For Believers Of Jesus Christ

[Walden]

The other day I got around to watching the anti-religious "documentary" Religulous, by Bill Maher. I came away rather unimpressed by the film and the amateurishness of the whole thing, even though I do lean more towards Maher's line of thinking (though I am put off by his brashness and abrasiveness). However, i was intrigued by the recounting of the legend of the mythical god Horas, who pre-dated Christ by a few thousand years, yet was born of miraculous circumstances, had disciples, performed miracles, was resurrected, etc.

How do believers of Jesus Christ rationalize the numerous savior figures that pre-dated Jesus Christ, yet share uncanny and eerily similar stories and origins, as follows:

Virgin Birth: Many ancient saviors that pre-dated Jesus of Nazareth were, according to their mythical stories, born of a virgin: Attis of Phrygia, Buddha, Dionysus/Bacchus, Hercules/Heracles, Horus/Osirus of Egypt, Krishna of India, Mithra of Persia, Zoroaster/Zarathurstra, etc.

Born in a manger/cave: Birth of the savior in a manger/cave was common an ancient religion mythos pre-dating christianity: Adonis/Tammus, Apollo, Cybele, Demter, Herakles, Hermes, Mithra, Poseidon, etc.

Newborns ordered killed in order to kill the savior: The order to kill all innocent newborns in order to kill the savior is found in many ancient savior mythologies: Sargon, Nimrod, Moses, Jason, Krishna, Mordred, Jesus, Oedipus, Perseus, Romulus, Remus, Zeus

40 days in wilderness: Many savior gods were tempted in the wilderness: Buddha, Horus, Manu, Quetzalcoatl, Zoroaster.

Miracles: Honi the Righteous, and Hanini Be Dosa, resided in the biblical lands at the time of Jesus, and both were know for their paranormal powers; they healed the sick, exorcised demons, and made it rain to avert a famine. Apollonius of Tyana was renowned as a healer almost as much as Jesus; Apollonius was born around the time of Jesus, with a birth marked by prodigious events. Apollonius taught, preached, healed, exorcised demons, performed paranormal appearances and disappearances, and resurrected the dead. Apollonius had disciples. Upon the death of Apollonius, his followers believed he would again appear, and he was deified as a god.

Sayings and Parables of Jesus: Many of the parables as taught by Jesus can be found in the Indian Vedas as spoken by Krishna (long before christianity) and in the Dhammapada attributed to the equally compassionate Buddha, as well as the Tao Te Ching of the Chinese sage Lao Tzu (6th century BCE). Likewise, some parables taught by Christ can be found in writings from the ancient Indian sect of Jainism (such as the parable of the prodigal son and the parable of the sower).

Transfiguration on the Mount: the ancient god Osiris also underwent a transfiguration on a mountain

The Passion: The ancient god Baal was taken prisoner, tried in a hall of justice, tormented and mocked by a rabble, let away to a mount, taken with two other prisoners (one of whom is released), sacrificed on a mount after which the rabble goes on a rampage, his clothes are taken, he is put in a tomb, he is sought after by weeping women, he is resurrected-- appearing to his followers after the stone is rolled away from the tomb.

Darkening of the Sun: This is similar to the darkening of the Sun as told in the stories of the anceint gods Heracles/Hercules, Krishna, Premetheus, and Osiris.

Savior Rises from the Dead: Similar to the stories of ancient gods Tammuz, Osiris/Horus, Prometheus, Mithra, Krisha, etc., all of whom rose from the dead after their deaths.

There are other examples, too exhaustive to list here, but you get the idea. Honestly, how do followers/believers of Christ rationalize all these coincidences?

[Duncan]

I also say that movie, but gladly didn't pay for it my friend owed me BUT I think he didn't offer any sources for his claims, do you know if he did or not?

[Palerider]

The other day I got around to watching the anti-religious "documentary" Religulous, by Bill Maher. I came away rather unimpressed by the film and the amateurishness of the whole thing, even though I do lean more towards Maher's line of thinking (though I am put off by his brashness and abrasiveness). However, i was intrigued by the recounting of the legend of the mythical god Horas, who pre-dated Christ by a few thousand years, yet was born of miraculous circumstances, had disciples, performed miracles, was resurrected, etc.

How do believers of Jesus Christ rationalize the numerous savior figures that pre-dated Jesus Christ, yet share uncanny and eerily similar stories and origins, as follows:

Virgin Birth: Many ancient saviors that pre-dated Jesus of Nazareth were, according to their mythical stories, born of a virgin: Attis of Phrygia, Buddha, Dionysus/Bacchus, Hercules/Heracles, Horus/Osirus of Egypt, Krishna of India, Mithra of Persia, Zoroaster/Zarathurstra, etc.

Born in a manger/cave: Birth of the savior in a manger/cave was common an ancient religion mythos pre-dating christianity: Adonis/Tammus, Apollo, Cybele, Demter, Herakles, Hermes, Mithra, Poseidon, etc.

Newborns ordered killed in order to kill the savior: The order to kill all innocent newborns in order to kill the savior is found in many ancient savior mythologies: Sargon, Nimrod, Moses, Jason, Krishna, Mordred, Jesus, Oedipus, Perseus, Romulus, Remus, Zeus

40 days in wilderness: Many savior gods were tempted in the wilderness: Buddha, Horus, Manu, Quetzalcoatl, Zoroaster.

Miracles: Honi the Righteous, and Hanini Be Dosa, resided in the biblical lands at the time of Jesus, and both were know for their paranormal powers; they healed the sick, exorcised demons, and made it rain to avert a famine. Apollonius of Tyana was renowned as a healer almost as much as Jesus; Apollonius was born around the time of Jesus, with a birth marked by prodigious events. Apollonius taught, preached, healed, exorcised demons, performed paranormal appearances and disappearances, and resurrected the dead. Apollonius had disciples. Upon the death of Apollonius, his followers believed he would again appear, and he was deified as a god.

Sayings and Parables of Jesus: Many of the parables as taught by Jesus can be found in the Indian Vedas as spoken by Krishna (long before christianity) and in the Dhammapada attributed to the equally compassionate Buddha, as well as the Tao Te Ching of the Chinese sage Lao Tzu (6th century BCE). Likewise, some parables taught by Christ can be found in writings from the ancient Indian sect of Jainism (such as the parable of the prodigal son and the parable of the sower).

Transfiguration on the Mount: the ancient god Osiris also underwent a transfiguration on a mountain

The Passion: The ancient god Baal was taken prisoner, tried in a hall of justice, tormented and mocked by a rabble, let away to a mount, taken with two other prisoners (one of whom is released), sacrificed on a mount after which the rabble goes on a rampage, his clothes are taken, he is put in a tomb, he is sought after by weeping women, he is resurrected-- appearing to his followers after the stone is rolled away from the tomb.

Darkening of the Sun: This is similar to the darkening of the Sun as told in the stories of the anceint gods Heracles/Hercules, Krishna, Premetheus, and Osiris.

Savior Rises from the Dead: Similar to the stories of ancient gods Tammuz, Osiris/Horus, Prometheus, Mithra, Krisha, etc., all of whom rose from the dead after their deaths.

There are other examples, too exhaustive to list here, but you get the idea. Honestly, how do followers/believers of Christ rationalize all these coincidences?

I can't say that I speak for Mormons exactly but I think some would say that most of these things you have described were taught by revelation to Father Adam, Noah and the early Patriarchs and as the world was divided after the flood, many of the prophecies were "hijacked" by the apostate sons of men. These somewhat altered legends,stories, etc. were preserved through the ages in different forms and various cultures but although they took on some of the same characteristics of the true Gospel story which occured when Christ made his first appearence, they were still nonetheless only imitations of the real thing.

[Walden]

I can't say that I speak for Mormons exactly but I think some would say that most of these things you have described were taught by revelation to Father Adam, Noah and the early Patriarchs and as the world was divided after the flood, many of the prophecies were "hijacked" by the apostate sons of men. These somewhat altered legends,stories, etc. were preserved through the ages in different forms and various cultures but although they took on some of the same characteristics of the true Gospel story which occured when Christ made his first appearence, they were still nonetheless only imitations of the real thing.

Actually, that sounds to me to make the most sense with regard to rationalizing these similarities....would be interested to hear other theories, but I could see this theory as appearing the most rational for a believer.

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

I'd say Palerider has it essentially correct - Hugh Nibley's writings on the diffusion of the Temple ordinances, while speculative, are very satisfying to me as an explanation for the widespread commonalities between ancient mythology. See http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=55&chapid=526 for instance. His last book 'One Eternal Round' is also excellent, speculating on the ubiquity of 'Ascension' texts from all around the world. John M. Lundquist is a great follow-up to Nibley, as he examines the fundamentals of Temple ideology from Eastern traditions: http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=100&chapid=1128

I'm from Hawaii, and the myths I grew up with are very similar to some ancient Asiatic and even Egyptian stories, which is in part what attracted me to Mormonism (embodied male and female Gods and Goddesses, Creation from primordial material rather than ex nihilo, etc.) A good paper from a non-Mormon source about how these things are spread throughout cultures: http://www.jps.auckland.ac.nz/document/Volume_2_1893/Volume_2,_No.3,_September_1893/Asiatic_Gods_in_the_Pacific,_by_E._Tregear,_p129-146/p1

[bluebell]

I can't say that I speak for Mormons exactly but I think some would say that most of these things you have described were taught by revelation to Father Adam, Noah and the early Patriarchs and as the world was divided after the flood, many of the prophecies were "hijacked" by the apostate sons of men. These somewhat altered legends,stories, etc. were preserved through the ages in different forms and various cultures but although they took on some of the same characteristics of the true Gospel story which occured when Christ made his first appearence, they were still nonetheless only imitations of the real thing.

I agree with this.

[Flyonthewall]

I agree with Palerider also. Just like the game Telephone, the original truth has been added to, subtracted from or altered down thru the ages and cultures.

That is why I believe ALL religions have a portion of truth to them, some are readily recognizable, others require more effort to see.

[Rob Bowman]

Walden,

The list that you reproduced of alleged parallels to the supposed Jesus myth is itself a myth. It is a tissue of half-truths and whole fictions. For example, few if any of the figures listed as supposedly born of a virgin were actually claimed by their devotees or mythologists to have been born of a virgin. What skeptics do typically is to find stories in which an anthropomorphic deity impregnates a mortal woman and to declare these stories to be "parallels" to the virgin birth of Christ. They are not. So many, and I would say almost all, of the alleged parallels are strained at best and nonexistent at worst. Try to track down documentation that all of these figures were born in a cave, for example, and I predict that you will have trouble documenting this supposed parallel for most if not all of the figures.

The other methodological problem with the argument is that these parallels simply have nothing to do, in almost every instance, with any possible historical source of the Gospel stories. It should be obvious that stories about the Buddha, Krishna, or Quetzalcoatl have no bearing on how the Gospel stories originated. What skeptics do is to ransack the myths and legends of cultures throughout the ancient world and try to create a composite picture that superficially looks like the Gospel narrative about Jesus. We could easily do the same thing to form a composite story that looks like the story of Julius Caesar, but that would not in any way show that Julius Caesar didn't exist or that he didn't do what historical records report him doing. Even in the few cases where the alleged parallels are culturally close to the context of Jesus (e.g., Honi and Hanini) the similarities have been exaggerated and the differences ignored to create the illusion of a significant parallel.

There are a lot of good resources online that explode various elements of the Jesus-myth argument. Mary Jo Sharpe, a friend of mine, has some excellent articles on her Confident Christianity website (click on Articles).

[bluebell]

Walden,

The list that you reproduced of alleged parallels to the supposed Jesus myth is itself a myth. It is a tissue of half-truths and whole fictions. For example, few if any of the figures listed as supposedly born of a virgin were actually claimed by their devotees or mythologists to have been born of a virgin. What skeptics do typically is to find stories in which an anthropomorphic deity impregnates a mortal woman and to declare these stories to be "parallels" to the virgin birth of Christ. They are not. So many, and I would say almost all, of the alleged parallels are strained at best and nonexistent at worst. Try to track down documentation that all of these figures were born in a cave, for example, and I predict that you will have trouble documenting this supposed parallel for most if not all of the figures.

The other methodological problem with the argument is that these parallels simply have nothing to do, in almost every instance, with any possible historical source of the Gospel stories. It should be obvious that stories about the Buddha, Krishna, or Quetzalcoatl have no bearing on how the Gospel stories originated. What skeptics do is to ransack the myths and legends of cultures throughout the ancient world and try to create a composite picture that superficially looks like the Gospel narrative about Jesus. We could easily do the same thing to form a composite story that looks like the story of Julius Caesar, but that would not in any way show that Julius Caesar didn't exist or that he didn't do what historical records report him doing. Even in the few cases where the alleged parallels are culturally close to the context of Jesus (e.g., Honi and Hanini) the similarities have been exaggerated and the differences ignored to create the illusion of a significant parallel.

There are a lot of good resources online that explode various elements of the Jesus-myth argument. Mary Jo Sharpe, a friend of mine, has some excellent articles on her Confident Christianity website (click on Articles).

Having taken some global mythology classes just last year in college, i don't think the similarities can be dismissed as 'lies and hoaxes' created by atheists.

[Walden]

Walden,

The list that you reproduced of alleged parallels to the supposed Jesus myth is itself a myth. It is a tissue of half-truths and whole fictions. For example, few if any of the figures listed as supposedly born of a virgin were actually claimed by their devotees or mythologists to have been born of a virgin. What skeptics do typically is to find stories in which an anthropomorphic deity impregnates a mortal woman and to declare these stories to be "parallels" to the virgin birth of Christ. They are not. So many, and I would say almost all, of the alleged parallels are strained at best and nonexistent at worst. Try to track down documentation that all of these figures were born in a cave, for example, and I predict that you will have trouble documenting this supposed parallel for most if not all of the figures.

The other methodological problem with the argument is that these parallels simply have nothing to do, in almost every instance, with any possible historical source of the Gospel stories. It should be obvious that stories about the Buddha, Krishna, or Quetzalcoatl have no bearing on how the Gospel stories originated. What skeptics do is to ransack the myths and legends of cultures throughout the ancient world and try to create a composite picture that superficially looks like the Gospel narrative about Jesus. We could easily do the same thing to form a composite story that looks like the story of Julius Caesar, but that would not in any way show that Julius Caesar didn't exist or that he didn't do what historical records report him doing. Even in the few cases where the alleged parallels are culturally close to the context of Jesus (e.g., Honi and Hanini) the similarities have been exaggerated and the differences ignored to create the illusion of a significant parallel.

There are a lot of good resources online that explode various elements of the Jesus-myth argument. Mary Jo Sharpe, a friend of mine, has some excellent articles on her Confident Christianity website (click on Articles).

Thanks for the link.

With regard to Caesar, you mention that "We could easily do the same thing to form a composite story that looks like the story of Julius Caesar, but that would not in any way show that Julius Caesar didn't exist or that he didn't do what historical records report him doing." The difference is, there is little in the way of "historical record", outside the gospels themselves, that Jesus Christ even existed....certainly nowhere near the historical records pointing to the existence of Caesar. To compare the two, and thus insinuate the two as being equally valid "historical figures" is stretching it a bit, IMO.

Though the exact details may differ, as you point out, I do find it curious that many of the historical savior figures follow a generally similar pattern: miraculous birth, performance of miracles, persecution and execution, resurrection, etc. Yes, the details may change due to cultural narratives and norms, but the overall pattern is uncanny, IMO.

Actually, I think that the explanation as detailed by Palerider above likely gives the best rationale, for a believer, for these similarities.

[Mars]

There could be thousands of historical references to Jesus of Nazareth.

There could be one.

None of it would change the *real* question: Is He who He claims to have been?

[thesometimesaint]

Walden:

2 people get up in court and testify to 2 entirely different things about the same event. Which do you believe?

[Palerider]

Just for the sake of clarification, I was attempting to give a quick synopsis of the Mormon rationale for the similarities between the legends and myths of different cultures and Christianity.

Frankly, I personally don't know what happened thousands of years ago regarding the impetus for such mythology. And I'm not sure that I care much...... What I do know is that I have a great sense of trust for the majority of the Holy Scriptures, especially regarding the prophecies and actual birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. And that is where I place my faith and hopes.

[Questing Beast]

...

Honestly, how do followers/believers of Christ rationalize all these coincidences?

Well, that is the rub, isn't it? DO you rationalize? I tried for years to. I depended on Joseph Smith's theophany being real to believe in Jesus Christ. Compromise the first vision and you begin to compromise the scriptures; i.e. the Bible does not hold up on its own.

So to me Jesus Christ is a creation of the first Christians. The "prophesied" elements were all there: they had to fit in order for the "messiah" to be real. So naturally all of the indispensable elements of paganism and Judaism got attached to him.

The difference between Jesus Christ and any of the other "messiahs" is that he transcended them all with the message of salvation for all as a free gift of God's love. The "Jesus Story" is centered on getting the message of God's love across; and nothing impresses more than self-sacrifice unto death. Resurrection to life for all just extends the miracle to include everybody. Nothing is more powerful than that.

So the Jesus Story is God's ultimate mythology, miracle or wonder tale, or "fairy tale" as Tolkien put it. The literal truth of it is in the message, which I believe; not the details, which I do not believe anymore than I believe in literal history being something we can learn from the revised fragments that survive down to our time....

[Rob Bowman]

Walden,

You wrote:

The difference is, there is little in the way of "historical record", outside the gospels themselves, that Jesus Christ even existed....certainly nowhere near the historical records pointing to the existence of Caesar. To compare the two, and thus insinuate the two as being equally valid "historical figures" is stretching it a bit, IMO.

Not at all. Historians have two books by Caesar, but the earliest manuscripts date from about a thousand years after Caesar, compared to less than two centuries after Jesus for the earliest manuscripts of the four Gospels. The other main ancient sources for Caesar are Plutarch and Suetonius (second century) and Cassius Dio (early third century). our earliest sources for Jesus are Paul's epistles (in the 50s, roughly twenty years after Jesus' death) and the four Gospels (roughly thirty to sixty years after Jesus' death). Suetonius also mentions Jesus briefly, as do Tacitus and, in the late first century, Josephus. Historians don't doubt the existence of either Caesar or Jesus, and for very good reasons.

You wrote:

Though the exact details may differ, as you point out, I do find it curious that many of the historical savior figures follow a generally similar pattern: miraculous birth, performance of miracles, persecution and execution, resurrection, etc. Yes, the details may change due to cultural narratives and norms, but the overall pattern is uncanny, IMO.

That's just the problem: there is no overall pattern. It's an invention of the skeptics. Name one of these supposed "historical savior figures" predating Jesus who exhibits the four or five elements you mention here. There isn't one.

You wrote:

Actually, I think that the explanation as detailed by Palerider above likely gives the best rationale, for a believer, for these similarities.

To accept the historicity of the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon, on which that explanation appears to rest, is just as dubious as the skeptical argument that explanation attempts to counter.

[KevinG]

Satan had a plan to keep all the stories straight and not depend on the messy process of using prophets and disciples with agency.

[Walden]

Walden,

You wrote:

Not at all. Historians have two books by Caesar, but the earliest manuscripts date from about a thousand years after Caesar, compared to less than two centuries after Jesus for the earliest manuscripts of the four Gospels. The other main ancient sources for Caesar are Plutarch and Suetonius (second century) and Cassius Dio (early third century). our earliest sources for Jesus are Paul's epistles (in the 50s, roughly twenty years after Jesus' death) and the four Gospels (roughly thirty to sixty years after Jesus' death). Suetonius also mentions Jesus briefly, as do Tacitus and, in the late first century, Josephus. Historians don't doubt the existence of either Caesar or Jesus, and for very good reasons.

You wrote:

That's just the problem: there is no overall pattern. It's an invention of the skeptics. Name one of these supposed "historical savior figures" predating Jesus who exhibits the four or five elements you mention here. There isn't one.

You wrote:

To accept the historicity of the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon, on which that explanation appears to rest, is just as dubious as the skeptical argument that explanation attempts to counter.

Maybe we are talking about different caesar's, but I am aware that Julius Caesar (Gaiius Julius Caesar), emperor of Rome from 60 BC to 44 BC, wrote and published during his lifetime the two volumes that you refer to above (Commentarii de Bello Gallico, Commentarii de Bello Civili)....both were published around 40 to 50 BC (not sure where you are getting your date of "a thousand years after Caesar"). In fact, Julius Caesar was considered quite an accomplished writer by his peer's, including Cicero. Besides, which manuscripts did Christ publish that were written by his own hand?

In staging your argument, you mention that Caesar is mentioned only by those who came long after his death ("Plutarch and Suetonius (second century) and Cassius Dio (early third century)." This fails to take into accounts writings by Caesar's contemporary peers that speak to his existence. Cicero? Sallust? Vitruvius? Catullus? These were all contemporaries of Caesar. This is not to mention the coinage from the period of Caesar with his depiction, as well as the ancient monument inscriptions to him throughout the Mediterranean.

And your challenge that I "name one of these supposed "historical savior figures" predating Jesus who exhibits the four or five elements you mention here," is as big a straw man as I have seen around here in quite a while, and that is saying a lot. I never said that the tale of Jesus Christ is a direct copy of "one" of the ancient savior myths....I posited that he is a combination of the classic savior myths that were parts of most ancient cultures and mimics many of the same narratives that surrounded the ancient savior myths of numerous cultures before and up to that time.

Maybe if you educate yourself regarding ancient myth (as bluebell has done, and thus stated "Having taken some global mythology classes just last year in college, i don't think the similarities can be dismissed as 'lies and hoaxes' created by atheists") you might see the patterns.....then again it might be a vast, worldwide conspiracy of those atheist, intellectual college professors.

In the end, I think that palerider's assessment would make the most sense for a believer, and would be a sound enough explanation for me (if I was a believer).

[Mars]

I think Cato mentioned Caesar as well, didn't he?

[Rob Bowman]

Walden,

You wrote:

Maybe we are talking about different caesar's, but I am aware that Julius Caesar (Gaiius Julius Caesar), emperor of Rome from 60 BC to 44 BC, wrote and published during his lifetime the two volumes that you refer to above (Commentarii de Bello Gallico, Commentarii de Bello Civili)....both were published around 40 to 50 BC (not sure where you are getting your date of "a thousand years after Caesar").

The earliest manuscripts (you know, copies) of Caesar's writings date from about a thousand years after his life.

You wrote:

In staging your argument, you mention that Caesar is mentioned only by those who came long after his death ("Plutarch and Suetonius (second century) and Cassius Dio (early third century)." This fails to take into accounts writings by Caesar's contemporary peers that speak to his existence. Cicero? Sallust? Vitruvius? Catullus? These were all contemporaries of Caesar. This is not to mention the coinage from the period of Caesar with his depiction, as well as the ancient monument inscriptions to him throughout the Mediterranean.

I said that those later writers were our "main" sources of information about Caesar, not our earliest or only sources. You might try to read what others say more carefully before disagreeing with them.

You wrote:

And your challenge that I "name one of these supposed "historical savior figures" predating Jesus who exhibits the four or five elements you mention here," is as big a straw man as I have seen around here in quite a while, and that is saying a lot. I never said that the tale of Jesus Christ is a direct copy of "one" of the ancient savior myths....I posited that he is a combination of the classic savior myths that were parts of most ancient cultures and mimics many of the same narratives that surrounded the ancient savior myths of numerous cultures before and up to that time.

I'm going to try to be nice here, at least for a little while longer. Here is what you wrote previously:

Though the exact details may differ, as you point out, I do find it curious that many of the historical savior figures follow a generally similar pattern: miraculous birth, performance of miracles, persecution and execution, resurrection, etc. Yes, the details may change due to cultural narratives and norms, but the overall pattern is uncanny, IMO.

If no one of these alleged "historical savior figures" follows this alleged pattern, then it clearly cannot be the case that "many" of them do! In order to establish a "pattern," you need several examples that follow it. You have one example: Jesus.

Suppose I speculated that Joseph Smith never existed but was a myth based on numerous stories about legendary persons or characters from past history. To support this claim, I might point to the death of various outlaws in the American West in gunfights, Emanuel Swedenborg's many visions, various medieval mystics who reported visions of God or of Jesus, the practice of polygamy by Abraham and David in the Old Testament, etc., etc., etc. No one of these figures has all of the elements of the story. Therefore, there is no "pattern" on which the supposed mythological figure of Joseph Smith is based. The argument is nonsense.

You wrote:

Maybe if you educate yourself regarding ancient myth (as bluebell has done, and thus stated "Having taken some global mythology classes just last year in college, i don't think the similarities can be dismissed as 'lies and hoaxes' created by atheists") you might see the patterns.....then again it might be a vast, worldwide conspiracy of those atheist, intellectual college professors.

I'm way past the stage of having just taken a couple of college classes of relevance. I have been involved in researching and studying relevant subjects, including ancient history and religions, for over thirty years. Your suggestion that I need to educate myself about ancient myth is unintentionally humorous.

[mfbukowski]

Walden,

The list that you reproduced of alleged parallels to the supposed Jesus myth is itself a myth. It is a tissue of half-truths and whole fictions. For example, few if any of the figures listed as supposedly born of a virgin were actually claimed by their devotees or mythologists to have been born of a virgin. What skeptics do typically is to find stories in which an anthropomorphic deity impregnates a mortal woman and to declare these stories to be "parallels" to the virgin birth of Christ. They are not. So many, and I would say almost all, of the alleged parallels are strained at best and nonexistent at worst. Try to track down documentation that all of these figures were born in a cave, for example, and I predict that you will have trouble documenting this supposed parallel for most if not all of the figures.

Dang. That's two today!

I actually agree with you. If that is what Maher is pushing, he is even worse than I thought.

[Mortal Man]

How do believers of Jesus Christ rationalize the numerous savior figures that pre-dated Jesus Christ, yet share uncanny and eerily similar stories and origins

...

Honestly, how do followers/believers of Christ rationalize all these coincidences?

C.S. Lewis argued that the pagans derived them long ago from an ancient revelation from God. He believed that “Christianity fulfilled paganism” and “paganism prefigured Christianity”. — C. S. Lewis: A Biography, pp. 274, 30; Harcourt Inc., (1974).

Justin Martyr, on the other hand, took opposing positions depending on who he was talking to. When addressing pagans in the Roman senate, he argued that Jesus was no different than their gods:

“And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was produced without sexual union, and that He was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing new and different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter… Asclepius, who, though he was a great healer, was struck by a thunderbolt, and ascended to heaven.” — First Apology, 21:1-2.

“When we say that He [Jesus] made well the lame and the paralytic and those who were feeble from birth and that he resurrected the dead, we shall seem to be mentioning deeds similar to and even identical with those which were said to have been performed by Asclepius.” — First Apology, 22:6.

However, when speaking to the Jews, Justin blamed any similarities on the devil:

“And when he [the devil] brings forward Asclepius as the raiser of the dead and healer of all diseases, may I not say that in this matter likewise he has imitated the prophecies about Christ?” — Dialogue with Trypho, 69.

[Mortal Man]

I can't say that I speak for Mormons exactly but I think some would say that most of these things you have described were taught by revelation to Father Adam, Noah and the early Patriarchs and as the world was divided after the flood, many of the prophecies were "hijacked" by the apostate sons of men. These somewhat altered legends,stories, etc. were preserved through the ages in different forms and various cultures but although they took on some of the same characteristics of the true Gospel story which occured when Christ made his first appearence, they were still nonetheless only imitations of the real thing.

What is more likely, that a story which had not yet occurred was pre-hijacked millennia in advance, or that the story was later embellished to better compete with already existing stories?

How could you tell the difference between these two scenarios?

[Mortal Man]

Name one of these supposed "historical savior figures" predating Jesus who exhibits the four or five elements you mention here.

Asclepius

There isn't one.

Yes there is. You left our earlier discussion before addressing this issue.

[mfbukowski]

What is more likely, that a story which had not yet occurred was pre-hijacked millennia in advance, or that the story was later embellished to better compete with already existing stories?

How could you tell the difference between these two scenarios?

Trying to establish the historicity of any of these traditions is pure folly.

None of it really matters. The point is, do you have a testimony or not. That doesn't mean it didn't happen that way- just that knowing by testimony is just as valid as any other way, since the "truth" is totally unknowable.

When choosing between one story and another I will take the one that changes my life and resonates with what is deep within me over one which I see as some "old story", every time.

[bookofmormontruth]

Well, that is the rub, isn't it? DO you rationalize? I tried for years to. I depended on Joseph Smith's theophany being real to believe in Jesus Christ. Compromise the first vision and you begin to compromise the scriptures; i.e. the Bible does not hold up on its own.

So to me Jesus Christ is a creation of the first Christians. The "prophesied" elements were all there: they had to fit in order for the "messiah" to be real. So naturally all of the indispensable elements of paganism and Judaism got attached to him.

The difference between Jesus Christ and any of the other "messiahs" is that he transcended them all with the message of salvation for all as a free gift of God's love. The "Jesus Story" is centered on getting the message of God's love across; and nothing impresses more than self-sacrifice unto death. Resurrection to life for all just extends the miracle to include everybody. Nothing is more powerful than that.

So the Jesus Story is God's ultimate mythology, miracle or wonder tale, or "fairy tale" as Tolkien put it. The literal truth of it is in the message, which I believe; not the details, which I do not believe anymore than I believe in literal history being something we can learn from the revised fragments that survive down to our time....

Well thank goodness you at least got the Bishop and Stake President to sign your temple recommend the other night!