• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Questions for those who believe Jesus is just a construction of several figures?

Rainbow Mage

Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
My question would be this, for those who think Jesus was invented and constructed from several different figures. Who did they construct Jesus from? I've heard people say Osiris and Horus, but as a Kemetic I can tell you that Osiris and Horus really aren't that much like Jesus. People say Mithra, but a lot of what Mithraics believed came after Christianity. Then there's the do unto others deal. Did they take parts from Buddha and Confucius too? What I'm asking is, explain how they could construct a figure like Jesus, if that's all he is, is an invention who didn't actually exist in some sense.
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
That is certainly interesting, but does this prove Jesus was merely an invention or a construction?

I don`t think it proves anything.
I think it leaves open the possibility that Jesus was indeed a construction of some sort.

That`s the hypothesis I lean towards anyway.

Even if Jesus was indeed a single historical figure the legend and mythos that have surrounded him for millennia lend to the support of at least some construction going on somewhere.

I myself don`t believe he was an invention from scratch.

I don`t have much support for any of my beliefs on this subject however.
I don`t think there is much support to be had concerning the origins of Jesus in any context.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
there is no way to know with any certainty

there were son of god types spring up on every corner

on one hand you have enough pagan and jewish myths around to make up a god and a NT written by unknown outhors many decades after his death who never met jesus. you have a town called nazareth that was lucky if it was even a small village at that time, most accurate history placed there comes in 70AD or later. You also have a NT that has enough myth added to it and contradiction of the real jesus to make it seem its all imagination. You have a OT much of the jesus dogma was stolen from. There is also no known writings of jesus if he was even literate and none of the local scribes wrote a word about him. there is not one eye witness anywhere to be found. add a pinch of imagination and fiction.

on the other

You have a person who did speak in parables like the OT not all copied verbatim and you have enough after the fact peices of writing to assume he was not imagination. no scribes would have written about a little know street corner deity anyway and jesus wasnt important enough at the time to be worthy of being recorded. nazareth may have been to small a village to be noticed anyway or put on maps other villages were. you do have a good martyr story that would have been written down as the story grew. You also have a religious movement at that time unique enough that it didnt just pop up out of nowhere, giving allot of credibility to the martyr story and with he few pieces of early lititure we do have it kind of ties it all together.


We may never know but if I had to put a percentage to a historical jesus im at %75 for and %25 against.. probably due to my lack of education on the historical aspects.
 

EtuMalku

Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
My question would be this, for those who think Jesus was invented and constructed from several different figures. Who did they construct Jesus from? I've heard people say Osiris and Horus, but as a Kemetic I can tell you that Osiris and Horus really aren't that much like Jesus. People say Mithra, but a lot of what Mithraics believed came after Christianity. Then there's the do unto others deal. Did they take parts from Buddha and Confucius too? What I'm asking is, explain how they could construct a figure like Jesus, if that's all he is, is an invention who didn't actually exist in some sense.

Hi Senedjem,

Exploring the construction of a myth like Jesus is nothing short of a daunting task, as it is with all mythologies. Personally, I have no problem seeing the myth of a Dying Sun and its Resurrection becoming personified throughout time.

My understanding of Egyptian Religion is that all of the deities except for Set are Principles of the Natural Ordering of the Universe, what many refer to as Divinity/God. So, it is well within my view that a Jesus icon can be directly related to both Horus and Osiris icons, especially given that their are two Horus', the Horus of post-united Egypt and Horus the Elder of united Egypt.

Here is an interesting theory on the Jesus myth (one of many).

[SIZE=+3]Reflections on the Christ Myth[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]by Revilo P. Oliver[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]Professor of the Classics, Retired; University of Illinois, Urbana[/SIZE]
[This booklet and its addendum were previously published, in part, in Liberty Bell magazine. -- K.A.S.]
[SIZE=+1]CHAPTER ONE:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]THE CHRIST MYTH[/SIZE]




CHRISTIANITY IS A FUSION of two myths. The Jesus myth requires no explication. It is clear that the stories collected in the "New Testament" are versions of a folk-tale formed, like the legend of Robin Hood, by the accretion around a central figure of episodes in the careers of a number of minor figures. The Jesus of that legend was a composite formed from tales about Jesus ben Ananias (1), Jesus ben Pandera (2), the agitator, whose name may have been Jesus, who led a party of his followers into Jerusalem during the celebration of the Passover and was well received by the populace, but soon suppressed, and Judas the Gaulanite (3). And it is possible, of course, that there was an otherwise forgotten Jesus who also tried to start a Jewish revolt against civilized rule and paid the penalty. The composite Jesus was, of course, a would-be christ and interested only in his own barbarous people. The stories in the "New Testament" have been embellished by Christians, and that is what is remarkable.


Read More Here
 

ellenjanuary

Well-Known Member
Hi Senedjem,

Exploring the construction of a myth like Jesus is nothing short of a daunting task, as it is with all mythologies. Personally, I have no problem seeing the myth of a Dying Sun and its Resurrection becoming personified throughout time.

My understanding of Egyptian Religion is that all of the deities except for Set are Principles of the Natural Ordering of the Universe, what many refer to as Divinity/God. So, it is well within my view that a Jesus icon can be directly related to both Horus and Osiris icons, especially given that their are two Horus', the Horus of post-united Egypt and Horus the Elder of united Egypt.

Here is an interesting theory on the Jesus myth (one of many).

[SIZE=+3]Reflections on the Christ Myth[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]by Revilo P. Oliver[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]Professor of the Classics, Retired; University of Illinois, Urbana[/SIZE]
[This booklet and its addendum were previously published, in part, in Liberty Bell magazine. -- K.A.S.]
[SIZE=+1]CHAPTER ONE:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]THE CHRIST MYTH[/SIZE]




CHRISTIANITY IS A FUSION of two myths. The Jesus myth requires no explication. It is clear that the stories collected in the "New Testament" are versions of a folk-tale formed, like the legend of Robin Hood, by the accretion around a central figure of episodes in the careers of a number of minor figures. The Jesus of that legend was a composite formed from tales about Jesus ben Ananias (1), Jesus ben Pandera (2), the agitator, whose name may have been Jesus, who led a party of his followers into Jerusalem during the celebration of the Passover and was well received by the populace, but soon suppressed, and Judas the Gaulanite (3). And it is possible, of course, that there was an otherwise forgotten Jesus who also tried to start a Jewish revolt against civilized rule and paid the penalty. The composite Jesus was, of course, a would-be christ and interested only in his own barbarous people. The stories in the "New Testament" have been embellished by Christians, and that is what is remarkable.


Read More Here
Thanks for the link. That Oliver guy seems to have a whole rack-of-axe to grind. ;)

Some of what he says makes a degree of sense; other times it is hard to discern the light of knowledge from the sparkle of ground-axe particle.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Jesus is also sometimes compared to Buddha and Krishna, when in fact, those stories are virtually nothing like that of Jesus.

From what I've seen, the theory that Jesus was a construct based on other mythological figure is poorly supported, and very fickle at best.
 

Rainbow Mage

Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
Jesus is also sometimes compared to Buddha and Krishna, when in fact, those stories are virtually nothing like that of Jesus.

From what I've seen, the theory that Jesus was a construct based on other mythological figure is poorly supported, and very fickle at best.

That's what I think, and so far in this thread I've really seen no evidence to make me change my mind. Yet it's odd how some will be the first to claim quite certainly that Jesus did not exist and was a construction of Rome. They've yet to prove this.
 

Jacksnyte

Reverend
a quote from a really good article on the subject:

We know very little about Yeishu ha-Notzri. All modern
works that mention him are based on information taken from the
Tosefta and the Baraitas - writings made at the same time as the
Mishna but not contained in it. Because the historical
information concerning Yeishu is so damaging to Christianity,
most Christian authors (and even some Jewish ones) have tried to
discredit this information and have invented many ingenious
arguments to explain it away. Many of their arguments are based
on misunderstandings and misquotations of the Baraitas and in
order to get an accurate picture of Yeishu one should ignore
Christian authors and examine the Baraitas directly.

The skimpy information contained in the Baraitas is as
follows: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Perachyah once repelled Yeishu with
both hands. People believed that Yeishu was a sorcerer and they
considered him to be a person who had led the Jews astray. As a
result of charges brought against him (the details of which are
not known, but which probably involved high treason) Yeishu was
stoned and his body hung up on the eve of Passover. Before this
he was paraded around for forty days with a herald going in
front of him announcing that he would be stoned and calling for
people to come forward to plead for him. Nothing was brought
forward in his favour however. Yeishu had five disciples:
Mattai, Naqai, Neitzer, Buni, and Todah.

In the Tosefta and the Baraitas, Yeishu's father is
named Pandeira or Panteiri. These are Hebrew-Aramaic forms of a
Greek name. In Hebrew the third consonant of the name is
written either with a dalet or a tet. Comparison with other
Greek words transliterated into Hebrew shows that the original
Greek must have had a delta as its third consonant and so the
only possibilty for the father's Greek name is Panderos. Since
Greek names were common among Jews during Hashmonean times it is
not necessary to assume that he was Greek, as some authors have
done.

The connection between Yeishu and Jesus is corroborated
by the the fact that Mattai and Todah, the names of two of
Yeishu's disciples, are the original Hebrew forms of Matthew and
Thaddaeus, the names of two of Jesus's disciples in Christian
mythology.

The early Christians were also aware of the name "ben
Pandeira" for Jesus. The pagan philosopher Celsus, who was
famous for his arguments against Christianity, claimed in 178
C.E. that he had heard from a Jew that Jesus's mother, Mary,
had been divorced by her husband, a carpenter, after it had been
proved that she was an adultress. She wandered about in shame
and bore Jesus in secret. His real father was a soldier named
Pantheras. According to the Christian writer Epiphanius (c.
320 - 403 C.E.), the Christian apologist Origen (c.185 - 254
C.E.) had claimed that "Panther" was the nickname for Jacob the
father of Joseph, the stepfather of Jesus. It should be noted
that Origen's claim is not based on any historical information.
It is purely a conjecture aimed at explaining away the Pantheras
story of Celsus. That story is also not historical. The claim
that the name of Jesus's mother was Mary and the claim that her
husband was a carpenter is taken directly from Christian belief.
The claim that Jesus's real father was named Pantheras is based
on an incorrect attempt at reconstructing the original form of
Pandeira. This incorrect reconstruction was probably influenced
by the fact that the name Pantheras was found among Roman
soldiers.

You can check out the whole thing here:
http://embracingthecontradiction.org/Mythical_Jesus.html
 
Last edited:

Jacksnyte

Reverend
a quote from a really good article on the subject:

We know very little about Yeishu ha-Notzri. All modern
works that mention him are based on information taken from the
Tosefta and the Baraitas - writings made at the same time as the
Mishna but not contained in it. Because the historical
information concerning Yeishu is so damaging to Christianity,
most Christian authors (and even some Jewish ones) have tried to
discredit this information and have invented many ingenious
arguments to explain it away. Many of their arguments are based
on misunderstandings and misquotations of the Baraitas and in
order to get an accurate picture of Yeishu one should ignore
Christian authors and examine the Baraitas directly.

The skimpy information contained in the Baraitas is as
follows: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Perachyah once repelled Yeishu with
both hands. People believed that Yeishu was a sorcerer and they
considered him to be a person who had led the Jews astray. As a
result of charges brought against him (the details of which are
not known, but which probably involved high treason) Yeishu was
stoned and his body hung up on the eve of Passover. Before this
he was paraded around for forty days with a herald going in
front of him announcing that he would be stoned and calling for
people to come forward to plead for him. Nothing was brought
forward in his favour however. Yeishu had five disciples:
Mattai, Naqai, Neitzer, Buni, and Todah.

In the Tosefta and the Baraitas, Yeishu's father is
named Pandeira or Panteiri. These are Hebrew-Aramaic forms of a
Greek name. In Hebrew the third consonant of the name is
written either with a dalet or a tet. Comparison with other
Greek words transliterated into Hebrew shows that the original
Greek must have had a delta as its third consonant and so the
only possibilty for the father's Greek name is Panderos. Since
Greek names were common among Jews during Hashmonean times it is
not necessary to assume that he was Greek, as some authors have
done.

The connection between Yeishu and Jesus is corroborated
by the the fact that Mattai and Todah, the names of two of
Yeishu's disciples, are the original Hebrew forms of Matthew and
Thaddaeus, the names of two of Jesus's disciples in Christian
mythology.

The early Christians were also aware of the name "ben
Pandeira" for Jesus. The pagan philosopher Celsus, who was
famous for his arguments against Christianity, claimed in 178
C.E. that he had heard from a Jew that Jesus's mother, Mary,
had been divorced by her husband, a carpenter, after it had been
proved that she was an adultress. She wandered about in shame
and bore Jesus in secret. His real father was a soldier named
Pantheras. According to the Christian writer Epiphanius (c.
320 - 403 C.E.), the Christian apologist Origen (c.185 - 254
C.E.) had claimed that "Panther" was the nickname for Jacob the
father of Joseph, the stepfather of Jesus. It should be noted
that Origen's claim is not based on any historical information.
It is purely a conjecture aimed at explaining away the Pantheras
story of Celsus. That story is also not historical. The claim
that the name of Jesus's mother was Mary and the claim that her
husband was a carpenter is taken directly from Christian belief.
The claim that Jesus's real father was named Pantheras is based
on an incorrect attempt at reconstructing the original form of
Pandeira. This incorrect reconstruction was probably influenced
by the fact that the name Pantheras was found among Roman
soldiers.

You can check out the whole thing here:
http://embracingthecontradiction.org/Mythical_Jesus.html
Who's plagiarizing?!?
 
Last edited:
[/size][/i]
Who's plagiarizing?!?

" This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: United States Code: Title 17,107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use | LII / Legal Information Institute. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner."

ok, i apologise for accusing you of plagiarism.
but atleast now i know the source of your data.

I still believe my source to have more value than yours, because IMO my source has came to these conclusions simply in the search of knowledge, with no hidden agenda.

while your source has an agenda, and that is to prove anything wrong that conflicts with their belief.

I wil agree with you that what I am saying right now is not truely a valid arguement but im simply not interested enough in this subject to go and read texts like that.
 
Last edited:

Rainbow Mage

Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
I know Jack that there is someone mentioned in the Talmud tract Sanhedrin called Yeshua, who was reproved by his Rabbi for hanging up a brick and worshiping it. Yes, there are all kinds of Jewish sources about various people named Yeshua, but I'm not sure how definitively they can be shown to be about Jesus of Nazareth.
 

Jacksnyte

Reverend
Another good article on the subject is quoted here:

According to author Robert Price, specialists in mythology such as Lord Raglan, Otto Rank, and others have developed a concept called the "Mythic Hero Archetype" -- a type of larger-than-life man found in many Indo-European and Semitic cultures. They have analyzed stories and myths of Aeneas, Arthur, Buddha, David, Gilgamesh, Heracles, Lohengrin, Moses, Odysseus, Oedipus, Perseus, Romulus, Siegfried, etc. and have identified twenty-two recurring elements in these myths. Typically, the life story of any one hero contains many, but not all, of the twenty-two components. 1
Author Alan Dundes has compared this archetype with events in the life of Jesus, as recorded in the Christian Scriptures. 2 He found that Jesus' life contained almost all of the twenty two elements. Element #3 is missing, and #12 is a weak match. But the remaining twenty events are relatively precise matches:
  1. His mother is a royal virgin. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke state that Jesus' mother is a virgin. (e.g. Matthew 1:23). The genealogies in the two gospels indicate that Joseph is of royal descent; Mary would partake of royalty by being married to Joseph. (e.g. Matthew 1:1-16).
  2. His father is a king. Jesus is regarded to be the Son of God, and God is often referred to as King of Kings.
  3. His father and mother are related. There is no match here. Nothing is known about the genealogy of Mary, so this cannot be confirmed. If the early Christians believed that Joseph and Mary were related, then this information did not make it into the Gospels.
  4. His conception was unusual. Both the Gospels of Luke and of Matthew state that Jesus was conceived by Mary "from the Holy Spirit" without having engaged in sexual intercourse with a man. (Matthew 1:20),
  5. He was said to be the son of God. This is seen throughout the Christian Scriptures. Considering only the first chapter of the Gospel of John, there are seven references to Jesus as the Son of God:
    topbul2d.gif
    [FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]as "The Word" being with God.[/FONT]
    topbul2d.gif
    [FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]as the "only begotten of the Father." [/FONT]
    topbul2d.gif
    [FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]as the "only begotten Son"[/FONT]
    topbul2d.gif
    [FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]as "the Lamb of God." (2 times)[/FONT]
    topbul2d.gif
    [FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]as the "Son of God." (2 times)[/FONT][FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]
  6. There was an attempt to kill the hero while he was a child. In Matthew 2:16, Herod ordered that "all the Children who were in Bethlehem" and its vicinity were to be murdered. (KJV) 3 The NIV says that the slaughter was to be restricted to only male infants.
  7. He was spirited away. Matthew 2:13-14 relates how an angel appeared to Joseph in a dream and told him to flee to Egypt with his family.
  8. He was reared by foster parents in a country far away. Matthew 2:15 states that Jesus was raised in Egypt until Herod died, and it was safe for the family to return to Nazareth. Most hero myths involve a foster family. In the case of Yeshua, Joseph was not Jesus' father; Joseph was a type of foster father.
  9. Little or no information is known about his childhood. The Christian Scriptures give almost no details about the life of Jesus, from the time that he was circumcised at the age of eight days (Luke 2:21) until his baptism at about the age of 30. The only exception is Luke 2:46-49 where, at the age of 12, he was described as having been taken to Jerusalem at the time of Passover. He is described as debating theological matters with the priests. Presenting the hero as a child prodigy does not appear in the Mythic Hero Archetype being considered here. However, Robert Price states that "it is a frequent mytheme in other hero tales not considered by Raglan..." 1
  10. He goes to a future kingdom. Jesus went to Jerusalem just before his last Passover, where he was declared king by the public. John 12:12-13 says that "a great multitude took branches of palm trees and went out to meet Him, and cried out: 'Hosanna! Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord! The King of Israel!' " (NKJ)
  11. He is victorious over the king. The passage in John 18:36-37 describes how Jesus demonstrated superior debating skill when interviewed by Pilate. More importantly, Jesus' resurrection which was mentioned in all four Gospels and many additional locations in the Christian Scriptures is the ultimate victory over the king who was responsible for ordering the crucifixion. Pilate ordered Jesus death and Jesus was triumphant. Pilate was not a king; he was a procurator -- a type of governor. But he still had enormous power.
  12. He marries a princess. There is no match here -- only the suggestion of a tie-in. There is no record of Jesus having been married. However, some theologians have suggested that the miracle story in which he converts water into wine may have taken place at his own wedding. The Gospels talk extensively about women being in Jesus' retinue during his ministry. In the culture of Palestine during the 1st century CE, these female followers would have had to be married to Jesus and/or the disciples, or they were prostitutes. One assumes the former, because one would otherwise expect the Pharisees to repeatedly and viciously criticize Jesus for moral laxity if he was followed by a crowd of hookers. It has been argued that Jesus was probably married. Jewish society strongly pressured men to marry while young; if Jesus remained single, then one would have expected the Pharisees to criticize him for remaining a bachelor. Luke 8:3 indicates that one of the women who followed Jesus was at least close to King Herod.
  13. He becomes king. John 18:36-37 describes how the people of Jerusalem proclaimed him the King of Israel. Pilate jokingly recognizes that the public considered Jesus as a king in Mark 15:12 and John 19:15. In Mark 15:18, the Roman soldiers jokingly referred to him as king of the Jews. A plaque was placed above his head during the execution. It called him "The King of the Jews." (e.g. Mark 15:26).
  14. He reigns uneventfully, for a while. He does not reign in the sense of having temporal power. However, Mark 12:27 to 13: describes how he holds court in the Jerusalem temple.
  15. He prescribes laws. In Mark 12 and 13, "...He issues teachings, parables, and prophecies, which are taken with legal force by his followers." 1
  16. He loses favor with the gods or his subjects. The Gospels record how the public turns against Jesus and demands that he be crucified. (e.g. John 19:15).
  17. He is driven from the throne and city. In Luke 23:26-32, he is led out of the city by Roman soldiers.
  18. He has a mysterious death. DuringJesus' crucifixion, he died after an unexpectedly short time. (John 19:31-33). More mysterious than that were the events at the time of his death. Luke 23:44-45 describes how the sun stopped shining and the curtain in the temple was torn in two. Matthew 27:51-53 describes major earthquakes sufficiently strong to split rocks. Matthew also discusses the resurrection of many people from their graves, who subsequently entered the city and appeared to many people.
  19. He dies at the top of a hill: He was executed on the hill of Golgotha, on top of Mount Calvary.
  20. If he has any children, they do not succeed him. There is nothing in the Christian Scriptures to indicate that Jesus had children. It was Jesus brother, James, who succeeded him as leader of the disciples, and the head of the Jewish Christian group in Jerusalem. (Some faith groups regard James as Jesus' step-brother, cousin or friend).
  21. His body was not buried: Rather that being buried in an earthen grave, his body was temporarily laid out in a rock cave. At some unknown time between late Friday afternoon, when he was laid in the tomb, and the following Sunday morning, the Gospels all say that Jesus was resurrected. Price comments that this "would seem to be within legitimate variant-distance of the ideal legend type." 1
  22. One or more holy sepulchers are built: The Church of the Holy Sepulcher was built over the place where many Christians believe that Jesus was executed.
And may be found here:
Jesus life and Pagan "god-men"
[/FONT]
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
Another good article on the subject is quoted here:
I actually wrote a paper not too long ago refuting Price's arguments here. Basically, in order to Price's list to work, he has to ignore, dismiss, and stretch the evidence. When I get a chance, I will post the relevant part of my paper showing the actual refutation to Price's list here.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
His mother is a royal virgin.
Who else was born of a virgin?

His father is a king.
Many spiritual reformers along the lines of Jesus were born to intellectuals.

His father and mother are related.
And who else is like this?

His conception was unusual.
Okay, there's one similarity.

He was said to be the son of God.
The only other Christ like figure that I know of who fits this is Sri Ramakrishna, who treated Mother Kali as his own Mother.

There was an attempt to kill the hero while he was a child.
Only Krishna fits this. Who else?

He was spirited away.
Many weren't. The Buddha left of his own accord.

He was reared by foster parents in a country far away.
Who else? One more similarity to Krishna, and it's fairly minor.

Little or no information is known about his childhood.
We know plenty about the childhoods of Krishna and Buddha.

He goes to a future kingdom.
I don't get it. Who else did this?

He is victorious over the king.
That's very, very vague. Krishna does kill his uncle Kamsa, who had made repeated attempts to kill him, but that's still very minor.

But who else even goes against kings?

He becomes king.
The Buddha didn't become king. As far as I know, the only other one who became a king was Krishna.

He reigns uneventfully, for a while.
That's a REAL stretch, so I don't even really see how it's valid for Jesus, let alone others.

He prescribes laws.
Most of the others didn't teach laws, but simple guidelines.

He loses favor with the gods or his subjects.
Who else fits that?

He is driven from the throne and city
Again, who else fits that?

He has a mysterious death.
Again, who else fits that? For most of the figures, it's clear how they died.

He dies at the top of a hill:
No one else that I know of fits this.

If he has any children, they do not succeed him.
Okay, the Buddha had a child, but he's not really spoken of.

His body was not buried:
I don't think that detail is really even spoken of for others.

One or more holy sepulchers are built:
Okay, yet one more similarity.

So, the evidence remains fickle, and really needs to be stretched to fit with others.

That's not enough to form a conclusion that Jesus was a construct of other mythological figures.

It almost seems as if, the more the specifics get refuted, the more the argument becomes vague.
 
Top