Horus vs. Christ?

[JAD]

I have read a few arguments pro and con for the comparison of Egyptian mythology with Christian mythology regarding the Horus/Christ connection, but I haven't delved very deeply into this issue. As a matter of curiosity, (and because I find it increasingly difficult to find time to lurk on message boards and surf the web) I was wondering if someone could help me cut through the crap and find some substance.

For example, is Acharya S. a reliable source? What links are available to the lay person to investigate whether or not there is some credible connection between Egyptian and Christian mythologies? What about other pagan connections? What are some good websites or books that deal fairly, not only with the issues mentioned above, but also with issues pertaining to the mythological nature of the Judeo-Christian scriptures (e.g., that the Exodus never happened)?

Any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks.

[lpetrich]

I think that a better comparison is with Osiris. Jesus Christ and Osiris both got killed by evil enemies, and they both later rose from the dead. Some women were involved with each resurrection; Isis reassembled Osiris and brought him back to life, while the women at Jesus Christ's tomb had been bystanders.

As to Acharya S, I have a hard time taking her "scholarship" seriously. Earl Doherty makes a much more cogent case for Jesus mythicism in his Jesus Puzzle (http://jesuspuzzle.com/) pages.

[sidhe]

I'd rather go with a tad more scholarly, and bizarre.

Like Martin Luther King, Jr.'s paper on the influence of mystery religions on Christianity. (http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/index.php/home/pages?page=http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/kingweb/publications/papers/vol1/500215-The_Influence_of_the_Mystery_Religions_on_Christia nity.htm)

The Osiris connection is a good bit more tenable than any connection to Horus, however much some might like to make Horus the Tiphareth of the Egyptian pantheon.

[Anne]

There's a lot of crap out there. A lot of pagans make things up to fit what they want, and you really need to be careful. Some pro pagan stuff has me rolling.

Head over to ratpags (http://www.rationalpagans.com/index.php)if you'd like to chat with some.

[sidhe]

There's a lot of crap out there. A lot of pagans make things up to fit what they want, and you really need to be careful. Some pro pagan stuff has me rolling.

Head over to ratpags (http://www.rationalpagans.com/index.php)if you'd like to chat with some.

A whole lot of the stranger "Horus = Christ" stuff comes from Crowley, who, as best I can figure, either was making stuff up, or was doing one of his deliberate misstatements to get people to say really stupid stuff. There is some ability to draw a parallel, but only if you look at Jesus as the "Conquering Son" archetype, rather than "Suffering Servant."

[Anne]

There are some real flakes out there who do not represent all pagans who will have so many completely soda-through-the-nose statements they meant wholeheartedly.

It's a shame, IMO, but it's true.

[lpetrich]

I decided to practice what I preach about primary sources, so I found an online version of Plutarch's Isis and Osiris (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Moralia/Isis_and_Osiris*/home.html) and started reading. Sure enough, I found where Typhon (Set) killed and dismembered Osiris and where Isis reassembled him.

Going further in the comparisons of Jesus Christ to other deities, I've found that he scores very high in Lord Raglan's Mythic-Hero profile, but I think I'll start a separate thread for that profile.

[JAD]

So it sounds like the Horus/Osiris/Christ connection lacks significant support. Why is Acharya S. poorly regarded? Is her scholarship shoddy or is she viewed as a nut job? I've also read a number of negative things throughout the years about Doherty's work, but I don't recall if such things came from heavily biased sources.

Besides the Plutarch link above, are there additional translated primary sources that would be good to peruse?

[hecaterin]

I've heard her called a nutjob. Not so much Doherty, I've just heard him called a poor historian but with no obvious good reason.

(I have no knowledge here; I'm just saying what rumours I've heard.)

[Davidnic]

Almost all of the lists and research we see about this ultimately either come from or are inspired by a book called The Pagan Christ a book reviewer sent emails to 20 Egyptologists, Here is a link to his summary of what he learned: link (http://hnn.us/articles/6641.html)

It pretty much refutes the theory.

[VoxRat]

A bit off topic, but...

I can't help wondering if the invention of Christianity doesn't owe something to the roughly contemporaneous events in Rome.

Think about it. A New World Order comes into being. For the first time, there's one individual - the emperor - who's pretty much The Lord of the entire (western) world. Those coins - the ones your supposed to render unto Caesar - were stamped with the emperor's image, with the motto "divi filius" (son of god).

[Davidnic]

A bit off topic, but...

I can't help wondering if the invention of Christianity doesn't owe something to the roughly contemporaneous events in Rome.

Think about it. A New World Order comes into being. For the first time, there's one individual - the emperor - who's pretty much The Lord of the entire (western) world. Those coins - the ones your supposed to render unto Caesar - were stamped with the emperor's image, with the motto "divi filius" (son of god).

You're not the first to make such an observation. it is important to note that many in the Roman world who knew of it were fascinated by the Messiah concept. To be upfront, I am a card carrying Catholic...so I have my own personal feelings on how things went down. But addressing in the context of your post there is a valid basis for discussion and for Christians, there are issues that we need to address as well.

That the Roman Empire lent much of it's hierarchical structure to Western Christianity, in particular Catholicism, is beyond serious rational debate. Exactly how much that influenced deep factors in the theology is a different matter.

In many ways Pagan Roman theology is directly oppositional to the core concepts of Christian Theology, so theology wise the bleed over is not all that great. But the structure that pervades much of Western Christianity is undeniably Roman.

It can be fascinating to look at Western Roman influence on Christian structure and development as opposed to Byzantine influence on Eastern Christian development. Then add in Egyptian influence in the Coptic Church and Syriac influence in Churches like the Syro-Malabar, Assyrian Church of the East and Maronite. Then throw in the direct and large influence of Egyptian Coptic monks on early Ireland.

Looking at all of this in the context of core Christian theology and the various Pagan theologies and then seeing the various social lines you get to see what came from where as far as social custom, influence of empires and early Church Tradition. There are things constant in all of these Christian traditions that are in direct opposition to Pagan theology. There are things that built on theological and moral concepts introduced in the Pagan world. And there is, of course, a large chunk, unmistakably Hebrew in origin.

But very seldom...very seldom, is something presented as directly ad the Christ-Horus connection a valid thing. 9 times out of 10 the lineage and development of a tradition (note the small t, as a Catholic I view that differently from big T Tradition) is coming from multiple lines and kind of obscure.

[JAD]

Thanks for all the replies. I am reasonably satisfied that the "DaVinci Code"-type obsession about a pagan Christ is mostly just that. I may pursue the issue further when or if some substantial support is unearthed.

I am, however, still curious as to what pagan influences did permeate Christianity. Or, as VoxRat suggests, I am also interested in other factors behind the formation of Christianity that may be rooted in the historical context of Rome.

[Soul Invictus]

Hi Jad,

I wouldn't consider Acharya S a scholar, but that doesn't mean that her claims have no merit. There's no shortage of people who make claims of their own, or offer claims made by scholars, but they fail to present enough source data in their works to make it credible.

As lpetrich stated, Osiris would be a better comparison than Horus. Horus was the offspring between Osiris and Isis. Seeing as how the Egyptian story predates the Christian example, it doesn't surprise me at all that there are duplications in the allegory or similarities at all.

[Anne]

IIRC, the Madonna and child image we are familiar with is a direct Church rip off of an Isis cult that started up in the 300's...

But I could have been taught wrong...

[VoxRat]

IIRC, the Madonna and child image we are familiar with is a direct Church rip off of an Isis cult that started up in the 300's...

But I could have been taught wrong...Which reminds me of another coincidence(?) Is there a connection between Athena - the virgin goddess - and the Christian obsession with the Virgin Mary?

Ever meditate on the etymology of the word, "Parthenon"?

[Davidnic]

IIRC, the Madonna and child image we are familiar with is a direct Church rip off of an Isis cult that started up in the 300's...

But I could have been taught wrong...


Earliest veneration of Mary is traced to 40AD in what would become Spain.

Which reminds me of another coincidence(?) Is there a connection between Athena - the virgin goddess - and the Christian obsession with the Virgin Mary?

Ever meditate on the etymology of the word, "Parthenon"?

"Temple of the Virgin" I would say that is just a coincidence. Virginity has had a spiritual dimension in almost all cultures. Veneration of the Virgin Mary has far more of a basis in the "Queen Mother" concept in Jewish royalty and even more in the connection to the Ark of the Covenant concept.

The origin of Marian veneration can be linked to Mary's role in early Church theology as the new Ark of the Covenant. The theology of it is that where the old Ark held the Manna from Heaven, The tablets of the Law and the Staff of the priesthood. Mary carried the Bread of Life, the New Law and the New Priesthood.

The beginnings of the early theology are not Greek but rather come from the early connections to the Old Testament and some Scriptural word play. In the old testament when David dances before the ark it is connected to when John the Baptist, in the womb of Elizabeth danced when she saw Mary. There is also parallel use of "overshadow" in relation to the tabernacle of the Ark and of Mary. Also David Asks how the Ark should come to him and Elizabeth parallels that with asking how should the mother of her Lord come to her.

So Luke takes great pains to set up the connection between Mary and the Ark and all that entails. So I would say the connection is far more Hebrew than Greek. Much more argues for it's Hebrew origin. Rather than Mary being connected to Parthenon (Temple of the Virgin) the connection is to Tabernacle (Dwelling place of the Lord).

[lpetrich]

IIRC, the Madonna and child image we are familiar with is a direct Church rip off of an Isis cult that started up in the 300's...

But I could have been taught wrong...
Isis worship had spread outside of Egypt after Alexander the Great's conquests centuries before.

I would not be surprised if the Church had ripped off existing Isis-and-Horus mother-and-child imagery -- they ripped off a lot of other paganism, like the title "pontiff". But mother-and-child imagery seems a bit too generic to me.

[Ray Moscow]

IIRC, the Madonna and child image we are familiar with is a direct Church rip off of an Isis cult that started up in the 300's...

But I could have been taught wrong...
Isis worship had spread outside of Egypt after Alexander the Great's conquests centuries before.

I would not be surprised if the Church had ripped off existing Isis-and-Horus mother-and-child imagery -- they ripped off a lot of other paganism, like the title "pontiff". But mother-and-child imagery seems a bit too generic to me.

The Isis/Horus image is so common in Egyptian art, and the Mary/Jesus one so similar, that it seems like a direct ripoff.

[Pendaric]

http://marcohoffmann.de/nag_hammadi_message-in-a-bottle/relation-christ2egypt/380_-_200_BC_isisandhorusstatue.jpg

This is an Isis/Horus statue from approximately 400 BC.

[Davidnic]

And how many ways can you depict a mother and a child? Sitting on the lap, nursing, holding in the air? Just because a mother and child image are similar does not mean one is a direct take on another...they depict a common scene. You need to look at the theology of it.

[Soul Invictus]

And how many ways can you depict a mother and a child? Sitting on the lap, nursing, holding in the air? Just because a mother and child image are similar does not mean one is a direct take on another...they depict a common scene. You need to look at the theology of it.

The similarity of the story is the reason for assumption of cultural borrowing...not the art depiction.

[Davidnic]

And how many ways can you depict a mother and a child? Sitting on the lap, nursing, holding in the air? Just because a mother and child image are similar does not mean one is a direct take on another...they depict a common scene. You need to look at the theology of it.

The similarity of the story is the reason for assumption of cultural borrowing...not the art depiction.

Theologically the stories are not similar at all. And in the story Horus was not born of a virgin. I don't see any similarity that any Egyptologist of repute has but their reputation behind.

[Ray Moscow]

Well, I wouldn't say "no" similarities (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5b.htm).

Sun gods have their similarities.

[Soul Invictus]

And how many ways can you depict a mother and a child? Sitting on the lap, nursing, holding in the air? Just because a mother and child image are similar does not mean one is a direct take on another...they depict a common scene. You need to look at the theology of it.

The similarity of the story is the reason for assumption of cultural borrowing...not the art depiction.

Theologically the stories are not similar at all. And in the story Horus was not born of a virgin. I don't see any similarity that any Egyptologist of repute has but their reputation behind.

I don't know what you're referencing when you refer to 'Egyptologist'. As to the point though, Horus was not born via a sex act, or copulation. Jesus was not born via a sex act, or copulation, either.

[Davidnic]

I don't know what you're referencing when you refer to 'Egyptologist'; however are you familiar with how Horus was conceived?

I am referring to degreed individuals who teach the subject and use that term for themselves. Or Professors of Egyptology. Conceived by the severed phallus of Osiris after his death. And the Horus "born of a virgin" is not something any teacher of Egyptian mythology has ever stood behind that I have seen.

[Soul Invictus]

I don't know what you're referencing when you refer to 'Egyptologist'; however are you familiar with how Horus was conceived?

I am referring to degreed individuals who teach the subject and use that term for themselves. Or Professors of Egyptology. Conceived by the severed phallus of Osiris after his death. And the Horus "born of a virgin" is not something any teacher of Egyptian mythology has ever stood behind that I have seen.

You probably missed my post, because I edited it again to provide some information. All I said was Horus was not born via a sex act, or copulation. Jesus was not born via a sex act, or copulation, either. That's a similarity that doesn't definitely connect borrowing, but the fact that this theme predates the Christian example definitely shows its lack of novelty.

[Davidnic]

I don't know what you're referencing when you refer to 'Egyptologist'; however are you familiar with how Horus was conceived?

I am referring to degreed individuals who teach the subject and use that term for themselves. Or Professors of Egyptology. Conceived by the severed phallus of Osiris after his death. And the Horus "born of a virgin" is not something any teacher of Egyptian mythology has ever stood behind that I have seen.

You probably missed my post, because I edited it again to provide some information. All I said was Horus was not born via a sex act, or copulation. Jesus was not born via a sex act, or copulation, either. That's a similarity that doesn't definitely connect borrowing, but the fact that this theme predates the Christian example definitely shows its lack of novelty.

Oh if you are talking about outside the normative way...then sure. Sorry if I misunderstood.

The theme of miraculous birth be it without direct sex act or to someone physically unable to have one....they have been around since people wrote on cave walls.

[Soul Invictus]

I am referring to degreed individuals who teach the subject and use that term for themselves. Or Professors of Egyptology. Conceived by the severed phallus of Osiris after his death. And the Horus "born of a virgin" is not something any teacher of Egyptian mythology has ever stood behind that I have seen.

You probably missed my post, because I edited it again to provide some information. All I said was Horus was not born via a sex act, or copulation. Jesus was not born via a sex act, or copulation, either. That's a similarity that doesn't definitely connect borrowing, but the fact that this theme predates the Christian example definitely shows its lack of novelty.

Oh if you are talking about outside the normative way...then sure. Sorry if I misunderstood.

The theme of miraculous birth be it without direct sex act or to someone physically unable to have one....they have been around since people wrote on cave walls.

You said it in a much better way than I did. Miraculous birth. I have got to use that instead of my 'not born via a sex act, or copulation' phrase. :thumbdown:

[lpetrich]

More generally, Greco-Roman mythology is full of divine impregnation, and there were stories about the literal biological divine paternity of Pythagoras, Plato, Alexander the Great, and Augustus Caesar.

That concept is absent from the Old Testament; kings were only "sons of God" in a metaphorical, adoptive sense. But the writers of the Gospels took it literally, thus Jesus Christ became the Son of God in the literal biological sense, just like numerous pagan heroes.