Science and Jesus Christ

One of my biggest epiphanies to come to me in a long time was the understanding that science had attained significant evidence supporting the position that Jesus Christ never existed. Prior to this I had believed that God didn’t exist but that it was possible that some person like Jesus Christ had existed. Now I believe that it is unlikely since the evidence is so strong.

It’s probably been discussed before on this forum, but I thought I’d give it a spin and see if there were any reasonable refutations to be found.

The basic overview is that the Christ-myth had been around long before Jesus Christ. The Catholic church even admits it (the evidence is so strong). The rebuttal is that Satan put those myths out there throughout history so that when the real Jesus Christ came he could be doubted. It’s the old god-buried-dinosaur-bones-to-test-our-faith kind of argument.

Here are a couple of sources:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Chri … _mythology

esoterickat.wordpress.com/page/12/

Some of the interesting components are “the Three Kings following the Eastern star to the birth of the sun”, the 24,000 year calendar, the way the sun gets to its lowest point in the sky, dies, and then is resurrected after three days, etc. It makes a lot of sense.

And the reason I’m so excited about this understanding is that it really affects the way I see my society (I live in the US). I now see the Christ-manger scene as something that is likely to have never existed.

Oh, and the reason I didn’t post this in the religious section is because I wouldn’t expect constructive discussion there for this topic. I might not get it here either. :slight_smile:

Hi Membrain,

I can’t offer refutations, because I’m in your boat.

From what I’ve read, Josephus was the only historian around Jesus time who would’ve mentioned him. Some claim he does mention Jesus in some of his writings, but that is debatable.

Not to mention that there were a lot of people name Jesus being crucified at the time. There were also a lot of little cults that were popping up at the time. As you probably know, similar stories to that of Jesus existed long before Jesus was born.

Maybe somebody else can jump in and take the opposing stance.

I don’t know either way…I’d like to say he didn’t exist because I hate christianity, but the christians (and others) claim to have evidence that he existed. I’ve seen the Zeitgeist argument, but it’s hard to prove the absence of something. I’d like to find more reputable research on both.

Personally, I lean more towards the not existing from what I’ve seen, but there’s much more to the issue.

I think “constructive discussion” is the goal. Your point of the lack of historical evidence is another important bit of evidence.

I’m curious if you were jolted by the evidence against Christ’s existence and all the pagan and astrological evidence as well. The fact that it had been kept from me for so long (I’m am at a semi-ripe age) is sort of thrilling. The self-delusion of my society is stunning.

There is the story of Horus, born 2000 years before Christ. Here’s a link:
abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread290806/pg1

Here are a few facts (I’ve pasted the ones that are just one sentence long):

  1. Horus born of a virgin. <> Jesus born of a virgin.
  2. The foster father of Horus was Seb or Seph. <> Jesus was fostered by Joseph.
  3. The birth of Horus announced by angels. <> The birth of Jesus announced by angels.
  4. Horus had 12 followers. <> Jesus had 12 disciples.
  5. Horus was killed by crucifixion. <> Jesus was crucified.

It seems impossible to explain the dozens of similarities as coincidence. Wouldn’t you agree?
Like I said, the Catholic Church admits its true and blames Satan which seems to be the only other option.

Well, there’s two issues here. There’s no doubt in my mind that the jesus of the bible does not exist for that reason and many others. Whether or not he existed as a normal guy is another issue. There may have been a nice rabbi or two around the year zero who called himself (or themselves) Jesus and travelled around with some followers and was either greatly misunderstood, exploited, or both.

I’m not sure what I think about the historicity of Jesus. It’s possible that there was a person behind the myth or Jesus might be a synthesis of several people (as is sometimes speculated of Shakespeare). Maybe he was invented out of whole cloth. My WAG is that there was a real person that inspired the myth, no matter how far removed from the claims later made of him.

Oh OK, I can agree with that. It is the Christ of the Bible that I was referring to and that he was not even a real person (even subtracting the Christ aspect). That some people just created him on paper using previous stories (perhaps in some cases based upon people many of who might have been named Jesus).

I think the point is that he couldn’t have been a real person. That he was created via the retelling of stories that were around for thousands of years (many based on astrology). I used to believe just like you that he might have actually existed, but this “new” evidence seemed to make it very unlikely.

If the link provided is factual that’s certainly a lot more than you’d expect to explain by coincidence. My questions would be 1) would the Jews of the time be familiar enough with Egyptian mythology and 2) what event led to the creation of the Christ myth patterned on Horus? Certainly the Jews were very familiar with Egypt, but I don’t remember the timeline very well- wasn’t Egypt pretty Greco/Roman by this time? I imagine that even if they were the knowledge of the Old Gods would still be in the folklore. As to the second question, there was probably some man or event that encouraged or necessitated the creation of a new religion, but what was it? Religions are rarely created from whole cloth- myths build upon older myths over time. Even the most obviously manufactured religion I can point to, namely the Church of LDS, was wild fantasy grafted onto existing J/C mythology.

The source of your source on Horus is pretty dubious. I was pretty heavily into Ancient Egypt and while I can agree the Horus-myth has a lot in common with the Christ myth I think some of those comparisons are a little off:

  1. Horus born of a virgin. <> Jesus born of a virgin.

Technically true, because when Isis remade Osiris, she couldn’t find his penis. In most versions of the myth, Isis still manages to give Osiris a blow-job somehow. In some versions she even managed to have sex with him! Plus Isis and Osiris had been married before Osiris was dismembered and it can be pretty safely assumed that they had engaged in coitus. So, his birth wasn’t the result of a normal sexual union, but there is no way to know whether Isis was a virgin because . . .

More importantly, the Ancient Egyptian language didn’t have a word for ‘virgin’. At least insofar as we can tell (most Egyptologist do assume the Egyptians were aware of the concept). Now, the cult of Isis that spread from Egypt to much of the rest of the Mediterranean and was popular with certain elements in the Empire (think Hinduism/Buddhism in the '60s) and it is possible that the notion of virginity was introduced there. But since it is already known that Christianity is a mystery cult, it resembling a mystery cult shouldn’t surprise us too much.

  1. The foster father of Horus was Seb or Seph. <> Jesus was fostered by Joseph.

Seb (Geb) is Osiris’s father and the Earth god. As in literally the Earth. We are standing on Geb right now. I’ve never heard of him interacting with Horus in a foster-fatherly role. Again, the mystery cult may have changed this.

  1. The birth of Horus announced by angels. <> The birth of Jesus announced by angels.

Not in any of the versions of the myth I am familiar with. Maybe the mystery cult threw it in, but I’m trying to think of an Egyptian equivalent of Angels. Plenty of minor deities, though I am unaware of any of them heralding Horus’s birth.

  1. Horus had 12 followers. <> Jesus had 12 disciples.

I know of his four sons involved with the canopic jars. Who are the other 8?

  1. Horus was killed by crucifixion. <> Jesus was crucified.

I’ve never heard of Horus being crucified. Any examples, ideally pre-dating the establishment of Christianity in Egypt?

Both Christ and Horus are monomyths so it makes sense that their stories would have many similarities. Though the ones cited here don’t appear to be the similarities in question. I mean, really. During a Pharaoh’s life, they are Horus and when they die they become Osiris. So you have a really clear case of a son and a father being contained within the same entity. That would be a good angle to take with respect to Christianity and Horus. And it is possible that Christianity was partially inspired by that story.

As for the personage of Jesus, you have to remember that history wasn’t a rigid discipline back in the day, so you have to view it through that lens. For example, the Talmud talks about a Rabbi who sounds very much like Jesus, except it would date him to 100AD and he was executed by hanging. My guess is that the Jesus of the Bible is a combination of several different people (which also explains his in congruent actions) that were fused into one individual in a mystery cult that became very popular. Probably initially by co-opting John the Baptist’s cult.

Since I am coming at it from a non-literalist view, I don’t really have a problem pointing at any, or all, the figures that went into Jesus and say, “Yeah, that’s Jesus”. I imagine one of them was probably a charismatic healer and member of John the Baptist’s cult, or at least involved with it in some manner. And he probably ran afoul of the Roman authorities. Though I can see where it would be problematic for someone coming at it from the standpoint of belief.

Edit: And I can’t really see what this has to do with ‘science’. Some astronomy, sure. But only as it relates to the religious question.

I’m not sure if it has to be specifically Egyptian mythology. I think the implication is that many religions could have shared and propagated the same stories. The unifying thing seems to be astrology which would seem a very universal component in early religions. I would guess that religions spontaneously gravitated to astrology as they were developed.

I found this:

“The earliest known astrological records date back to Babylon, 1645 BC”
astrology.com/aboutastrology … w/history/

One of the interesting things is that the Sun lowers in the sky day after day, “dies” or “rests” for three days, and then “rises” to start the other half of the yearly cycle. Anyone can see this, and one doesn’t need any other evidence to see the similarity to the Jesus Christ story. Then you add stuff like the three stars in Orion called the “Three Kings” and see that if you draw a line through them they point to the Eastern star and then the rising sun. Etcetera etcetera.

It’s cool! The implication is so simple and obvious that there’s not a lot of wiggle room.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Three_Kings

Thanks for the neat stuff. I’ll try to respond to some of it soon. As to why I put it as “science” under “Natural Sciences”… I think we are using facts, evidence, logic, etc. on which to base our arguments. Just as you used your understanding of Egypt, I assume you would consider that information gleaned from science, Anthropology, and not some other method.

Also the aspect of the yearly Sun cycle, and how it lowers, rests, and rises, and even how “Sun” sounds like “Son”. These are self-evident evidences that most people probably don’t need to have proved to them, but it is still all science in that they are all empirically provable. Anyway, that was the idea.

English son / sun
Latin filius / sol
Greek huios / hêlios
Hebrew ben / shemesh

I doubt that we can examine the context of unfamiliar languages (I speak English and no other). “Sun” and “Son” are similar in the USA.

The etymology of other languages can be debated, and I welcome it in any form other than a riddle.

But getting back to the strong point: the symbology of the “thorny crown” and the sun is self-evident. And Science (and perhaps even this thread) has other strong points.

I apologize if I seem so inflexible; there are no doubt flaws in the extrapolations, but the overall weight seems insurmountable.

Membrane,

Let’s accept for the moment that there was no person who performed the acts depicted in Scripture. Let’s accept for the moment that there wasn’t even a person that these stories are loosely based on and that Jesus is nothing more than a character in a story (which surely nobody can deny).

Accepting all of this, my question to you is, are the teachings of Jesus Christ in any way diminished? If so, how does stripping the text of its historicity in any way undermine its message? To me Jesus’ teachings are not made or broken by historical evidence since the point of the Gospels isn’t to relate history but to show us a way of life… So please, tell me how the non-historicical nature of Scripture in any way undermines its message? Is Macbeth undermined because the events it depicts are not historical?

I suppose the message is undermined the same way that fiction undermines a message compared to a non-fiction message. I think there is more of a connection when one imagines that another person actually really did what is talked about in the story. Like Ghandi for example: you hear his life story and you think “wow, someone actually accomplished that”. Where, if you read a story about Superman, there is a disconnect there inasmuch as you can’t connect as much to the character due to him being fictional.

If one connects to fictional characters as much as they connect to non-fictional ones, then I suppose the difference would be, none.

Caesar Augustus was referred to as “Divine,” “Son of God,” “God,” and “God from God,” “Lord,” “Redeemer,” “Liberator,” and “Savior of the World.” So I’m pretty sure following your logic, that he never existed. He was just a myth. He was called son because of the Sun God Horus. It was a kind of pun. Son is like Sun. Get it? Somehow the Romans were punning in English. It isn’t an anchronism, it’s quite convincing, “self evident” even.

As for the crown symbolism, that would seem to apply to every “rayed” crown that ever existed not just the Jesus’. Are they all mere fictions? Because I’ve seen such crowns on kings and queens in paintings and photos. Are they fictions too?

And I found evidence that Napolean never existed either:

"Napoleon is the French translation of the Greek phrase “Nai Apolyon” or “True Apollo” (Apollo being the Greek sun god).

Napoleon’s mother was named “Letitia”. Apollo’s mother was named “Leto”

Napoleon had three sisters. They are the “three graces” at the courtyard of Apollo.

Napoleon had four brothers, three of whom were kings. They represent the four seasons. All but winter are ‘kings’ (spring is king of flowers, summer is king of harvests, fall is king of fruits).

Napoleon was born on March 20th, the spring equinox.

Napoleon had 12 active marshals, the 12 signs of the zodiac.

Napoleon had 4 inactive marshals, the 4 compass points (they don’t move).

Napoleon attempted to invade Moscow, failed, and retreated south. This represents the course of the sun at the spring equinox, heading north, then turning south.

He went to Egypt and moved west over a period of 12 years. This represents the movement of the sun (east to west) over the twelve hours of daylight."

How much of what has been considered historic fact can be proved scientifically by say DNA evidence? If it can’t, I say we throw it all out. As Henry Ford said, “History is bunk.”

Being called certain names isn’t the thing that makes this argument strong. It’s supportive but not the main point. The strength of the argument comes from the similarity of the Christ story to the cycles of the Sun, to astrology, and to other pre-Christian religions. That’s what makes it unlikely that Jesus died for three days and was resurrected. And if that’s not true, the overall credibility of the story is severely damaged.

I think there is plenty of corroborative evidence to support the existence of Caesar and Napoleon. If one of them died and was resurrected we might expect to see evidence of that as well.

Nearly all the attributes of the Christ myth recycle older themes; that’s probably why the faith resonates to this day. It seems at least plausible that some historical person served as the inspiration for the Jesus of the New Testament. However, there’s scant corroborating evidence outside the bible.