Have you noticed how quickly the posters of the "Horus was the story that Jesus was based on" myth retract it?

Have you noticed how quickly the posters of the "Horus was the story that Jesus was based on" myth retract it? Topic: Have you noticed how quickly the posters of the "Horus was the story that Jesus was based on" myth retract it?
June 16, 2019 / By Angeline
Question: Can anyone think of other bloopers eagerly posted and then deleted by careless skeptics? (The Horus-as-the-basis-for-the-Jesus-story is probably one of the most embarrassing for the novice-naysayer, especially here on R&S where people are used to seeing it and have pre-written rebukes ready to post.) Indeed, another Horus-whine got deleted by its author just a few minutes ago. Cut-and-pasting popular "skeptics' blunders" from online Bible-bashing sites always risks backfiring on the Christianity-detractor who hasn't done his/her homework enough to know that the Horus argument is bogus. Can anyone think of other bloopers frequently posted by careless skeptics?
Best Answer

Best Answers: Have you noticed how quickly the posters of the "Horus was the story that Jesus was based on" myth retract it?

Willard Willard | 2 days ago
Have I ever noticed it? No I haven't. Are you sure it was the poster and not someone else who deleted it? I don't think it's a big secret that many Christian traditions were taken from previous pagan traditions. "Can anyone think of other bloopers frequently posted by careless skeptics?" Hitler was an atheist, the United States was founded as a Christian nation, Obama is the antichrist, the world will end in 2012, Darwin recanted on his deathbed, evolution has been proven false... I could go on.
👍 152 | 👎 2
Did you like the answer? Have you noticed how quickly the posters of the "Horus was the story that Jesus was based on" myth retract it? Share with your friends
Willard Originally Answered: I hear the Horus, Mithra, Jesus topic/debate was debunked, please explain?
The entire: "Christianity is plagiarized from pagan religions" myth was debunked by the 1920s. First of all you need to get a copy of Lee Strobel's book: The case For the Real Jesus. In which he clearly shows you, through experts, why each of the points you talk about Horace Mithra are not parallels to Christianity. First of all, those very poor scholars that tried to make this claim had to first Christianize the myth, to try and make it conform. Now it's not possible to give you complete answers in the limited space available but let me give you a little bit from the book. T.N.D. Mettinger - a senior Swedish scholar, professor at Lund University, and member of the Royal Academy of letters, history, and the antiquities of Stockholm--- wrote one of the most recent academic treatments of dying and rising gods in antiquity. He admits in his book: The Riddles of Resurrection,: "that the consensus among modern scholars -nearly universal- is that there are no dying and rising God superseded Christianity. They all postdated the first century. ( came AFTER) Obviously the timing is critical: Christianity could not about the idea of the resurrection if myths about dying and rising gods weren't even circulating when Christianity was birthed in the first century A.D." (quoted from Strobel's book) while Mettinger takes exception to the nearly universal scholarly conviction and takes a decidedly minority position and claim that there are at least three possible and maybe as many as five possible dying and rising gods that predate Christianity: the question is this: are there any actual parallels between these myths and Jesus' resurrection? Mettinger, after combing through all of these accounts and critically analyzing them adds that none of these serve as parallels to Jesus... none of them. It's important to remember that Jesus' resurrection is a historical fact that can be proven from the witnesses and testimonies not only of the Bible but of extra biblical sources. And all of these are considered mythical not even believed as literal by those who followed that religion. Mettinger caps his study with this stunning statement: "there is, as far as I am aware, no prima facie evidence that the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is a mythological construct, drawing on the myths and rights of the dying and rising gods of the surrounding world." In short, this leading scholar's analysis is a sharp rebuke to popular level authors and Internet bloggers who make a grand claim about the pagan origins of Jesus' returned from the dead. Ultimately, he affirms, "the death and resurrection of Jesus retained its unique character in the history of religions." The religious belief of Mithra was: Mithras sprang Wholey formed from a rock, naked, with a hat and holding a dagger or torch or globe. This in no way reflects death and resurrection. And I think you're thinking of Osiris not Horus when you talk about death and resurrection. Osiris's body was cut into 14 pieces and then reassembled minus one part by his sister: Isis. He was then raised, not in life, he is the king of the underworld. Whether this can be called a [bodily] resurrection is questionable especially since according to Plutarch it was the pious desire of devotees to be buried in the same ground were according to local traditions the body of Osiris was still lying." End of quotes from Lee Strobel's book. You'll find this book to give you satisfactory answers and explanations as to why this entire belief was laid to rest in 1920 but has been resurrected by the same liberal left, radical fringe, minority and Internet quasi-scholars today.

Seamour Seamour
why people argue about the bible I don't know. Either a person believes it or they don't. Some people aren't happy if aren't arguing.
👍 60 | 👎 -5

Ned Ned
Are you serious? You're pointing to one of the scads of gods over the years that have those same attributes and trying to break the point with a few details that can get hairy. The argument against that claim is very poorly made with little outside evidence to support that comes up to be unbiased. I can think of bloopers, but none of them come from "Careless Skeptics".
👍 59 | 👎 -12

Kevyn Kevyn
maybe you should post the info that proves that its not true...it would certainly be helpful in resolving the matter also, please show us all that the story of noah wasnt stolen from utnapishtim btw- have you noticed that christians and other religious types usually have a "fair weather friend" relationship to historical facts, and then when proven wrong counter with something along the lines of "i have faith, and thats all that matters"? im not sure you know how this works: the posters arent the ones doing the deleting; its yahoo answers mods caving to hordes of theist report monkeys one could post "the sky is blue" and if enough people report it its gone, as y/a doesnt actually read anything, including appeals oh....and you havent refuted anything. after reading your profile i will assume that you know what a naked assertion is. this is poor practice for someone as educated as yourself (though for the life of me i cannot understand how a computer science degree is even remotely germane to this discussion)
👍 58 | 👎 -19

Hudson Hudson
I think any of the Jesus-Myth Hypotheses. They are frequently posted, probably because of a few recent online documentaries -- The God Who Wasn't There and Zeitgeist -- but they are rarely supported with reliable evidence. I hope you are actually interesting in answers rather than simply wanting to voice your opinion on this one topic and call attention to one blunder that is corrected when the posters are informed of their error.
👍 57 | 👎 -26

Hudson Originally Answered: Do kids learn more from issue-based books with a story based format or a factual based one?
Children learn differently. Some will relate to the story based format, some will relate better to the factual based format. Story based formats usually have facts in them and factual based formats often include little examples or 'stories' in them. Children really relate well to concrete things and have difficulty with abstracts. So whether issue-based or story-based the format would have to be concrete rather than abstract. Death and 'where' the person goes is an 'abstract'. Feeling the loss of someone near and dear is a concrete. How to handle that is a concrete. Emotions in general are abstract. Crying, upset stomachs, wanting to be with the other person, etc. are concretes. Physical symptoms are concrete. Mental states are abstract. I think you get where I'm coming from. Don't know how this helps with your assignment though. Blessings :)

If you have your own answer to the question Have you noticed how quickly the posters of the "Horus was the story that Jesus was based on" myth retract it?, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.