₦airaland Forum

Mithra of Persia
Mithra/Mitra is a very ancient god found both in Persia and India and predating the Christian savior by hundreds to thousands of years.
In fact, the cult of Mithra was shortly before the Christian era “the most popular and widely spread ‘Pagan’ religion of the times,” as Wheless says. Wheless continues: Mithraism is one of the oldest religious systems on earth, as it dates from the dawn of
history before the primitive Iranian race divided into sections which became Persian and Indian . . . When in 65-63 B.C., the conquering armies of Pompey were largely converted by its high precepts, they brought it with them into the Roman Empire.
Mithraism spread with great rapidity throughout the Empire, and it was adopted, patronized and protected by a number of the Emperors up to the time of
Constantine.
Indeed, Mithraism represented the greatest challenge to Christianity, which won out by a hair over its competitor cult. Mithra has the following in common with
the Christ character:
· Mithra was born of a virgin on December 25th in a cave, and his birth was attended by shepherds bearing gifts.
· He was considered a great traveling teacher and master.
· He had 12 companions or disciples.
· Mithra’s followers were promised immortality.
· He performed miracles.
· As the “great bull of the Sun,” Mithra sacrificed himself for world
peace.
· He was buried in a tomb and after three days rose again.
· His resurrection was celebrated every year.
· He was called “the Good Shepherd” and identified with both the Lamb and the Lion.
· He was considered the “Way, the Truth and the Light,” and the
“Logos,” “Redeemer,” “Savior” and “Messiah.”
· His sacred day was Sunday, the “Lord’s Day,” hundreds of years
before the appearance of Christ.
· Mithra had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter.
· His religion had a eucharist or “Lord’s Supper,” at which Mithra said, “He who shall not eat of my body nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved.”
· “His annual sacrifice is the passover of the Magi, a symbolical atonement or pledge of moral and physical regeneration.”
Furthermore, the Vatican itself is built upon the papacy of Mithra, and the Christian hierarchy is nearly identical to the Mithraic version it replaced. As Walker
states:The cave of the Vatican belonged to Mithra until 376 A.D., when a city prefect suppressed the cult of the rival Savior and seized the shrine in the name of Christ, on
the very birthday of the pagan god, December 25.
Walker also says: Christians copied many details of the Mithraic mystery-religion, explaining the
resemblance later with their favorite argument that the devil had anticipated the true
faith by imitating it before Christ’s birth.
Shmuel Golding states, in The Book Your Church Doesn’t Want You to Read: Paul says, “They drank from that spiritual rock and that rock was Christ” (I Cor 10:4). These are identical words to those found in the Mithraic scriptures, except that
the name Mithra is used instead of Christ. The Vatican hill in Rome that is regarded as sacred to Peter, the Christian rock, was already sacred to Mithra. Many Mithraic
remains have been found there. The merging of the worship of Attis into that of Mithra, then later into that of Jesus, was effected almost without interruption.
In fact, the legendary home of Paul, Tarsus, was a site of Mithra worship Of Mithraism the Catholic Encyclopedia states, as related by Wheless, “The fathers conducted the worship. The chief of the fathers, a sort of pope, who always
lived at Rome, was called ‘Pater Patratus.’” The Mithraic pope was also known as Papa and Pontimus Maximus.
Virtually all of the elements of the Catholic ritual, from miter to wafer to altar to doxology, are directly taken from earlier Pagan mystery religions. As Taylor states,
“‘That Popery has borrowed its principal ceremonies and doctrines from the rituals of Paganism,’ is a fact which the most learned and orthodox of the established church
have most strenuously maintained and most convincingly demonstrated.”

HORUS/OSIRIS of Egypt
The legends of Osiris/Horus go back thousands of years, and many people over the millennia have thought Osiris to be a real person, some claiming he lived up to
22,000 years ago.
The cult of Osiris, Isis and Horus was widespread in the ancient
world, including in Rome. In the Egyptian myth, Horus and his
once-and-future Father, Osiris, are frequently interchangeable, as in “I and my Father are one.” Concerning Osiris, Walker says:
Of all savior-gods worshipped at the beginning of the Christian era, Osiris may have contributed more details to the evolving Christ figure than any other. Already very old in Egypt, Osiris was identified with nearly every other Egyptian god and was on the way to absorbing them all. He had well over 200 divine names. He was called the Lord of Lords, King of Kings, God of Gods.
He was the Resurrection and the Life, the Good Shepherd, Eternity and Everlastingness, the god who “made men and women to be born again."
Budge says, “From first to last, Osiris was to the Egyptians the god-man who suffered, and died, and rose again, and reigned eternally in heaven. They believed that they would inherit eternal life, just as he had done. . . .”
Osiris’s coming was announced by Three Wise Men: the three stars Mintaka, Anilam, and
Alnitak in the belt of Orion, which point directly to Osiris’s star in the east, Sirius (Sothis), significator of his birth. . . .
Certainly Osiris was a prototypical Messiah, as well as a devoured Host. His flesh was eaten in the form of communion cakes of wheat, the “plant of Truth.”. . . The cult of Osiris contributed a number of ideas and phrases to the Bible. The 23rd Psalm copied an
Egyptian text appealing to Osiris the Good Shepherd to lead the deceased to the “green pastures” and “still waters” of the nefer-nefer land, to restore the soul to the body, and to give protection in the valley of the shadow of death (the Tuat). The Lord’s Prayer was
prefigured by an Egyptian hymn to Osiris-Amen beginning, “O Amen, O Amen, who are in heaven.” Amen was also invoked at the end of every prayer.
As Col. James Churchward naively exclaims, “The teachings of Osiris and Jesus are wonderfully alike. Many passages are identically the same, word for word.”
Massey provides other details as to the similarity between Osirianism and Christianity:
For instance, in one of the many titles of Osiris in all his forms and places he is called “Osiris in the monstrance”. . . In the Roman ritual the monstrance is a transparent
vessel in which the host or victim is exhibited. . . . Osiris in the monstrance should of itself suffice to show that the Egyptian Karast (Krst) is the original Christ, and that
the Egyptian mysteries were continued by the Gnostics and Christianized in Rome.
Osiris was also the god of the vine and a great travelling teacher who civilized the world. He was the ruler and judge of the dead. In his passion, Osiris was plotted
against and killed by Set and “the 72.” Like that of Jesus, Osiris’s resurrection served to provide hope to all that they may do likewise and become eternal.
Osiris’s “son” or renewed incarnation, Horus, shares the following in common
with Jesus:
· Horus was born of the virgin Isis-Meri on December 25th in a cave/manger with his birth being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men.
· His earthly father was named “Seb” (“Joseph”).
· He was of royal descent.
· At age 12, he was a child teacher in the Temple, and at 30, he was
baptized, having disappeared for 18 years.
· Horus was baptized in the river Eridanus or Iarutana (Jordan) by “Anup the Baptizer” (“John the Baptist”), who was decapitated.
· He had 12 disciples, two of whom were his “witnesses” and were
named “Anup” and “Aan” (the two “Johns”).
· He performed miracles, exorcised demons and raised El-Azarus (“El-
Osiris”), from the dead.
· Horus walked on water.
· His personal epithet was “Iusa,” the “ever-becoming son” of “Ptah,”
the “Father.” He was thus called “Holy Child.”
· He delivered a “Sermon on the Mount” and his followers recounted
the “Sayings of Iusa.”
· Horus was transfigured on the Mount.
· He was crucified between two thieves, buried for three days in a
tomb, and resurrected.
· He was also the “Way, the Truth, the Light,” “Messiah,” “God’s
Anointed Son,” the “Son of Man,” the “Good Shepherd,” the “Lamb of
God,” the “Word made flesh,” the “Word of Truth,” etc.
· He was “the Fisher” and was associated with the Fish (“Ichthys”),
Lamb and Lion.
· He came to fulfill the Law.
· Horus was called “the KRST,” or “Anointed One.”
· Like Jesus, “Horus was supposed to reign one thousand years.”
Furthermore, inscribed about 3,500 years ago on the walls of the Temple at Luxor were images of the Annunciation, Immaculate Conception, Birth and Adoration of Horus, with Thoth announcing to the Virgin Isis that she will conceive
Horus; with Kneph, the “Holy Ghost,” impregnating the virgin; and with the infant being attended by three kings, or magi, bearing gifts. In addition, in the catacombs at Rome are pictures of the baby Horus being held by the virgin mother Isis—the
original “Madonna and Child.” As Massey says:
It was the gnostic art that reproduced the Hathor-Meri and Horus of Egypt as the Virgin and child-Christ of Rome . . . You poor idiotai, said the Gnostics [to the early Christians], you have mistaken the mysteries of old for modern history, and accepted literally all that was only meant mystically.
Moreover, A. Churchward relates another aspect of the Egyptian religion found in Catholicism:
We see in the ancient Catholic churches, over the main altar, an equilateral triangle, and within it an eye. The addition of the eye to the triangle originated in Egypt—“the all seeing eye of Osiris.”

KRISHNA OF INDIA
The similarities between the Christian character and the Indian messiah Krishna number in the hundreds, particularly when the early Christian texts now considered apocryphal are factored in. It should be noted that a common earlier English spelling
of Krishna was “Christna,” which reveals its relation to “Christ.”
Also, in Bengali, Krishna is reputedly “Christos,” which is the same as the Greek for “Christ” and
which the soldiers of Alexander the Great called Krishna.
It should be further noted
that, as with Jesus, Buddha and Osiris, many people have believed and continue to believe in a historical Krishna.
The following is a partial list of the
correspondences between Jesus and Krishna:
· Krishna was born of the Virgin Devaki (“Divine One”) on December 25th.
· His earthly father was a carpenter, who was off in the city paying tax while Krishna was born.
· His birth was signaled by a star in the east and attended by angels
and shepherds, at which time he was presented with spices.
· The heavenly hosts danced and sang at his birth.
· He was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of
thousands of infants.
· Krishna was anointed on the head with oil by a woman whom he
healed.
· He is depicted as having his foot on the head of a serpent.
· He worked miracles and wonders, raising the dead and healing
lepers, the deaf and the blind.
· Krishna used parables to teach the people about charity and love, and he “lived poor and he loved the poor.”
· He castigated the clergy, charging them with “ambition and
hypocrisy. . . Tradition says he fell victim to their vengeance.”
· Krishna’s “beloved disciple” was Arjuna or Ar-jouan (John).
· He was transfigured in front of his disciples.
· He gave his disciples the ability to work miracles.
· His path was “strewn with branches.”
· In some traditions he died on a tree or was crucified between two
thieves.
· Krishna was killed around the age of 30, and the sun darkened at
his death.
· He rose from the dead and ascended to heaven “in the sight of all men.”
· He was depicted on a cross with nail-holes in his feet, as well as
having a heart emblem on his clothing.
· Krishna is the “lion of the tribe of Saki.”
· He was called the “Shepherd God” and considered the “Redeemer,”
“Firstborn,” “Sin Bearer,”
“Liberator,” “Universal Word.”
· He was deemed the “Son of God” and “our Lord and Savior,” who
came to earth to die for man’s salvation.
· He was the second person of the Trinity.
· His disciples purportedly bestowed upon him the title “Jezeus,” or “Jeseus,” meaning “pure essence.”
· Krishna is to return to judge the dead, riding on a white horse, and to do battle with the “Prince of Evil,” who will desolate the earth.
The story of Krishna as recorded in the ancient Indian legends and texts penetrated the West on a number of occasions.
One theory holds that Krishna
worship made its way to Europe as early as 800 BCE, possibly brought by the Phoenicians. Higgins asserts that Krishna-worship in Ireland goes back even further, and he points to much linguistic and archaeological evidence of this early migration.
Krishna was reinjected into Western culture on several other occasions, including by
Alexander the Great after the expansion of his empire and his sojourn in India.
It is also claimed that his worship was reintroduced during the first century CE by Apollonius of Tyana, who carried a fresh copy of the Krishna story in writing to the
West, where it made its way to Alexandria, Egypt. Graham relates the tale: The argument runs thus: There was in ancient India a very great sage called Deva
Bodhisatoua. Among other things he wrote a mythological account of Krishna, sometimes spelled Chrishna. About 38 or 40 A.D., Apollonius while traveling in the
East found this story in Singapore. He considered it so important he translated it into his own language, namely, Samaritan. In this he made several changes according to
his own understanding and philosophy. On his return he brought it to Antioch, and
there he died. Some thirty years later another Samaritan, Marcion, found it. He too made a copy with still more changes. This he brought to Rome about 130 A.D., where
he translated it into Greek and Latin.
Thus, we have the apparent origins of Marcion’s Gospel of the Lord, which he claimed was the Gospel of Paul. In addition to the gospel story, the moralistic teachings purportedly introduced by Jesus were established long before by Krishna. These similarities constitute the reason why Christianity has failed, despite repeated efforts for centuries, to make headway in India, as the Brahmans have recognized
Christianity as a relatively recent imitation of their much older traditions, which they have considered superior as well. Higgins relates:
The learned Jesuit Baldaeus observes that every part of the life of Cristna [Krishna]
has a near resemblance to the history of Christ; and he goes on to show that the time when the miracles are supposed to have been performed was during the Dwaparajug, which he admits to have ended 3,100 years before the Christian era. So that, as the
Cantab says, If there is meaning in words, the Christian missionary admits that the history of Christ was founded upon that of Crishnu [Krishna].

BUDDHA
Although most people think of Buddha as being one person who lived around 500 BCE, the character commonly portrayed as Buddha can also be demonstrated to
be a compilation of godmen, legends and sayings of various holy men both preceding and succeeding the period attributed to the Buddha (Gautama/ Gotama), as was demonstrated by Robertson:. . . Gotama was only one of a long series of Buddhas who arise at intervals and who all teach the same doctrine.
The names of twenty-four of such Buddhas who appeared before Gotama have been recorded. . . . It was held that after the death of each Buddha, his religion flourishes for a time and then decays. After it is forgotten, a new Buddha
emerges and preaches the lost Dhamma, or Truth. . . .
It seems quite probable in the light of these facts that any number of teachings attributed to “the Buddha” may have been in existence either before or at the time when Gotama was believed to have lived. . . .
The name Gotama is a common one; it is also full of mythological associations.
There was admittedly another Gotama known to the early Buddhists, who founded an order. So what proof is there that the sayings and doings of different Gotamas may not have been
ascribed to one person? . . .
Because of this non-historicity and of the following characteristics of the Buddha myth, which are not widely known but which have their hoary roots in the mists of time, we can safely assume that Buddha is yet another personification of the
ancient, universal mythos being revealed herein.
The Buddha character has the following in common with the Christ figure:
· Buddha was born on December 25th of the virgin Maya, and his birth was attended by a “Star of Announcement,” wise men and angels singing heavenly songs.
· At his birth, he was pronounced ruler of the world and presented with “costly jewels and precious substances.”
· His life was threatened by a king “who was advised to destroy the child, as he was liable to overthrow him.”
· Buddha was of royal lineage.
· He taught in the temple at 12.
· He crushed a serpent’s head (as was traditionally said of Jesus) and
was tempted by Mara, the “Evil One,” when fasting.
· Buddha was baptized in water, with the “Spirit of God” or “Holy
Ghost” present.
· He performed miracles and wonders, healed the sick, fed 500 men from a “small basket of cakes,” and walked on water.
· Buddha abolished idolatry, was a “sower of the word,” and
preached “the establishment of a kingdom of righteousness.”
· His followers were obliged to take vows of poverty and to renounce
the world.
· He was transfigured on a mount, when it was said that his face
“shone as the brightness of the sun and moon."
· In some traditions, he died on a cross.
· He was resurrected, as his coverings were unrolled from his body and his tomb was opened by supernatural powers.
· Buddha ascended bodily to Nirvana or “heaven.”
· He was called “Lord,” “Master,” the “Light of the World,” “God of
Gods,” “Father of the World,” “Almighty and All-knowing Ruler,” “Redeemer of All,” “Holy One,” the “Author of Happiness,”
“Possessor of All," the
“Omnipotent,” the “Supreme Being,” the “Eternal One.”
· He was considered the “Sin Bearer,” “Good Shepherd," the
“Carpenter,” the “Infinite and Everlasting,”and the “Alpha
and Omega.”
· He came to fulfill, not destroy, the law.
· Buddha is to return “in the latter days” to restore order and to judge the dead.”
In addition to the characteristics of the “teaching/savior god” as outlined above,
the Buddhistic influence in Christianity includes: Renouncing the world and its riches, including sex and family; the brotherhood of man; the virtue of charity and
turning the cheek; and conversion. That Buddhism preceded Christianity is undeniable, as is its influence in the world long prior to the beginning of the Christian era. As Walker relates:
Established 500 years before Christianity and widely publicized throughout the Middle East, Buddhism exerted more influence on early Christianity than church
fathers liked to admit, since they viewed Oriental religions in general as devil worship. . . . Stories of the Buddha and his many incarnations circulated incessantly
throughout the ancient world, especially since Buddhist monks traveled to Egypt, Greece, and Asia Minor four centuries before Christ, to spread their doctrines. . . .
Many scholars have pointed out that the basic tenets of Christianity were basic tenets of Buddhism first; but it is also true that the ceremonies and trappings of both
religions were more similar than either has wanted to acknowledge.
As to Buddhistic influence in the specific area where the Christ drama purportedly took place, Larson states:
Buddhist missionaries penetrated every portion of the then known world, including Greece, Egypt, Baktria, Asia Minor, and the Second Persian Empire.
Palestine must have been permeated by Buddhist ideology during the first century. . . . The literature of India proves that Jesus drew heavily upon Buddhism, directly or indirectly, to obtain not simply the content of His ethics, but the very form in which it was
delivered. Both Gautama and Jesus found parable effective.
Indeed, it seems that a number of Jesus’s parables were direct lifts from Buddhism; for example, that of the prodigal son.
The existence of Buddhism in the Middle East during the Christian era is acknowledged by Christian apologists themselves such as Cyril and Clement of Alexandria, who said the Samaneans or Buddhists were priests of Persia.
Furthermore, a number of scholars have pushed back the origins of Buddhism many thousands of years prior to the alleged advent of Gautama Buddha.
Albert Churchward also traces the Buddha myth originally to Egypt:
The first Buddha was called Hermias, and can be traced back to Set of the Egyptians; he originated in the Stellar Cult. Later, however, the Solar Cult was carried to India,
and the Buddha is there the representative of Ptah of the Egyptians. . . . . Sakya-Muni
or Gautama, whose life and history were evolved from the pre-extant mythos, the true Buddha, . . . could become no more historical than the Christ of the gnosis.
If Buddhism could but explicate its own origins, it would become apparent that it is both natural and scientific, i.e. the old Stellar Cult of Egypt. But the blind attempt to
make the Buddha historical in one person will place it ultimately at the bottom of a dark hole.
Higgins also evinced that true “Buddhism” is much more ancient than the legends of the Buddha, since in ancient Indian temples long predating the era of
“Gautama” are depictions of the Buddha as a black man, not only in color but in feature. In Higgins’s opinion, Buddhism has been the most widespread religion
on the planet, also found in England, where it was the religion of the Druids. He also states that the “Hermes of Egypt, or Buddha, was well known to the ancient
Canaanites,” i.e., the people who preceded and in large part became the Israelites.
Therefore, Buddhism was no doubt an early influence on Hebrew thought and religion.

BAALIM AND ADONAI
The god “Baal” and gods “Baalim” are mentioned dozens of times in the Old Testament, as the Israelites are frequently castigated or murdered by “their own” priests for “going after Baal.”
Like the Elohim, the plural Baalim or Baals were often represented by the singular “Baal,” or “Ba’al,” an Egyptian term combining “Ba,” the
symbol of the planet and goddess Venus, with “al” or “el,” the designation of the sun.
Thus, Baal was the name for the sun in the Age of Taurus (Bull), which was ruled by Venus.
The Taurean age is one of 12 ages representing the astrological phenomenon called the “precession of the equinoxes,” whereby the sun rising at the vernal or spring equinox is backdropped by a different constellation every 2,150 years.
The precession takes nearly 26,000 years to move through the 12 constellations, a cycle
called the “Great Year.”
The knowledge of the precession goes back many thousands
of years and is found around the globe from China to Mexico, reflecting that the so-called primitive ancients were in reality extraordinarily advanced.
In addition, when the sun was in Taurus, beginning about 6,500 years ago, the bull motif sprang
up in many parts of the world, including the Levant, where it symbolized Baal.
Like the other epithets for “God,” Baal is a title meaning “Lord” or “husband”; it is, in fact, a very old appellation for the Deity, and can be found not only in Egypt but
also in India as Bala.
In the ancient languages of Ireland and Sri Lanka, “Baal means
“sun.” Baal is in reality the earlier name of the character later known as Yahweh, as is stated at Hosea 2:16, And in that day, says YHWH, you will call me, “My husband,” and no longer will you call me “My Baal.”
Walker relates that Baal was “‘The Lord’ among ancient Semites; consort of the goddess Astarte . . . Every god was a Baal. The title was introduced into Ireland via
Phoenician colonies from Spain . . . Old Testament Jews worshipped many baalim as past or present consorts of the Goddess Zion (Hosea 2:2-. Yahweh shared these
other gods’ temples for a long time, until his priesthood managed to isolate his cult and suppress the others.”And Blavatsky says, “The Baal of the Israelites (the
Shemesh of the Moabites and the Moloch of the Ammonites) was the identical ‘Sun-Jehovah,’ and he is till now ‘the King of the Host of Heaven,’ the Sun, as much as
Astoreth [Astarte] was the ‘Queen of Heaven’—or the moon.”
The other Baalim worshipped by the Israelites included “Baal Peor,” the “Lord of the Gap,” and “Baal
Berith,” “Lord of the Covenant.” Another was “Baal Jehoshua,” also Joshua or Jesus, the “Lord of Salvation,” long before the Christian era.
Another word basically the same as Baal is Adonis, which in the plural is Adonai, a term used for “Lord” over 400 times in the Hebrew bible. Adonis, like Baal and El, is an epithet for the sun.

ATTIS OF PHRYGIA
The story of Attis, the crucified and resurrected Phrygian son of God, predates the Christian savior by centuries, in the same area as the gospel tale. Attis shares the
following characteristics with Jesus:
· Attis was born on December 25th of the Virgin Nana.
· He was considered the savior who was slain for the salvation of
mankind.
· His body as bread was eaten by his worshippers.
· His priests were “eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven.”
· He was both the Divine Son and the Father.
· On “Black Friday,” he was crucified on a tree, from which his holy
blood ran down to redeem the earth.
· He descended into the underworld.
· After three days, Attis was resurrected on March 25th (as tradition held of
Jesus) as the “Most High God.”
Doane provides detail of the Attis drama, which was a recurring blood
atonement:
Attys, who was called the “Only-Begotten Son” and “Saviour” was worshiped by the Phrygians (who were regarded as one of the oldest races of Asia Minor).
He was represented by them as a man tied to a tree, at the foot of which was a lamb, and, without doubt also as a man nailed to the tree, or stake, for we find Lactantius making . . . Apollo of Miletus . . . say that: “He was a mortal according to the flesh;
wise in miraculous works; but, being arrested by an armed force by command of the Chaldean judges, he suffered a death made bitter with nails and stakes.
And in Christianity Before Christ, Jackson relates:
In the Attis festival a pine tree was felled on the 22nd of March and an effigy of the god was affixed to it, thus being slain and hanged on a tree. . . . At night the priests
found the tomb illuminated from within but empty, since on the third day Attis had arisen from the grave.
The drama or passion of Attis took place in what was to become Galatia, and it was the followers of Attis to whom Paul addressed his Epistle to the Galatians at 3:1, “O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?” Since the Galatians presumably were not in Jerusalem when Christ was purportedly crucified, we may sensibly ask just
who this was “publicly portrayed as crucified” before their eyes? This “portrayal” certainly suggests the recurring passion of the cult of Attis. Again, in addressing the Galatians, Paul brings up what is obviously a recurring event: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us—
for it is written, ‘Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree.’” (Gal. 3:13) As followers of Attis, the addressees would understand the part about “every one who hangs on a tree,” since they, like other biblical peoples, annually or periodically hung a proxy or
effigy of the god on a tree. As is the case in the Old Testament with ritualistic hangings, this “cursing” is in fact a blessing or consecration.
Attis was popular not only in Phrygia/Galatia but also in Rome, where he and Cybele, the Great Mother of the Gods, had a temple on Vatican Hill for six centuries.
So similar was the Attis myth to the Christian story that the Christians were forced to resort to their specious argument that the devil had created the Attis cult first to fool Christ’s followers.
Side Note: doubters you don't have to agree with the excerpts, please do your own research and come up with a version of this story different from this one.

THE CHARACTERS THAT MAKE UP CHRIST
This is another aspect of the " Pius fraud" that looks at the numerous god-men characters that makes up the Jesus myth. It should be noted that all of these god-men characters existed years before Christianity took form, these god-men like today's Jesus Christ were once considered as real human beings that once existed before ascending to heaven. Like christianity, believers in these god-men thought their death was an atonement process that gave them believers some kind of atonements from sin.
The very striking resemblance from the stories of these god-men with the later stories surrounding that of Jesus Christ only shows how decietful, unoriginal and fraudulent the whole claims of Jesus christ existence is/was; most of the places, names and events were all copycats of different pagan gods.
Little wonder the proponents have no evidence for the historicity of the Christian founder. As much as they, Christians have suppressed, destroyed, mutilate and hide texts and documents where they got and formed their Jesus stories, information still exists about these Pegan gods that existed thousand years before Christ.
Also, I shall post excerpts that demonstrates or proves that the world into which Christianity was born was filled with assorted gods and goddesses, as opposed
to a monotheistic vacuum. In fact, in their fabulous exploits and wondrous powers many of these gods and goddesses are virtually the same as the Christ character, as
attested to by the Christian apologists themselves.
Although many people have the impression that the ancient world consisted of unconnected nations and tribes, the truth is that during the era Jesus allegedly lived
there was a trade and brotherhood network that stretched from Europe to China.
This information network included the library at Alexandria and had access to numerous oral traditions and manuscripts that told the same narrative portrayed in
the New Testament with different place names and ethnicity for the characters.
Below is a list of the deities or god-men that existed before the Christian era whose stories and charcter made up the Jesus characters: some of them will be discussed in later excerpts I shall be posting soon.
· Adad and Marduk of Assyria, who was considered “the Word” (Logos)
· Adonis, Aesclepius, Apollo (who was resurrected at the vernal
equinox as the lamb), Dionysus, Heracles (Hercules) and Zeus of
Greece
· Alcides of Thebes, divine redeemer born of a virgin around 1200 BCE
· Attis of Phrygia
· Baal or Bel of Babylon/Phoenicia
· Balder and Frey of Scandinavia
· Bali of Afghanistan
· Beddru of Japan
· Buddha and Krishna of India
· Chu Chulainn of Ireland
· Codom and Deva Tat of Siam
· Crite of Chaldea
· Dahzbog of the Slavs
· Dumuzi of Sumeria
· Fo-hi, Lao-Kiun, Tien, and Chang-Ti of China, whose birth was
attended by heavenly music, angels and shepherdsccxl
· Hermes of Egypt/Greece, who was born of the Virgin Maia and called
“the Logos” because he was the Messenger or Word of the Heavenly
Father, Zeus.
· Hesus of the Druids and Gauls
· Horus, Osiris and Serapis of Egypt
· Indra of Tibet/India
· Ieo of China, who was “the great prophet, lawgiver and savior” with
70 disciplesccxli
· Issa/Isa of Arabia, who was born of the Virgin Mary and was the
“Divine Word” of the ancient Arabian Nasara/ Nazarenes around 400 BCE
· Jao of Nepal
· Jupiter/Jove of Rome
· Mithra of Persia/India
· Odin/Wodin/Woden/Wotan of the Scandinavians, who was
“wounded with a spear.”
· Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece
· Quetzalcoatl of Mexico
· Quirinius of Rome
· Salivahana of southern India, who was a “divine child, born of a
virgin, and was the son of a carpenter,” himself also being called “the Carpenter,” and whose name or title means “cross-borne”
(“Salvation”)
· Tammuz of Syria, the savior god worshipped in Jerusalem
· Thor of the Gauls
· Universal Monarch of the Sibyls
· Wittoba of the Bilingonese/Telingonese
· Zalmoxis of Thrace, the savior who “promised eternal life to guests at his sacramental Last Supper. Then he went into the underworld, and rose again on the third day”
· Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia
· Zoar of the Bonzes
This list does not pretend to be complete, nor is there adequate room here to go into detail of all these mythological characters.
It should be noted that, as with Jesus, a number of these characters have been thought of in the past as being historical persons, but today almost none of them are considered as such.

A lot of people here are ignorant. Neither Chinedu nor Osita is dwarf. Their size is as a result of heart problem which causes irregular metabolic process not some Genetic problem in their DNA.
Another thing, he does not even need to sleep with his wife to get her pregnant with his child if sex becomes a problem-which I doubt anyway- they can easily use artificial insemination to fertilize the wife's eggs with his own sperm, so what's the biggy?
Guys need to tone down with the sick jokes and very rediculous suggestion that it is impossible.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]You really have nothing to say. No proof, nada.

I predicted this before we started that if you were going to argue for another person's position, you must be willing to answer any questions thrown at the position you are defending.
It seems that aside from copy and paste, your argument has no further depth or foundation.

Your position is just a hollow shell with no substance beyond copy and paste. You have no answers to my questions because you really don't know what you are talking about.
A time comes when you have to move from quoting Acharya to actually defending her claims. You have failed at this.[/quote]Mr man, You like going round and round when you have nothing to say. Deal with the facts and not me, the poster. I am yet to see you intelligently argue any of the observations the writer made about Jesus, instead you are so obsessed with nonsense antics to distract attention from the main issue, evidence of lack of substance. Anyway, feel free to bail out if you want but I shall continue what I set out to do here, it goes beyond you or anyones likes or dislikes. You dont have to like the theme of this topic but I refuse to be drawn into diversionary antics that you like to indulge in when intellect fails you.

Hahaha. . Mr Anonym
Now you are clutching at straw here.
I have explained to you already but you kept on asking thesame question like you want details, so I asked you to ask google not me...lol

Enigma: ^^ All I know is that her work is rubbish, her claims are rubbish. And no one aware of true scholarship in this area need take her seriously --- only thing to be concerned about are those who may be misled for lack of better information.

hmmmm. . You think so? You realy believe so? On what basis are her work rubbish? The people whose commentaries and quotationd she used can easily be looked up on the net to check the accuracy of her claims.
Do you think she is rubbish because she dares to question the authenticity of the Christian faith and whether the centre piece, Jesus was actully fictional or real or because you did your own personal research on her claims and discovered she was writing babbles? Be honest dear!

[quote author=Mr_Anony]You referred to 1Tim 6:20

[i]Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge [/i]1Tim 6:20 (NIV)

....I hope you do realize that this is a very generic command and can apply to any and all heretics ...........or perhaps I am missing something and you may want to point out to me exactly how this specially applies to Marcion and his doctrines[/quote]Mr Anonym, that aspect of this discussion will be better explained to you through the effort of your own research on Marcion for a start, his theology, his antithesis work and his connection to Paul. You don't need me spoon feeding you with aspects of this discussion not in the scope of this thread.
Do your own research.

Enigma: My dear friend your Murdock or Acharya S is far from new to me; in fact just type Acharya S into even this Nairaland's search engine.



Edit: better to use the search engine at the top rather than the one at the bottom.

My friend, I know exactly that, infact the book in question was written in 1999, but that is besides the point. It is the content of her work that I am about not wether it is old or new. Anyway, what exactly was the knowledge you got from the threads that already delt with this issue that refuted her claims, I am very much interested in it if you care.

Enigma: My dear friend your Murdock or Acharya S is far from new to me; in fact just type Acharya S into even this Nairaland's search engine.



Edit: better to use the search engine at the top rather than the one at the bottom.

My friend, I know exactly that, infact the book in question was written in 1999, but that is besides the point. It is the content of her work that I am about not wether it is old or new.

Enigma: To reiterate for the benefit of Christians: all the claims being made here are rubbish and not worth more than a brief or cursory attention by knowledgeable or simply wise people.

Nicely put like this by someone who examined this "epic work" of Murdock --- or is it "Acharya"? http://www.eddiesnipes.com/2011/02/book-review-the-christ-conspiracy-by-acharya-s/




Edit: and the reviewer concludes

As usual attack the author and take attention away from the main issues addressed.
You should confirm yourself that the people she cited are false . . Archaya only dug deeper into the conspiracy, most of what she has written are not actually new if you make your own research to confirm the authenticity of her claims.
If you find Archaya's style irritating, there over a thousand authors that have written extensively on this topic with differing style and methods but virtually thesame conclusions.
If Christ was so great a person with such a monstrous impact why is it so hard to defend him?
Why do you all resort to "attack tactics" when confronted with unpalatable findings. The internet is there for you all to confirm any false representation by the writer.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Also you haven't yet shown me this verse in 1Timothy that you keep asserting addressed Marcion.
Paul that was supposed to have been dead[/quote]Like I have told you before, read the arguments first before jumping to comment illogically.
Marcion, an orthodox Bishop later excommunicated from the Roman catholic Church, formed a Gnostic canon of Scripture c. 140 around ten of the canonical Pauline epistles, which did not include both first and second Timothy, Titus and Hebrews. The reason he was expelled from the chucrh was because of his religious ideologies which gave a very different version of Christ and person of christ, his work known as antithesis described it in details.
Shortly after his expulsion, Paul that was supposed to have been dead released his first letter to Timothy councelling against teachings in Marcion's antithesis work that boarders on the person of Jesus different from the one claimed in today's canonical gospels.
In timothy 6 vs 20 Paul tells Timothy who was one of Paul's surbodinate and the leader of the Church in Ephesus to guard against contrary or opposing ideas or teachings (which was the theme of Marcions antithesis about the person of Jesus).
Marcion was the first person to have compiled the NT, his version did not contain the three "Pastoral Epistles of Paul" some of which were written letters to church leaders councelling and advising them against marcionist type of theology i.e Timothy, Hebrew and Titus. Let's not forget that Timothy, Hebrew and Titus were later written and released shortly after Marcion was excommunicated and started his own Marcionist movement.

Anonym
I have both given full text excerpt from the book and a little summary of some of them. Instead of engaging in sidetalk and diversionary antics like you always do, why dont you disproof the writers assertions. You ask for proof when the author exhaustively quoted renown authors and scholars to support her arguments. If you doubt her claims why not look up the quoted authors and scholars she used, look at their work and see if she is just ranting like you are doing or dishing out unpalatable facts that you find irritating.
I thought you claimed to have downloaded the PDF file, from the way you keep commenting based on the snippet I gave in my summaries. Read the full text and excerpts and please tone down with the side talk, leave that petty talk for unintelligent commentator.
I shall post more excerpt later on

Well all the side talk and outburst are irrelevant, if any one of you christian apologists is very confident of the history of their religion, please do well to attack the issues raised and not me, the poster that only brought it out to your revelation.
Come with irrefutable proofs that Jesus realy did exist not some messed up assumptions and beliefs based on religious allegiance.
The genealogies of Jesus, both Matthew's version and Luke's, are pious fiction. Nazareth did not exist in the 1st century AD, the area was a burial ground of rock-cut tombs.
With multiple authors behind the original gospel story it is no surprise that the figure of "Jesus" is a mess of contradictions. Yet the story is so thinly drawn that being a "good Christian" might mean almost anything.
The 12 disciples are as fictitious as their master, invented to legitimise the claims of the early churches. The original Mary was not a virgin, that idea was borrowed from pagan goddesses.
The pagan world knew all about virgins getting pregnant by randy gods: The Mythical "Virgin Mother".
Scholars have known all this for more than 200 years but priestcraft is a highly profitable business and finances an industry of deceit to keep the show on the road. "Jesus better documented than any other ancient figure"?
Don't believe a word of it.
Unlike the mythical Jesus, a real historical figure like Julius Caesar has a mass of mutually supporting evidence.

[/quote][quote author=Mr_Anony]This is incorrect, Paul actaully does. In 1Timothy 6:13, Paul mentions the trial of Jesus before Pilate. In 1Tim 3:16, Paul affirms that Jesus appeared in the flesh. In 1Cor15:5-7, Paul talks about Christ's resurrection, he even speaks of it as common knowledge. These are the few instances I could find for now.[/quote]Apart from 1 Timothy 6v13 which has been demonstrated to be anonymous church forgeries and interpolation just like the epistles themselves through the inconsistency in their claimed dates, the rest of the quotations did not in anyway say anything about the historical background of Jesus Christ.
According to the orthodox dating, the Pauline epistles were written (c. 49-70) and in Paul's first Epistle to Timothy warns against the Marcionist work known as the Antithesis.
Marcion was expelled from the Church of Rome in c. 144 C.E. and the First Epistle of Paul to Timothy was written shortly afterwards.
Now tell me how possible it is that books that were alleged to have been written c. 49-70 to be addressing Marcionist work written in c. 144?
[quote author=Mr_Anony]This is called arguing from silence. Paul not mentioning something is not proof in any way that he is ignorant of it.[/quote]This is a case of denial.
Paul claims to be preaching about Jesus Christ yet he did not find it useful to use quotes, teachings and talk about his great miraculous works in his epistles yet you want to argue that it does not expose his ignorance of such a person existing or things happening in real life?
So what was the whole essense of Jesus preaching, teaching and doing good work if all that can not be used as blue print in writing epistles about it? Your denial is untenable.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]pre-existing pagan-worship like what and what?[/quote]There are very damning evidence that
"Jesus Christ" is a compilation of legends, heroes, gods and godmen that existed way before the alleged time he existed.
There is plenty of documentation to show that this issue is not a question of "faith" or "belief."
The truth is that during the era this character supposedly lived there was an extensive library at Alexandria and an incredibly nimble brotherhood network that stretched from Europe to China, and this information network had access to numerous manuscripts that told the same narrative portrayed in the New Testament with different place names and ethnicity for the characters.
In actuality, the legend of Jesus nearly identically parallels the story of Krishna, for example, even in detail, as was presented by noted mythologist and scholar Gerald Massey over 100 years ago, as well as by Rev. Robert Taylor 160 years ago, among others.
Here is a little observation from Massey's documentation:
PRE-JESUS STORIES THAT MADE UP THE JESUS MYTH
"WHO WAS HE?"
1. He was born of the virgin Maya, who was considered the "Queen of Heaven.
2. He was of royal descent.
3. He crushed a serpent's head.
4. He performed miracles and wonders, healed the sick, fed 500 men from a "small basket of cakes," and walked on water.
5. He abolished idolatry, was a "sower of the word," and preached "the establishment of a kingdom of righteousness."
6. He taught chastity, temperance, tolerance, compassion, love, and the equality of all.
7. He was transfigured on a mount.
8. He was crucified in a sin-atonement, suffered for three days in hell, and was resurrected.
9. He ascended to "heaven."
HE WAS...BUDDHA (563 B.C.)
1. He contributed the name of Jesus Christ.
2. He and his once-and-future Father, are frequently interchangeable in the mythos ("I and my Father are one".
3. He was born of the virgin Meri on December 25th in a cave/manger, with his birth being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men. 4. He was a child teacher in the Temple and was baptized when he was 30 years old.
5. He was also baptized by "Anup the Baptizer," who becomes "John the Baptist."
5. He had 12 disciples.
6. He performed miracles and raised one man, el-Azar-us, from the dead.
7. He walked on water.
8. He was transfigured on the Mount.
9. He was crucified, buried in a tomb and resurrected.
10. He was also the "Way, the Truth, the Light, the Messiah, God's Anointed Son, the Son of Man, the Good Shepherd, the Lamb of God, the Word" etc.
11. He was "the Fisher," and was associated with the Lamb, Lion and Fish. His personal epithet was "Iusa," the "ever-becoming son" of "Ptah," the "Father."
12. HE was called "the KRST," or "Anointed One," long before the Christians duplicated the story.
13. In the catacombs at Rome are pictures of Him as a baby being held by his virgin mother.
14. HE WAS... the Ancient Egyptian God HORUS (prior to 3100 B.C.)
The ancient Egyptians also adopted the cross as a religious symbol of their pagan gods. Countless Egyptians drawings depict themselves holding crosses in their hands. Among them, the Egyptian savior Horus is depicted holding a cross in his hand.
He is also depicted as an infant sitting on his mother's knee with a cross on the seat they occupy.
The most common of the crosses used by these pagan Egyptians, the crux ansata, was later adopted by the Christians)
He was born on December 25th.
He was considered a great traveling teacher and master.
He had 12 companions or disciples.
He performed miracles.
He was buried in a tomb. After three days he rose again.
His resurrection was celebrated every year.
He was called "the Good Shepherd."
He was considered "the Way, the Truth and the Light, the Redeemer, the Savior, the Messiah."
He was identified with both the Lion and the Lamb. His sacred day was Sunday, "the Lord's Day," hundreds of years before the appearance of Christ.
He had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter, at which time he was resurrected. His religion had a Eucharist or "Lord's Supper."
HE WAS... MITHRA (about 2000 B.C.) ("He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made on with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation.
" An inscription to Mithras which parallels John 6:53-54. This inscription is inside the vatican... in the tomb of saint peter.) Born of a Virgin His father was a carpenter. His birth was attended by angels, wise men and shepherds, and he was presented with gold, frankincense and myrrh.
He was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants.
He was of royal descent.
He was baptized in A river.
He worked miracles and wonders.
He raised the dead and healed lepers, the deaf and the blind.
He used parables to teach the people about charity and love.
"He lived poor and he loved the poor.
" He was transfigured in front of his disciples.
In some traditions he died on a tree or was crucified between two thieves.
He rose from the dead and ascended to heaven.
He is called the "Shepherd God" and "Lord of lords," and was considered "the Redeemer, Firstborn, Sin Bearer, Liberator, Universal Word.
" He is the second person of the Trinity, and proclaimed himself the
"Resurrection" and the "way to the Father."
He was considered the "Beginning, the Middle and the End," ("Alpha and Omega" , as well as being omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. -
His disciples bestowed upon him the title "Jezeus," meaning "pure essence.
" He is to return to do battle with the "Prince of Evil," who will desolate the earth HE WAS...
KRISHNA (around 400 B.C.)
(The similarities between the Christian character and the Indian messiah are many. Indeed, Massey finds over 100 similarities between the Hindu and Christian saviors, and Graves, who includes the various noncanonical gospels in his analysis, lists over 300 likenesses.
It should be noted that a common earlier English spelling of Krishna was "Christna," which reveals its relation to '"Christ."
It should also be noted that, like the Jewish godman, many people have believed in a historical, carnalized Krishna) God was his father
He was born in a cave or cowshed.
A human woman, a virgin, was his mother.
His birth was prophesized by a star in the heavens. At a marriage ceremony, he performed the miracle of converting water into wine.
He was powerless to perform miracles in his hometown.
His followers were born-again through baptism in water.
He rode triumphantly into a city on a donkey.
Tradition records that the inhabitants waved palm leaves.
He had 12 disciples.
He was accused of licentious behavior.
He was killed near the time of the Vernal Equinox, about MAR-21.
He died "as a sacrifice for the sins of the world."
He was hung on a tree, stake, or cross. After death, he descended into hell.
On the third day after his death, he returned to life.
The cave where he was laid was visited by three of his female followers.
He later ascended to heaven.
His titles: God made flesh. Savior of the world Son of God.
He is "God made man," and equal to the Father.
He will return in the last days.
He will judge the human race at that time. Humans are separated from God by original sin.
The godman's sacrificial death reunites the believer with God and atones for the original sin.
HE WAS... OSIRIS-DIONYSUS (about 2500 B.C.)

SUMMARIES OF THE EXCERPTS 2nd PART
THE EPISTLES
1. Believers claim that Paul lived during the advent and after the death of Jesus Christ.
2. For this reason, they claim his epistles are one of the earliest christian texts.
3. His epistles strangely did not discuss or make any allusion to any of the events, places & people associated with the existence of a historical Jesus.
4. In writing His epistles about Jesus, Paul also never quotes from Jesus’s purported sermons and speeches, parables and prayers, nor does he mention Jesus’s supernatural birth or any of his alleged wonders and miracles, all of which would presumably be very important to Jesus’s followers, had such exploits and sayings been known prior to Paul.
5. All these point to the possibility that Paul could not quote, use or teach anything from the life and events Jesus in his epistles because there was nothing about Jesus that was true in the first place.
6. Instead Paul's epistles is laden with acient pre-christian religious beliefs, dogma, teachings and ideologies traceable to pre-existing pagan worship of the time.
7. The Jesus described in Paul's epistles are very different from the one described in the four canonical gospels.
8. In fact, it has been demonstratively proven that the so-called Paul's epistles are pseudographics ( forged writings). The the Pauline epistles could not have been written at the given orthodox dates of (c. 49-70) if in his first epistle to timorthy he made mention of Marcion of Pontus who lived (c. 100-160). Same goes for the othe epistles allegedly written by "Paul", all probable forgeries.

THE GOSPELS
1. The Gospels were forged at the end of the 2nd century probably between 170-180 just about thesame time of the establishment of the Orthodoxy and supremecy of the Roman Church.
2. There are very strong evidence that all the canonical gospels were actually written in greek & not from the aclaimed jewish apostles who wrote in hebrew or Aramaic.
3. The greek word Petros was usedfor peter in the original gospels that were alleged to have come from Jewish apostles.
4. Prior to Luke's own narratives of the gospels, there were numerous narratives of the gospels in circulation which were once considered canonical but later adjudged suprious & vice versa.
5. The church Father Irenaeus bishop of lyon determined from these numerous narratives which ones should be canonized as God's inspired words.
6. The arrangement of the four canonical gospel is intentionally to give the false impression of order of publication, differing sources and production.
7. Mark or Luke is believed to be the first narratives of the canonical gospels, it is also believed that all of them copied from thesame source materials which was in greek language.
8. The first New Testament that ever appeared, was compiled and published by Marcion. It was in the Greek language. It consisted of “The Gospel,” and “The Apostolicon.”
THE GOSPEL OF THE LORD
Marcion's Gospel predates the canonical gospels and possibly was the material source from where the other writers copied. In his Gospel Jesus was not Jewish, he was not born but appeared in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberus Ceaser.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]@ryhmz,
If this is the summary of what you have been saying all along, then it doesn't prove or disprove anything. The question was Jesus didn't exist because....?
You answer: because mythicists, evemerists and believers think he did therefore he must not exist. That's poor logic.

It's just like saying Michael Jackson did not exist because only his fans believe he did and we can't trust his fans because they think Pop music is the only good music available. It tells us nothing about Michael.

It makes no difference what kind of person believes that Jesus exists. The question is: did He exist or not?

Again please tell us why Jesus did not exist. Give me valid reasons worthy of disputing. Concisely in bullet points: Jesus did not exist because....[/quote]I understand your point but I never said that was it all, I am still coming up with more summaries and more excerpts of the book. Power recently has not been too available where I am, so most times I have to make use of my phone's limited technicalities.
I shall be posting the second phase of the summaries later on today before posting more excerpts. I will also like you to read the downloaded pdf as well, this debate is very vast if you have noticed. I intend to make another thread that discusses other aspect of this issues in more details, you don't have to wait for my summaries anyway, just post your observations.
I have got tones of materials that I want post but for the limited functionality of my phone and inavailability of internet access here. Soon as I get to Lagos, you will be seeing an avalanche of these materials on NL.

neosmyt: I TIRE FOR PEOPLE O, WAT WILL IT COST U TO BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS LORD AND THAT GOD EXISTS AND MAYBE AT THE END DISCOVER IT WAS JUS STORIES THAN NOT BELIEVE IN JESUS AND GOD AND AT THE END DISCOVER THAT JESUS IS REAL, AND THAT HEAVEN AND HELL TRULY EXISTS.. PLS BE ON THE SAFE SIDE.. A WORD IS ENOUGH FOR THE WISE.

JESUS FOR LIFE, HOLINESS MY WATCHWORD

with your logic above I can imagine how spirit-filled you are.
In other words, it is like a betting a game to you. "So Christian like" of you to be dishonest and insincere in your pursuit for illusive eternity and immortality.
Betting on Jesus's existence is not neccessarily a smart move to prove to his superiors that you allowed yourself to be "God played" because you were not sure about him but yet wanted to secure
your own space in heaven should just in case. . . "smart dishonest christian" like you.

hisblud: There are two types of content on the site, "the first being contributed, which is essentially anything that's posted by any member that holds some sort of value information-wise. Contributed content can be voted on by other members, updated, appended, etc. The other type of content is reviewed content, which are articles created from contributed content that go into great detail on a given topic or sometimes entire film. All reviewed content is critiqued by the Editing Committee, which itself is made up of the largest contributors to the site. The community's lax rules, yet ironically high standards for reviewed content, has helped it stand out in the broader skeptic and debunking communities, but also of course made it quite despised in conspiracy communities.

Let me start first by stating that opinion is free but facts are stubbon things that remain sacrosanct.
As much as I find your diversionary antics uncreative and mentally lazy, I will like to point out to you that the site you quoted here is as junk as it comes.
It is an open source site where any pseudo-intellectual can post $hit and pass it off as contribution to be posted or reviewed. From the tone and the very embarrassing utter lack of substance in his rant, the following becomes evident:
1. The site you quoted from is an open source site, that means any pseudo-intellectual can make contributions or edit contributions made by others(both ignorant andf uninformed ones) for critiquing and discussions on the site.
2. The claims of the contributions are personal opinions of the contributors; they do not represent facts. Unfortunately for them, facts are what counts not personal opinions of what they think about the author of the book.
3. From the tone and diversionary antics used by the contributor, it would appear the contributor is a Christian apologist.
4. The fact this contributor could not pick any part of the book to disprove but rather sidesteps to give his own personal opinion of the author shows that this individual has not read any of the author's work. If he did, he would know that the author dedicated an enormous amount of space to the commentaries of highly credentialed individuals, used many primary sources, researched from hundreds of sources in a number of different languages which she quoted in the original languages, as well as providing a variety of translations.
As for you my friend, I will advise that you read the book first before picking any bones with the book. Pick up concepts, historical representations, obvious lies that you dont agree with and use contrary facts from reputable sources to disporove. Deflecting off the main topic by blabbing about mere opinions of others about the woman is not afterall an intelligen antics.

hisblud: at last a sweet reply, but much appreciated. Just finished enjoying myself in praying in tongues, and checked to see if you had replied and was pleased. Looking forward to you conclusion.

wont be so quick to call them conclusions per se, these are just summaries of my posts from the book so people can comment without having to go through the entire posts and lose interest. Besides, it is a well known facts that young Nigerians don't read not to talk of a mentally tasking one as this. Anyway enjoy, will be back with the other parts of my summaries and No, I am yet to finish from posting the excerpts, this is just the begining. I shall make another thread on another issue she addressed later on as we progress.

The Summaries of The Posted Excerpts Part one.
The existence of Jesus Christ is entirely based on an irrational belief system-faith- myths and deified Heroes that existed before the birth of Jesus.
The gospel claims therefore do not evidently give the represention of a Jewish man that had physical reincarnation 2000 years ago.
In the debate regarding the character and nature of Jesus christ, there are three contending school of thoughts:

1. THE BELIEVERS: this school of thought believes everything written in the christian-Judeo bible as sacrosanct, infallible, sacred and divine words of God written by men that were inspired by God even though this same bible is rife with inconsistencies, contradictions, errors and illogical yarns that render their beliefs untenable.
Also, beievers have great disdain for critical thinking & the substance of physical evidence of history rather it thrives on illogical belief system and false portrayals of history and events.
It is ironical that the christian believe that the only way God could fix the world (which by the way, thesame bible claims he created) was through blood-atonement of his own son, Jesus Christ yet history has shown and proved that such belief is rooted in acient pre-christian customs of sacrificing humans and animals, a barbaric, scapegaot ritual. And we are meant to believe that this is all God's plan according to the tenets of this beliefs. Believers ridicule as fiction, similar pre-christian religious & cultural dogmas to theirs but accept theirs as sacrosanct & devine.

2. THE EVEMERIST: this school of thought believes that the gods of old were in fact historical characters, kings, emperors & Heroes whose exploits and greatness were later deified.
Of all these deified biographical entities, Jesus Christ is the most popular till date.
Evemerist believe that it was Jesus's religio-political activities that became the centrepiece of his deification as well as got him the ire of the jewish people who begged Pontius Pilate the roman governor to execute Jesus christ.
The claims of his execution according to the canonical gospels of the NT to support his existence face 3 difficulties:
(a) All christian documents older than the NT gospels do not portray him as a political agitator as the NT gospels claims and does.
(b) If his activities had been primarily political, and the evangelists were not interested in—or deemed it inexpedient to mention—his politics, then what was the motive for their strong interest in him? How did they come to suppose that a rebel, whose revolutionary views they tried to suppress in their gospels, was the universal saviour?
(c) if he was involved in political activities to the point of engaging in temple cleansing as suggested in the NT why then did flavious Josephus who is one of the most respected Jewish historian not make mention of something as remarkable as that in his records.
The evemerist argument becomes unatenable too because when one strips off all these elements of preceeding myths that has led to his deification; one finds there is nothing or any historical person to point to.

3. THE MYTHICIST: this school of thought believes that Jesus Christ like other older mythological character that have existed before him was a myth whose divinity was helped by the gradually increasing nature of human history thus the intertwined fables around his existence as claimed by the canonical gospels.
This argument or belief is propelled by archaeological and linguistical discoveries and studies, as well as by the reduction of the Church’s power and vicious persecution of its critics.
However, even with the revealing insight and perspective of their work, believers and evemerists alike have refused to acknowledge their interesting findings rather they have concentrated efforts on criticizing their work.

hisblud: @rhymz please am excited about the quotes you have put up, please please have you finished pasting yet? Also do as annoy requested please please puuulease, abeg abeg

I shall post my response and summary tomorrow....hope u will be there

@Mr Anony,
Good fot you to have replied. Sorry I have been extremely hooked with activities today, in fact, as I write, I am extremely high on stout from the house party I had with my friend in my house.
I shall reply to your demands tomorrow when I am thinking straight without alcohol influencing my thoughts. . Lol. .
Matter of fact, I am surely going to have sex tonight with a pretty thing....till 2mao Mr.

rhymz: The Suggestion that Paul was a gay man is usually met most often with responsel ranging from pure dismissal to outright anger. I know the idea that a writer of the Scriptures, which are considered to be the direct Word of God in much of Christianity, could be gay is startling to say the least. However, it is still important that we rid ourselves of emotinal outburst and critically look at the issues.No doubt, Paul was a very dramatic man, deeply convicted and emotional.

In fact, his overly emotional nature should cause a stir as he lived in a society that did not look kindly upon such emotional display. But this in and of itself could simply be a unique trait possessed by Paul, not necessarily representative of his orientation. However, his stark emotionality leaves him more vulnerable to the probing of a textual critic, making our exploration a bit simpler. Looking at Paul's letter to the Romans, Paul’s last before his (presumable) execution. In this letter, he gives one a slight clue to the battle going on within him.

Allow me to quote an English translation of his words in Romans 7:23: “…I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members”. This passage reveals more than we might first notice upon first reading. On a closer look, one discovers that Paul speaks in the larger context of this chapter about a constant war. He claims sin dwells in his “members,” or his bodily parts.

However, he attempts to control these members with the “law of his mind” that seems to be often failing him.

Expectedly, you will want to explain this to be merely a passage referring to the human struggle with sin, however, bringing in other elements of the Paul's letters, such interpretation becomes a bit lacking. In his earlier and 2nd letters to Corinthians, one notices yet another clue in this intriguing puzzle in chapter12:7 NASB and I quote: “there was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me”, now put this passage in a larger context and try to decipher what he was trying to say.

In the opening chapter of Romans, Paul describes those he sees as the enemies of God as being confused sexually as a punishment for their sins. In his letter, he says that “God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error” (Romans 1:26-27 NASB). This seems a bit odd as Jesus is not seen as discussing sexual orientation, a subject one would believe he would preach during his discussions regarding sexual indiscretion, assuming that he considered the actions or state of gay individuals as being sinful. It is important to remember that Paul views himself as a representative of Jesus, so this contrast should of course cause a stir in the reader. This is not the only time Paul is seen displaying tendencies that can only be described as homophobic. He makes what appear to be negative statements toward gay individuals in his first letter to the Corinthians. It is, however, worth noting that the concept of sexual orientation had not yet developed, so such verses refer to lust and sex as stand alone sins, not in any way connected with a concept of sexual orientation. Keep this in mind as we continue to examine the issues at hand. Aside from the homophobia displayed in the Pauline letters, another often- overlooked trend becomes noticeable upon careful reading. Paul seems to take a negative view of women and marriage. He writes to his male readers, “it is good for a man not to touch a woman” (1 Corinthians 7:1 NASB). Paul was not married as he directly states when he gives these instructions to the unmarried and widow in 1 Corinthians 1:8 NASBs: “But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I”. Marriage is seen by Paul as a last resort for weak individuals in the next passage, 1 Corinthians 1:9 NASB “But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion”. One is probably now wondering why Paul would feel the need to create such a defensive web of misogyny and anti- marriage bias if Jesus did not seem to have an issue with gay individuals.

Let's not forget the fact that Paul knows very well how Judaic laws frowns at adultry. So while Paul is responsible for the propagation of Christianity, he was writing with the perspective of a convert who was previously an extremely dedicated and educated expert on traditional Jewish laws.

To indulge his passions, were he gay, would have been a grave sin.

Now that I have considered this array of clues from Paul’s writings, it becomes important to finish addressing the passage with which I began my study of Paul's writing. Talking about “war” in Paul’s “members.” There is a strong possibilty that this war in his members is thesame thing he meant by “thorn in his flesh” that served as a “messenger of Satan.” Whether or not it is the case, the question still remains… What part of the body will not obey the “law of the mind?" You and I know it is the Pen.i$, Looking at the anatomy of a male. Arms, legs, and the like can be controlled by the mind. The pen.i$ remains the member that ofte. .

This was my argument when you decided to dismiss my argument that Paul may have been gay.
Abeg posters make una tell me why he feels it is wrong for me to suggest that he was probably a repressed homosexual?
Tell more lies, let's see.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Friend, there is a difference between making an argument yourself and merely pasting another person's argument (even if you acknowledge the source).
An equivalent of what you do is like if I pasted whole chapters of the bible and then when questioned about them, I have no response. This will immediately show that I don't really have an understanding of the bible I am quoting.

All I am saying is if you are going to paste chapters from someone else' book, be ready to defend it because when I start questioning you now and you have no answer, you'll start complaining that I am being condescending.[/quote]You and your childish excuses. You are yet to read or comment on the thread but you are quick to throw unsolicited boastful advice.
How many times me and you don debate on issues before you start blabbing aboout me defending stuff.
Everyone's intelligence and exposure is a product of what they read, experience and are taught, don't come blabbing to me about posting chapters of a book that succinctly proves beyond any doubt the truth that Jesus Christ is never existed and all you could is to whine about non-issues while ignoring the damning facts. So intelligent of you. Need I remind you that it is perfectly ok for me to be making an argument and then decide to post well researched articles, pages of a book and materials from verifiable source that very well support my arguments.
I don't not to indulge endlessly in your usually tiring round and round argument without any serious facts to back them up. And please don't trying to insult my intelligence by passing my observations and comments on issues we do not agree on as a lack of understanding on my part, that is childish and a weak punchline.
I explained my argument very well to you with bible verses and quotations from your bible, don't tell me I misunderstand what it says when the implication is so obviously clear. Matter of fact, I shall post it now sef. .

As for the Paul Distortion of Chrustianity, thank God my arguements and articles I posted there to support them are all there for everyone to see, so it was not a matter of running away. I decided not to respond to reply again when I discovered you that you kept on regurgitating thesame arguments and using angry tone. You left the core of the argument and started psychoanalyzing me and trying to explain my own arguments to me. It was obvious you were angry and disgusted by my submission that the character Paul was prolly gay with the way he kept on going on and on about parts of his body not not doing what he wants and how he called it a curse inflicted on him by the devil and all that crap he was saying, nigga was obviously fighting with irregular sexual urges that he dare not directly say it. Instead he chose to remain celibate and made marriage look like an option for men with weaker resolve.
Face the facts and stop these nonsense resort to arm twisting arguments when somebody outwits you, it is not always about getting the last word dude, I care less about that, I am more interested in facts and logical arguments. If you dare lie again, I will derail this thread and post my arguments on the paul thread, let's see who ran away and who made better argument.

rhymz: Am just resisting the temptation to derail this thread else I would have inundated you with books and links that have made thorough research into unraveling the true identity of Jesus only to get more convinced that he is more of a mythological person than a historical one.

@Anonym
I remember vividly making exactly this comment on this thread, Yes or No?
You dare try to, once again, deflect from the main issue by blabbing about me copying and pasting as if I ever tried to pass any of these books and research as mine?
I always make it clear when I use articles or excerpts from well researched books to draw my conclusions or make my arguments. It is you who is the pseudo-intellectual here:
i. You make seriously flawed and illogical arguments.
ii You are in the habit of indulging in diversionary antics of hitting below the belt when intellect fails you
iii. Resorting to rationalization of illogicality and trying to psycho-analyze your opponent.
You are a dishonest fellow Mr.