I agree that there were "saviour" stories before the appearance of Jesus but as I wrote in a different thread, if Jesus was indeed the word of God, the logos incarnate and everything issued out of him from the begining of time, then why should it be a surprise that echos of him and his incarnation into flesh appear all over the place, before his very birth? Only a limited temporal outlook, or a reductionist scientific/aetheistic viewpoint, should discount the possibility that in the most important aspects, these similarities that exist elsewhere are reflections of Jesus and not vice-versa, whenever they happened.
However, I disaree strongly with what you wrote, whereby you stated that "The story of Jesus Christ is the rehashed story of Horus, Dionysus and Mithras to name a few. Word for word, VERBATIM".
The are similarities but to say they are the same "word for word, verbatum" is going way too far.
For example, some of the saviour stories you mentioned state that they were born on the 25th of December. Jesus, contrary to what apostate Churchianity teaches, was certainly not born on this pagan festival day!
Furthermore, the earlier saviour myths and stories are pale in the extreme, compared to the story of Jesus Christ. Oscar Wilde recognised in Jesus, more than any other "saviour", something extraordinarily special.
The following quote is from a letter Oscar Wilde wrote while he was in Reading Jail (the letter is also known as "De Profundis"):
He understood the leprosy of the leper, the darkness of the blind, the fierce misery of those who live for pleasure, the strange poverty of the rich.
He has all the colour elements of life; mystery, strangeness, pathos, suggestion, ecstasy, love. He appeals to the temper of wonder, and creates that mood in which alone he can be understood.
The great sins of the world take place in the brain; but it is in the brain that everything takes place... It is in the brain that the poppy is red, that the sky is blue, that the skylark sings.
There is one subject on which and through which I would like to express myself and that is 'Christ as the precursor of the romantic movement in life'.
The subject is intensely fascinating because I see in Jesus, not merely the essentials of the supreme romantic type, but all the accidents, the wilfulnesses even, of the romantic temperament also.
He was the first person who ever said to people that they should live 'flower-like lives.' He fixed the phrase. He took children as the type of what people should try to become!
As for evidence that Jesus existed, not all accounts of this remarkable man have been discredited and there are other factors, which I could go into that would draw one to the conclusion that this man did exist but this subject has been debated so many times on this forum over the years that on this occaision, I'll see how the thread develops.
It is incongruous to believe that Jesus was initiated into pagan Egyptian Mystery School teachings for many reasons, not least that Revelation compares Egypt to Satan!
I agree that Christ's message is more important than his life. I'm sure Jesus is not pleased with the way Churchianity has created a Jesus cult, where people are encouraged to pay more attention to his birth and death, rather than what he said in between.
|It's not Jesus but the story that's important.||385||PhilH||13-Feb-04 06:11|
|Re: It's not Jesus but the story that's important.||116||Milo||13-Feb-04 06:47|
|Re: It's not Jesus but the story that's important.||119||Richard Fusniak||13-Feb-04 16:05|
|Re: It's not Jesus but the story that's important.||112||Milo||13-Feb-04 19:25|
|Re: It's not Jesus but the story that's important.||172||Nebankh||13-Feb-04 16:30|
|Re: It's not Jesus but the story that's important.||101||Milo||13-Feb-04 19:37|
|Re: It's not Jesus but the story that's important.||113||Segestan||13-Feb-04 14:27|
|Re: It's not Jesus but the story that's important.||144||Milo||13-Feb-04 19:51|
|Re: It's not Jesus but the story that's important.||198||Cookiemonsters||14-Feb-04 23:30|