry Marty…the peanut thing was trail-blazed by George Washington Carver (a black man). I’ll give you the hairless vagina though.

    Now, you’d think that would be the end, right? But no. The guy comes back and tells me that he’s pretty sure George Washington had (a) nothing to do with peanuts and (b) certainly wasn’t black.

    And I nicely point out that I said George Washington CARVER, not George Washington.

    So the guy comes back and says soemthing like, “My father has read everything there is about George Washington and he didn’t invent anything having to do with peanuts.”

    To which I respond a bit peeved to the effect that “didn’t you read my post clearly? I am talking about a black man with the last name Carver, NOT the first president of the U.S.”

    This continues back and forth, with him continuing to remind me the first president of the U.S. wasn’t a peanut guy, and me getting irritated enough to start calling him on the other stuff, because he also insists that humor started with white people and God was white, hence why white people invented Jesus. Someone even posts at one point to back him up on the point that George Washington wasn’t black (which of course I never said he was, because I wasn’t talking about HIM). Eventually, after stoking up my blood pressure, I realize that the commenter is either an idiot or he’s simply doing all this on purpose just to rile me…and I drop the discussion.

    And that’s kind of like the thing with Nsangoma, except that I KNEW he was serious about believing that Jesus didn’t exist. I just figured I could throw out a little logic/truth in a couple sentences, tell him that even when I think he’s off base he still sounds cool saying his shit, and I figure that will be the end of it. You got your side, I got my side in, I showed you respect, and now it’s even. And boy was I wrong. And I still would have let it go if not for telling me I was running away when I suggested we not take Field’s commentary off topic.

    Some people. 😉

    Anyway, man, my appreciation for the blogroll addition; I’ll have you up on mine shortly. My wife tells me she checks out your blog pretty regular; looks like I should too. Peace.

  11. 11 Daudi
    March 19, 2008 at 4:05 pm

    Deacon..you have the capacity to deal with people’s shit more than I do. That boi Nsangoma I’ve seen on some blogs and seems to like to rile people up. I don’t know if he really wanted to have an intellectually stimulating discussion with you or just being the irritating fly. Just letting you know who I think he is.

  12. 12 Deacon Blue
    March 19, 2008 at 4:37 pm

    He probably didn’t want to really get into a true debate or discussion. He’s a dick, plain and simple, always trying to stir things up. My wife is still teasing me about ever having engaged him to begin with but what can I say, it’s probably the testosterone thing…after all, I WAS willing to walk away until he told me in front of potentially thousands or however many people (I don’t know the traffic at Field Negro’s blog, but I know it’s higher than mine) that I was RUNNING away.

    So, in that sense, I don’t know if I was being noble, smart or just plan prideful.

    And, in the end, I sort of feel like I’ve used him unintentionally, since he’s responsible for my most active post/commentary thus far.

    Then again, if anyone ever begged for being used, it’s that ignorant dude. 😉

  13. March 20, 2008 at 1:55 am

    this covers most of what your counterpart has brought up and most likely the source of his or her found philosiphy, to some digree this is a real, but a shamefully lost fact that some with more sway with the powers that be, namely the vatican and modern polatitans, i would like to be bias but the fact is we are an old, scatterd and some what lost and detached from the real realms that we miss by not allowing us to explore all posibilties mabey jesus did or didnt live but, is that really the point or do we need to remember the teatchings that we have forgoten or never allowed to see…

    its a neat out look on the subject thats for sure

  14. March 20, 2008 at 2:10 am

    and also 2012 is the end of the age of Pisces and the beginning of the age of Aquarius this is also known as the age of knowledge, so when the light becomes to unbearable,..Sqint…but do not look away

    get ready to meet the birth of a new son, as we enter the new house of Aquarius

  15. 16 Deacon Blue
    March 20, 2008 at 2:42 am

    While I appreciate your enthusiasm, Ben, the YouTube video you link to is propogating very popular but erroneus statements about ancient deities to paint a picture that Jesus is a copycat deity.

    I am something of a student of mythology, and having more than a passing familiarity with the Egyptian pantheon, for example, I can tell you that the original myths don’t paint a picture of Horus anything like what is presented in that video. His life and works as chronicled in the original Egyptian religious faith bore no parallel like that to Jesus.

    For a more detailed discussion of Jesus and comparisons to other deities, I would point you to:

    http://www.thedevineevidence.com/jesus_similarities.html

    What I find interesting is how Nsangoma earlier and now you (or, perhaps more accurately, the video link you provided us with) want to make this connection between “God’s Sun” (the image of the sun as an expression of the divine) and “God’s Son” (Jesus). Trying to say that the son of God is simply a play on the “sun of God” is ridiculous, as “sun” and “son” are homonyms in the English language but would not be so in very many (if any) other languages.

    Again, Jesus is not a copycat, though some other religions did update themselves to mimic Jesus in the centuries following the writing of the New Testament documents, and some people have misrepresented ancient religions to make them sound more like Jesus’ life.

    Let us not forget that the ancient Hebrews set themselves very much apart from the other pantheistic religions around them. The Old Testament looks very little like any mythological texts I have ever seen, whether Greek, Roman, Sumerian or Egyptian. Correspondingly, both the Hebrew prophecies about Jesus and the life of Jesus himself are very unique. Stories to the contrary are simply that: stories.


Comments are currently closed.

Deacon Blue is the blogging persona of editor and writer Jeffrey Bouley. The opinions of Jeff himself on this blog, and those expressed as Deacon Blue, in NO WAY should be construed as the opinions of anyone with whom he has worked, currently works, or will work with in the future. They are personal opinions and views, and are sometimes, frankly, expressed in more outrageous terms than I truly feel most days.

Jeff Bouley

_________

Jeff Bouley

To find out more about me professionally, click here. To find out more about me generally, click here.

_________

E-Mail

You can reach Deacon Blue/Jeff Bouley at deaconbluemail@gmail.com.

_________

LinkedIn

For my public profile, click here.

_________

Tales of the Whethermen

My superhero fiction blog, click here

_________

Raising the Goddess

My parenting blog, click here

Copyright Info and Images

For more about images used on this site, and copyrights regarding them, as well as usage/copyright information about my own writing as posted here, click here.

Deac Tweets

Archives

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 836 other followers

March 2008
M T W T F S S
« Feb   Apr »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

%d bloggers like this: