Remembering The Second Coming Of Christ At Christmas Time

Submitted by Dr. Georgie Porgie

Click On Image To View Presentation

Tags: , ,

872 Comments on “Remembering The Second Coming Of Christ At Christmas Time”

  1. kiki January 10, 2010 at 8:30 AM #

    (*)=Justin Hinds (**)=Little Roy


  2. Dictionary January 10, 2010 at 9:00 AM #


    Ad hominem.


    Observe carefully: Anonymous has still not addressed the matters on the merits.




  3. ROK January 10, 2010 at 9:08 AM #

    “what odds do you give that any of the main objectors above will seriously take up the challenge now?”

    This is the problem. What objectors what? You have this thing in your mind like if you fighting a war. Chill out man cause I am not fighting any war with you.

    I object to being called a scoffer when all I do is put forward another view. I also object to being called names for coming to my own conclusions. I object too to the putting down of Egypt just so you can hold up your bible.

    I object to the demonising of the Ancient people of Egypt and discrediting them for the huge contribution they have made to this world and which you yourself enjoy.

    Can anything good come out of Egypt for you? It is ridiculous to think that an empire that lasted over 3000 years could be so evil. You mean not one good person existed?

    If you step down from your demeanor, you can have a reasonable discussion with me, otherwise, I really don’t want to hear you and don’t care to respond to your elongated monologues. You have become a demolition machine on auto pilot.


  4. ROK January 10, 2010 at 9:15 AM #


    “Re ROK on Egypt. by expostulating at length on what Egyptian paganism was like, ROK has inadvertetnly managed to demonstrate the force of the points that were given to correct him.”

    You really don’t get it. I have not withheld or edited out what I though could be damaging, contradictory, or else. This is about truth. What the Egyptians did, they did.

    If I told you that Christ went to the toilet you will want to prove to me that a god does not need a toilet.



  5. ROK January 10, 2010 at 9:20 AM #

    New Kingdom

    The Middle Kingdom crumbled in the Second Intermediate Period, but the country was again reunited by Theban rulers, who became the first pharaohs of the New Kingdom. They promoted their deity Amun to the position of supreme state god, and syncretized him with the long-established patron of kingship, Ra. The temple of Amun-Ra at Karnak in Thebes thus became the religious capital of Egypt. Increased contact with outside peoples in this period led to the adoption of many Near Eastern deities into the pantheon, while the subjugated Nubians absorbed Egyptian religious beliefs, and in particular, adopted Amun as their own.

    The New Kingdom religious order was disrupted when Pharaoh Amenhotep IV replaced Amun with the Aten as the state god, and renamed himself Akhenaten in its honor. Eventually he prohibited the worship of gods other than the Aten, and moved Egypt’s capital to a new city at Amarna, for which this part of Egyptian history, the Amarna period, is named. In doing so Akhenaten claimed unprecedented status for himself, as an aspect of the Aten itself as well as its sole intermediary for worship. The Atenist system lacked well-developed mythology, moral philosophy, and afterlife beliefs, and the Aten itself seemed distant and impersonal, so the new order did not appeal to ordinary Egyptians. Thus, many of them continued to worship the traditional gods in private. Nevertheless, the withdrawal of state support for the other deities undermined the structure of Egyptian society. Akhenaten’s successors therefore restored the traditional religious system, and eventually they dismantled all Atenist monuments.

    The confusion of the Amarna period resulted in a long-term decline in pharaonic religious influence, despite the efforts of later pharaohs to counteract it. As a backlash against Akhenaten’s claim to be the only interface between the populace and the gods, people began to believe that the gods were more directly involved in daily life. The pharaoh was therefore less significant, more human and less divine. At the same time, after the religious restoration the priesthood of Amun grew still more powerful, and these factors contributed to the breakdown of the New Kingdom.


  6. ROK January 10, 2010 at 9:22 AM #

    Later periods

    In the first millennium BC, Egypt was significantly weaker than in earlier times, and in several periods foreigners seized the country and assumed the position of pharaoh. Animal cults, a characteristically Egyptian form of worship, became increasingly popular in this period, possibly as a response to the uncertainty and foreign influence of this period. Isis grew more popular in this period as well, and eventually became the most important goddess in Egypt.

    In the fourth century BC, Egypt became a Hellenistic kingdom under the Ptolemaic dynasty, which assumed the pharaonic role, maintaining the traditional religion and building or rebuilding many temples. The kingdom’s Greek ruling class identified the Egyptian deities with their own, and syncretized several Greek gods with Osiris and Apis to create Serapis, a new state god intended to unite the Greek and Egyptian communities. Nevertheless, for the most part the two belief systems remained separate, and the Egyptian deities remained Egyptian.

    The Ptolemaic religious system changed little after Egypt became a province of the Roman Empire, with the Ptolemaic kings replaced by distant emperors. The cult of Isis appealed even to Greeks and Romans outside Egypt, and in Hellenized form it spread across the empire. In Egypt itself, however, knowledge of many of the details of Egyptian belief had become confined to the insular and shrinking temple priesthoods. The religion declined further in the first century AD, when Christianity and its exclusive monotheism arrived and began winning converts. In 383 AD, when Christianity had become the official religion of the empire, Emperor Theodosius I ordered the closing of all pagan temples, including those in Egypt. While it persisted among the populace for some time, Egyptian religion slowly faded away thereafter.


  7. Dictionary January 10, 2010 at 9:33 AM #


    The evasions, sadly, still continue. the point is that the central issues at stake are at worldviews level, and until there is a serious addressing of this, all else is rhetorical posturing.

    For instance, once we see that he NT documents are in material part credible C1 primary source historical documents, and that they record eyewitness testimony tracing to 33 – 35 AD on the prophecy-fulfilling resurrection of Jesus with 500+ eyewitnesses, and have triggered 20 centuries of people meeting and being transformed by God in the [very Middle Eastern — pace ROK’s slander!] face of Christ, this sets a context for evaluating our whole view of the world based on what we do or should know.

    In that context, alternative worldviews have to come up with some very good explanations indeed to account for the Warranted Credible Truths 1 – 7 as identified above, and also the key evidence on fulfilled prophecy at 700+ years range [Is 53 vs 1 Cor 15], and the stream of life transforming salvific power through the gospel of Christ.

    Explanations that plainly are not forthcoming — or they would not only be trumpeted all over the Internet but would be assiduously cut and pasted all over this thread.

    This is a case where silence is eloquent indeed!

    And in the case of ROK, we look in vain for any sign of compunctions about proved slander.

    Not to mention, regret for a sadly but utterly revealing confession on having padlocked his mind 30 years ago.




  8. kiki January 10, 2010 at 10:03 AM #



  9. Zoe January 10, 2010 at 10:06 AM #

    @Rok, Keep on posting the historic reality of Egyptian *paganism* your willingness, in ignorance, to resolutely CONFIRM exactly what we have been saying, is amazing. Thank you again!

    Hear Rok Jan 9, @9:18 PM.

    “During the Old Kingdom the priesthoods of the major *DEITIES* TRIED to organize the *CONFUSING* national PANTHEON into groups, each with their own MYTHOLOGY and cult center. It was the period that family TRIADS of *DEITIES* emerged…” emphasis added.

    SATAN had a field DAY within Egyptian *mythology* what an all-fired, arrant, blighted, *CONFOUNDED* downright, flat-out *HELL-FIRED* mess of demonic deception he held over Egypt!!!

    It IS no wonder that, “…the priesthoods of the major DEITIES (Demon gods) TRIED to organize the *CONFUSING* national PANTHEON into groups…” emphasis added.

    The foolhardy Egyptian priest, tried organizing DEMON *gods* ‘…into GROUPS…”

    This out-and-out MAZE of utter Satanic deception, just bred more and more CONFUSION, as IT always does…leading ultimately to RUINATION of these Pagan civilization…as history is replete with the facts and evidence of their demise!


  10. Anonymous January 10, 2010 at 11:31 AM #

    “Some people think only intellect counts: knowing how to solve problems, knowing how to get by, knowing how to identify an advantage and seize it. But the functions of intellect are insufficient without courage, love, friendship, compassion and empathy”. –Dean Koontz


  11. kiki January 10, 2010 at 12:59 PM #

    The Third World


  12. Zoe January 10, 2010 at 2:41 PM #

    Respect for others Beliefs!!!???

    From time to time ROK has called for RESPECT for others Beliefs!

    This IS basic common sense, BUT, it must be carefully understood, that, One has to, or should RESPECT another person’s RIGHT to express their belief, NO matter how absurd or rediculous it may be.

    But, what Rok et al DON’T seem to grasp, is this. This IS a world of difference BETWEEN respecting another persons RIGHT to *express* their BELIEF, *AND* calling on me et al to RESPECT what it IS they believe!

    My civic duty to RESPECT another’s RIGHT to believe that the Moon is made of Green Cheeze, is one thing, BUT, to call on me et al to RESPECT that *rediculous* belief, IS NOT RIGHT!

    Enough said!!


  13. Zoe January 10, 2010 at 3:09 PM #


    No one on the side of the historic Judeo/Christian World view, is seeking to discredit Egypt’s contribution to mankind in the varied and many ways that it did. But, that IS not the point!

    The development or discovery of many wonderful things within Egyptian civilization, HAS NOTHING to do with the subject of its Religious Paganism. Almighty God, our Creator of historic divine revelation, has given and blessed mankind, througout ALL civilizations, ancient and modern, many, many, and varied talents and abilities, regardless of if is was/is Athiestic, Pantheistic, Polytheistic, Animistic, etc, etc.

    “Every good gift and every perfect gift IS from above, and comes down FROM the Father of lights, with whom there IS no variation or shadow of turning.” (James 1:17).

    Not only is God NOT responsible for human sin, He IS the source of all good.

    We were NEVER discusing Egypts inventions, etc, etc, or how much they contributed in Science, Mathematics, etc, as that was NOT the subject matter.

    Many great inventions and discoveries were made by men who were Atheist, etc, BUT, this natural God given ability, DID NOT put them right with their Creator, Almighty God!!


  14. Hopi January 11, 2010 at 12:01 AM #

    What’s being discussed is the 2nd coming and the authenticity/originality of the birth that could bring about a 2nd coming.

    Looking at the above, I can see the picture of a cow. You see the cow or Hathor or Hat-Heru was the Great Mother Cow from the Upper Hapi who provided nourishment for her young bull. Again this originated with the Black ones and later copied by the johnnies-come-lately.


    back to your christ

    The word Christ – Greek means the anointed was copied from the Karast _ Kemetian meaning the embalmed and anointed mummy, a figure of resurrection and life after death. The Karast is also the ‘messu’ – again Kemetian for anointed one from whcih you get messiah.

    Since Jesus’ birthday was in January, it was moved back to December 25, to coincide with that of Heru , and all the other Sun-gods that followed him. Dec 25th, was when Virgo constellation was in the eastern horizon and the Sun, which became the Son was born of the Virgin — Virgo.

    In early christendom the christian crucified figure was a lamb i.e the image of the Sun in Aries, during the time when the equinox occurred in Aries.

    In the temple of Luxor are 4 signs in a vignette depicting the Annunciation, the Conception, the Birth and the Adoration of the child Heru [your Jesus].

    Your scripture of Jesus’ transfiguration on the Mount was also plagurised from the Osiris’ Transfiguration in the Mount of the Moon.

    Isn’t it interesting how the ANTE-Christ has now become your ANTI-Christ?


  15. Dictionary January 11, 2010 at 3:18 AM #


    Let us first pause to explore a real current case of archaeology intersecting the Bible, and throwing light on the underlying authenticity of our OT text.

    (Hopi, sadly, has of course yet again willfully failed to provide the empirically supported causal bridges — other than bold face declarations — of the claimed pagan roots of the NT text and Christian faith. Observe onlookers, how for weeks, these mocking and too often ignorant objectors have studiously refused to responsibly interact with actual issues required to show such asserted roots, e.g. cf. here, which was linked and cited from the very beginning. As just he fiorst step, the advocates for Egyptian paganism have failed to address cogently how pagan polytheism would have been accepted enough by the likes of a Jesus or a Paul or a James or a John to shape how they viewed Jesus as messiah — a Hebrew prophetic expectation deeply rooted in the OT. And one that the Dead Sea Scrolls show was strongly present in C1 Judaea, so much so that since the 1950’s responsible scholarship has more and more come to respect t e specifically Hebraic roots of the NT, as we may see from noted Canadian NT Scholar Craig Evans’ U Calgary 2004 Benthal public lecture; which again was linked and cited from the very beginning, and was just as willfully ignored by the closed minded objectors. In short, we have been subjected for weeks now to a barrage of selectively hyperskeptical irresponsible and often ignorant and closed minded objections, in Hopi’s case trying consistently to twist key terms, symbols and ideas into distorted images in our minds, the latest being the meaning of the key NT eschatological concept, the Anti- Christ. Sad, and one for prayer . . . )

    Now, on focus for this contribution . . .

    In recent years, archaeological investigations have been undertaken in the region of the valley of Elah, at Khirbet Qeiyafa [evidently the biblical SHA’ARAYIM = “two gates, which is unique for that fortified site], a c. 1,000 BC [C-14 most probable date: 1,000 – 969 BCE] Iron Age II Israelite border fort 7 miles E of Gath (Philistine city-state and hometown of both Goliath and Ittai the Gittite, David’s Philistine general).

    Now, University of Haifa has announced the academic translation of a potsherd written on in what is now credibly the earliest recovered Hebrew text. (This cuts clean across fashionable skeptical theories that Heb writing only dates tot he C6 BC, which then became a basis for speculations that the Biblical texts can only date to that era, of the Babylonian Captivity.)

    The piece of clay jar used like we would use paper today [a common practice of the time], discovered at the site in 2008, was translated by prof Galil, thusly:

    The deciphered text:

    [Heb, in English letters]
    1′ ’l t‘ś w‘bd ’[t ….…]
    2′ špt [‘]b[d] w’lm[n] špt yt[m]
    3′ [w]gr [r]b ‘ll rb [d]l w
    4′ ’[l]mn šqm ybd mlk
    5′ ’[b]yn [w]‘bd šk gr t[mk]

    [English, per Galil;]

    1′ you shall not do [it], but worship the [Lord].
    2′ Judge the sla[ve] and the wid[ow] / Judge the orph[an]
    3′ [and] the stranger. [Pl]ead for the infant / plead for the po[or and]
    4′ the widow. Rehabilitate [the poor] at the hands of the king.
    5′ Protect the po[or and] the slave / [supp]ort the stranger. [HT Arutz Sheva’s Jan 8th 2010 report, “King David Era Pottery Shard Supports Biblical Narrative,” for providing the Heb transliteration.]

    Now, Prof Galil comments:

    “It indicates that the Kingdom of Israel already existed in the 10th century BCE and that at least some of the biblical texts were written hundreds of years before the dates presented in current research.”

    “This text is a social statement, relating to slaves, widows and orphans. It uses verbs that were characteristic of Hebrew, such as asah (“did”) and avad (“worked”), which were rarely used in other regional languages. Particular words that appear in the text, such as almanah (“widow”) are specific to Hebrew and are written differently in other local languages. The content itself was also unfamiliar to all the cultures in the region besides the Hebrew society: The present inscription provides social elements similar to those found in the biblical prophecies and very different from prophecies written by other cultures postulating glorification of the gods and taking care of their physical needs,”

    “It can now be maintained that it was highly reasonable that during the 10th century BCE, during the reign of King David, there were scribes in Israel who were able to write literary texts and complex historiographies such as the books of Judges and Samuel.” He adds that the complexity of the text discovered in Khirbet Qeiyafa, along with the impressive fortifications revealed at the site, refute the claims denying the existence of the Kingdom of Israel at that time.

    The contents of the text express social sensitivity to the fragile position of weaker members of society. The inscription testifies to the presence of strangers within the Israeli society as far back as this ancient period, and calls to provide support for these strangers. It appeals to care for the widows and orphans and that the king – who at that time had the responsibility of curbing social inequality – be involved. This inscription is similar in its content to biblical scriptures (Isaiah 1:17, Psalms 72:3, Exodus 23:3, and others), but it is clear that it is not copied from any biblical text.

    a –> In short, yet again, selectively hyperskeptical fashionable modernist and post moderniest theological scholarship [which too often dominates in the more traditional denominations in the Caribbean, being, e.g. built into UWI’s theological education programmes as taught in UTCWI (Ja) and Codrington College (B’dos)] is up against findings of archaeology; and seems to be again coming up short.

    b –> The fort [apparently falling out of use late in David’s reign, consistent with not only the biblical remark in 1 Chron 4:31 – 32 , but also the subjugation of the Philistines by David — observe, how they are never a serious military factor thereafter in Israel’s history], of course happens to be in the right spot for a border fort defending against invasions from Gath, fits into other findings about a major fortification programme at the time, and not only has pottery distinct from the Philistine types just 7 miles away, but its main gate is on the side towards Jerusalem.

    c –> The translated text fits very well into the biblical picture of a nation self consciously serving YHWH under its greatest king, and has a moral tone, focus and allusive remarks that fit in precisely with the Mosaic law, but is sharply distinct from the moral climate and polytheistic focus of surrounding cultures.

    d –> In short, we see a regionally unique, Mosaic-law shaped worldview and moral consciousness that fits into the Biblical, Ethical Monotheistic worldview centred on YHWH, the Creator-God of covenant, but is sharply distinct from the pagan polytheism that dominates elsewhere in the ANE.

    e –> Even just the identification that his text is characteristically Hebrew rather than belonging to nearby related semitic languages is enough to blow up the fashionable skeptical theories, which come and go, while consistently, the Biblical text shines through as authentic. [Also, note how in the Biblical text, Hebrews and their neighbours, esp. Philistines, clearly can converse without great difficulty; as happens in the duel between David and Goliath of Gath. Egyptian, of course is a Hamitic language.]

    f –> BTW, a similar pattern occurs with Genesis 14 [Abraham’s rescue of Lot], where “For the first time, the biblical events are expressly co-ordinated with external history.” Derek Kidner, Genesis (Chicago: InterVarsity Press, 1967), p. 118.

    [ . . . ]


  16. Dictionary January 11, 2010 at 3:39 AM #

    g –> As Bob Deffinbaugh outlines, allowing us to see just how precisely the text fits into the times:

    The first block of nations was that of the four Mesopotamian kings of the east (14:2). Chedorlaomer, king of Elam (modern Iran), seems to have been dominant.148 Shinar was the region of ancient Babylon (cf. Genesis 10:10). The second alliance was made up of five kings, including the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah (14:2).

    After 12 years as vessels of the four eastern kings, the five southern kings attempted to throw off their shackles. The eastern kings could not allow such rebellion to go unpunished. This revolt did not go unnoticed by others in the same plight (cf. 14:5-7). The economic results of ignoring the insurrection were too devastating to contemplate. The five southern kings controlled the territory through which the ‘way of the kings’ passed. This was the land bridge through which commerce between Egypt and the four eastern kingdoms must pass. Whoever controlled this land bridge maintained a monopoly on international trade . . . .

    the route of the conquest seems to be the ‘way of the kings,’ the trade route which the Mesopotamian kings sought to insure.150 The rebellion of the five southern kings may well have prompted similar acts from the other kingdoms. The four Mesopotamian kings thus sought to restore their sovereignty over the entire length of the trade route.

    Secondly, the four kings sought to deal with the rebel kingdoms one at a time. By securing their position first with these other kingdoms the danger of attack from the rear was removed. The noose seems to be drawing tighter about these rebels as the account progresses.151 It may have been hoped that as victories continued to pile up for the four kings that a surrender would be preferable to defeat for the five southern kings . . .

    h –> Of course, the eastern kings defeat their rebel vassals, and take Sodom (and Lot) captive, leading Abraham to mobilise his own retainers and allied tribes to go after them; inflicting a surprise attack that rescues the captives and their property, including Lot. (This tells us that Abraham was plainly a militarily experienced chieftain who disposed of a formidable regiment!)

    i –> But, back on our main point, we see Abraham in the same text, interacting — and remember, the text has shown itself subtly accurate and authentic tot he relevant times and geo-political arrangements, giving it the proper presumption of trustworthiness — with Melchizedek, King of what would later be Jerusalem, long before the Israelite sojourn in Egypt, and half a millennium or more before Akhenaten:

    Gen 14:17 After Abram43 returned from defeating Kedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet Abram44 in the Valley of Shaveh (known as the King’s Valley).45 14:18 Melchizedek king of Salem46 brought out bread and wine. (Now he was the priest of the Most High God.)47 14:19 He blessed Abram, saying,

    “Blessed be Abram by48 the Most High God, Creator49 of heaven and earth.50

    14:20 Worthy of praise is51 the Most High God, who delivered52 your enemies into your hand.”

    Abram gave Melchizedek53 a tenth of everything.

    j –> In other words, the whole attempt to trace the Hebraic faith in the Most High Creator God, the God of covenant, to Egypt, fails to reckon with the most basic facts of the history, here authenticated by archaeologically anchored survey of the times. (Cf. also this wider, classic survey.)

    k –> A far better understanding of the relationship between worship of the Most high and the rise of paganism is found in say Don Richardson’s ethnographically anchored study, Eternity in their Hearts. Many peoples, as they scattered across the earth [probably from the post-flood scattering of the nations], became more and more alienated from the Most High, and instead sought to placate earth and sky bound spirits to solve their problems. So, these spirits were soon gods, and the Most high was in a distant place, unreachable by desperate men. But, in many places a memory remained, and so son as the gospel was preached, the peoples flocked to he cross, as it was the welcome news that the Most high was reaching out tot hem in love and breaking the power of the demons.

    l –> In that context, the emphasis on magic in Egyptian paganism — as the Osiris legend shows, even the gods are magicians — is very illuminating: we are here looking at adepts trying to deal with lesser spirit beings, in a context where the Most High has faded from memory. Soon, with the institution of pagan priestcraft, this becomes full-fledged polytheistic paganism.

    m –> So then, let us hear Paul’s rebuke to such at Athens in 50 AD:

    17:22 So Paul stood80 before the Areopagus and said, “Men of Athens, I see that you are very religious81 in all respects.82 17:23 For as I went around and observed closely your objects of worship,83 I even found an altar with this inscription:84 ‘To an unknown god.’ Therefore what you worship without knowing it,85 this I proclaim to you. 17:24 The God who made the world and everything in it,86 who is87 Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by human hands,88 17:25 nor is he served by human hands, as if he needed anything,89 because he himself gives life and breath and everything to everyone.90 17:26 From one man91 he made every nation of the human race92 to inhabit the entire earth,93 determining their set times94 and the fixed limits of the places where they would live,95 17:27 so that they would search for God and perhaps grope around96 for him and find him,97 though he is98 not far from each one of us. 17:28 For in him we live and move about99 and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we too are his offspring.’100 17:29 So since we are God’s offspring, we should not think the deity101 is like gold or silver or stone, an image102 made by human103 skill104 and imagination.105 17:30 Therefore, although God has overlooked106 such times of ignorance,107 he now commands all people108 everywhere to repent,109 17:31 because he has set110 a day on which he is going to judge the world111 in righteousness, by a man whom he designated,112 having provided proof to everyone by raising113 him from the dead. [With of course 500+ witnesses and poured out spiritual transforming power in his name that now has transformed millions, including thousands all around us, if we would but listen]”


    So, then, the apostle to the nations has the last word (and in the end, the last laugh).



  17. Dictionary January 11, 2010 at 4:12 AM #


    Following up a point:

    Now, I think we should also bring back to focus the seven WCT’s of Jan 5, as presented above. For, this will help us evaluate worldview choices on comparative difficulties — precisely what the mocking objectors in this thread have been evidently ever so eager not to do.

    Such are plainly ever so intent on wedging apart the peoples of our region from the Biblical worldview and commitment to solid morality. Why? obviously, the better to make us ever so malleable to the manipulators and heirs to the old rapist of Africa, Cecil Rhodes.

    So, now, let us look again (with a few slight adjustments from Jan 5)

    W[arranted] C[redible] T[ruth] 1: Error exists, so we should recognise that truth exists as what is there that ewe may be in error about; truth saying of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not. Thus also, we may make mistakes about it so we need and OUGHT to be open to well-warranted correction. [As well, since we have a warranted, credible truth, knowable truth exists and radical relativist views that reject that knowledge of the truth is possible are immediately false. For instance “there are no absolutes” is a self-refuting absolute claim.]

    WCT 2: The first, intuitive principles of real-world logic: [a] A thing is what it is (the law of identity); [b] A thing cannot at once be and not-be (the law of non-contradiction); [c] A thing cannot neither be nor not-be (the law of the excluded middle). In that context — and Ari was discussing the nature of truth in Metaphysics 1011b, when he said what follows — [d] the truth is that which says of what is, that it is, and of what is not, that it is not. [Cf clarifications and rebuttals to challenges here. And, kindly note, we are specifically speaking with reference to the experienced real world, so extensions to empty-set contexts in which issues over contrasted empty sets arise, are irrelevant.]

    WCT 3: We live in a real world that exists, and contains individual things that also have real existence. (Just try to deny that and see where it lands you!)

    WCT 4: That which exists has a good and logically sufficient reason/explanation — notice the worldviews level application of abduction! — as to why: i.e. (i) if it begins to exist and/or may go out of existence, it has a cause; and (ii) it is possible for one or more necessary beings to exist which are the ultimate causal grounds for such contingent beings as in (i). (And, since it is credible that we live in a contingent observed world and we are contingent ourselves, both it and us require an adequate causal explanation in a non-contingent, self-existent order of existence. On this, the former Steady State universe model proposed that a material cosmos was that necessary being, but the want of evidence has led to the collapse of this view. the evidence pointing to the beginning of the cosmos in which we live therefore points also beyond the observed cosmos, to an order of existence that grounds it. And to posit that it comes from nothing — not space, time or matter or energy — by nothing and for nothing, is therefore absurd on its face. [Indeed, that is why multiverse models are now a popular notion.])

    WCT 5: As reflecting on the example of a fire will illuminate, causal — as opposed to merely logical — factors may be: (i) necessary [without which the result is blocked], (ii) sufficient [once present the result will happen or exist], (iii) necessary and sufficient (e.g. air, fuel and heat are each necessary for and are jointly sufficient to initiate and/or sustain a fire).

    WCT 6: Evil exists (NB: best understood as the objectionable, harmful and destructive privation and/or perversion of the good), so that — another Little Brown Sugar T-bone — governing moral truth, principle and obligation objectively exist. Thus also, only a worldview that has a grounding IS that is a proper foundation for OUGHT is a reasonable faith. [This insight is actually one of decisive ones that Paul was alluding to.]

    WCT 7: We, our circumstances, challenges and our common world are at least in significant part intelligible and discuss-able in light of reason, experience and good first principles used with good inferential logic. (Try to deny it and see where this gets you!)

    Such truths, of course are self-evident, as is discussed in the posts of Jan 5th (Objectors, kindly refer to the originals and the links before trying strawman rebuttals please).

    What does such a baseline cluster of credibly true facts do to help us choose a worldview?


    19 –> Worldviews are of course much broader than such a cluster of “first plausible”/ pretty certain WCT’s, even with considerable expansion. But, we have a cluster of criteria above that we deny on pain of evident absurdity, and which serve as a cluster of rock-hard basic facts and principles of reasoning that cut a considerable swath across the many worldview alternatives that are promoted in today’s post-/ultra-modern world.

    20 –> Indeed, it turns out that the reason many ideologies and worldviews are prominent in today’s marketplace of ideas and values, is that the WCT’s above are being ignored or suppressed or dismissed.

    21 –> For instance, on WCTs 1 and 2, radical relativism, and radical or selectively hyperskeptical views are utterly swept away.

    22 –> Similarly, on WCT’s 3 – 5, worldview level — or “scientific” claims that boil down to denying cause-effect bonds, are swept away. In short, something that begins to exist does not come from nothing. And, given the material world that we observe credibly is not eternal or necessary, we need a good explanation of where our credibly complex and fine-tuned cosmos came from. And random quantum fluctuations in a primordial sub-cosmos etc, will have to compete on comparative difficulties with views that suggest that an intelligible, complexly ordered world finely balanced and set up to support life is the product of intelligence and intent.

    23 –> Similarly, only views that properly ground morality are credible. This sharpest edge of the blade of the problem of the one and the many cuts clean across evolutionary materialism and other monist views [even non-materialistic ones]. Indeed, it is also a deep challenge for pantheism and panentheism.

    24 –> Also — and I am astonished I have to even raise this one — views that imply or assert a primordial reality that is independent of an order of super-human beings/ gods/ daimons/ angels/ demiurges etc and then have to address the grounding of is and ought run seriously afoul of the Euthryphro dilemma.

    25 –> Cutting to the chase scene, given the further facts of the prophesies in Is 53 etc [700+ BC] and the historical fulfillment in Jesus of Nazareth: born of a virgin under the law and prophecies, loving and serving with “astonishing feats”, then dying on a cruel cross at he sentence of a kangaroo court [but dying for our sins], then rising with 500+ witnesses and pouring out His Spirit though whom millions have come to intimately, personally know and be transformed by God in the [ROK and Hopi et al: very Middle Eastern . . . and this — hawk nose, brown eyes, brown hair, “unvarnished mahogany” complexion and all — just might be nearly right] face of Jesus ever since, sets up Judaeo-Christian, Redemptive Trinitarian Monotheism as the worldview to beat.

    And, thus — while quite sad really — it is no surprise that the many scoffing and distractive or distorting and demonising objections given since Jan 5 have studiously avoided a fair, level playing field examination of the WCTs and the way they intersect with popular worldview notions of our day.

    So, onlookers, let us think again, for ourselves; instead of staying docilely in the stocks and gazing at the hypnotising shadow shows of today’s secularist-neopagan and apostate version of Plato’s cave.



    PS: On Hopi’s latest twisted symbol, the use of the pagan Isis and Horus iconography to say it is antecedent to the virginal conception and birth of Christ [Horus was supposedly posthumously conceived by the goddess Isis having intercourse with her dead husband-god, the murdered Osiris, which is utterly contrary to the supernatural miraculous birth of Jesus without sexual involvement: “I know not a man”], we note that Holding — as long since linked — aptly addressed this one:

    Ron Leprohan, of the University of Toronto, pointed out that while sa means ‘son’ in ancient Egyptian and iu means ‘to come,’ Kuhn and Harpur have the syntax all wrong. In any event, the name Iusa simply does not exist in Egyptian. The name ‘Jesus’ is Greek, derived from a universally recognized Semitic name (Jeshu’a) borne by many people in the first century.

    While all the scholars agreed that the image of the baby Horus and Isis has influenced the [much later than C1] Christian iconography of Madonna and Child, this is where the similarity stops. The image of Mary and Jesus is not one of the earliest Christian images — and, at any rate, there is no evidence for the idea that Horus was virgin born. Further, the New Testament Mary was certainly not a goddess, like Isis.

    There is no evidence for the idea that Horus was ‘a fisher of men’ — or that his followers, the king’s officials, were ever 12 in number.

    KRST is the word for ‘burial’ (‘coffin’ is written ‘KRSW’); but there is no evidence whatsoever to link this with the Greek title ‘Christos,’ or Hebrew ‘Mashiah.’


  18. Dictionary January 11, 2010 at 4:32 AM #

    PPS: Forgot a link. Koukl’s argument from evil, linked under WCT 6.


  19. Dictionary January 11, 2010 at 7:56 AM #

    PPPS: To see a shattering of Hopi’s latest claims (and a glimpse at likely sources — note how Hopi consistently does not give sources, as though she is ashamed of or afraid for them . . . ), kindly see James Patrick Holding here.


  20. Dictionary January 11, 2010 at 8:00 AM #

    I am sure JPH, old pal, you will not mind my excerpting in full:


    Of all the pagan copycat candidates, Osiris and Horus are two that look if any to be a major threat. Egypt after all is not far from Palestine, and Jews did live in Egypt; it is not theoretically improbable that they could steal an idea for a Jesus from this place.

    But did they? The field is rife with claims, but as usual there is a great deal of filching of Christian terms to describe Egyptian events (not all of it with bad intentions) and a great deal of non-citation of sources for fabulous claims.

    * Osiris
    o Had well over 200 divine names, including Lord of Lords, King of Kings, God of Gods, Resurrection and the Life, Good Shepherd, Eternity and Everlastingness, the god who “made men and women to be born again.”
    o Coming was announced by Three Wise Men: the three stars Mintaka, Anilam, and Alnitak in the belt of Orion, which point directly to Osiris’ star in the east, Sirius, significator of his birth
    o Was a devoured Host. His flesh was eaten in the form of communion cakes of wheat, the ‘plant of Truth’.
    o The 23rd Psalm copied an Egyptian text appealing to Osiris the Good Shepherd to lead the deceased to the ‘green pastures’ and ‘still waters’ of the nefer-nefer land, to restore the soul and body, and to give protection in the valley of the shadow of death…
    o The Lord’s Prayer was prefigured by an Egyptian hymn to Osiris-Amen beginning, ‘O Amen, O Amen, who are in heaven. Amen was also invoked at the end of every prayer.
    o The teachings of Osiris and Jesus are wonderfully alike. Many passages are identically the same, word for word.
    o As the god of the vine, a great traveling teacher who civilized the world. Ruler and judge of the dead.
    o In his passion, Osiris was plotted against and killed by Set and “the 72.”
    o Osiris’ resurrection served to provide hope to all that they may do likewise and become eternal.
    * Horus
    o Was born of the virgin Isis-Meri in December 25th in a cave/manger with his birth being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men.
    o His earthly father was named “Seb” (“Joseph”).
    o He was of royal descent.
    o At age 12 he was a child teacher in the Temple, and at 30, he was baptized, having disappeared for 18 years.
    o Was baptized in the river Eridanus or Iaurutana (Jordan) by “Anup the Baptizer” (John the Baptist) who was decapitated.
    o He ad 12 disciples, two of whom were his “witnesses” and were named “Anup” and “AAn” (the two “Johns”).
    o He performed miracles, exorcized demons and raised El-Azarus (“El-Osiris”) from the dead.
    o Horus walked on water.
    o His personal epithet was “Iusa” the “ever-becoming son” of “Ptah,” the “Father.” He was called the “Holy Child.”
    o He delivered a “Sermon on the Mount” and his followers recounted the “Sayings of Iusa.”
    o Horus was transfigured on the Mount.
    o He was crucified between two thieves, buried for three days in a tomb, was resurrected.
    o Titles: Way, the Truth the Light; Messiah; God’s Anointed Son; Son of Man; Good Shepherd; Lamb of God; Word made flesh; Word of Truth.
    o Was “the Fisher” and was associated with the Fish (“Ichthys”), Lamb and Lion.
    o He came to fulfill the Law.
    o Was called “the KRST” or “Anointed One.”
    o Was supposed to reign one thousand years.

    That’s quite a list, but let’s make it simple to start: A good number — at least half — are so far as I have seen bogus. There has not been a shred of evidence for many of these in any book of Egyptian religion I have thus far consulted.

    For convenience I begin by reproducing the “thumbnail sketch of Horus’ life” given in Encyclopedia of Religions as offered by Miller, which also lays the groundwork for Osiris:

    “In ancient Egypt there were originally several gods known by the name Horus, but the best known and most important from the beginning of the historic period was the son of Osiris and Isis who was identified with the king of Egypt. According to myth, Osiris, who assumed the rulership of the earth shortly after its creation, was slain by his jealous brother, Seth. The sister- wife of Osiris, Isis, who collected the pieces of her dismembered husband and revived him, also conceived his son and avenger, Horus. Horus fought with Seth, and, despite the loss of one eye in the contest, was successful in avenging the death of his father and in becoming his legitimate successor. Osiris then became king of the dead and Horus king of the living, this transfer being renewed at every change of earthly rule. The myth of divine kingship probably elevated the position of the god as much as it did that of the king. In the fourth dynasty, the king, the living god, may have been one of the greatest gods as well, but by the fifth dynasty the supremacy of the cult of Re, the sun god, was accepted even by the kings. The Horus-king was now also “son of Re.” This was made possible mythologically by personifying the entire older genealogy of Horus (the Heliopolitan ennead) as the goddess Hathor, “house of Horus,” who was also the spouse of Re and mother of Horus.

    “Horus was usually represented as a falcon, and one view of him was as a great sky god whose outstretched wings filled the heavens; his sound eye was the sun and his injured eye the moon. Another portrayal of him particularly popular in the Late Period, was as a human child suckling at the breast of his mother, Isis. The two principal cult centers for the worship of Horus were at Bekhdet in the north, where very little survives, and at Idfu in the south, which has a very large and well- preserved temple dating from the Ptolemaic period. The earlier myths involving Horus, as well as the ritual per- formed there, are recorded at Idfu.”


    * Had well over 200 divine names, including Lord of Lords, King of Kings, God of Gods, Resurrection and the Life, Good Shepherd, Eternity and Everlastingness, the god who “made men and women to be born again.”


    The titles I have found ascribed to Osiris are [Fraz.AAO] Lord of All, the Good Being (the most common title), Lord of the Underworld, Lord/King of Eternity, Ruler of the Dead, [Griff.OO] Lord of the West, Great One, [Bud.ERR, 26] “he who takes seat,” the Begetter, the Ram, [Bud.ERR, 79] “great Word” (as in, “the word of what cometh into being and what is not” — a reflection of the ancient idea of the creative power of speech, found likewise in the Greek Logos), “Chief of the Spirits”; [Short.EG, 37] ruler of everlastingness, [Meek.DL, 31] “living god,” “God above the gods.”

    All of these are either general titles we would expect to be assigned to any head honcho deity, or else are related to Osiris’ command over the underworld. None of the ones cited closest and uniquely like unto Jesus were found.
    # Coming was announced by Three Wise Men: the three stars Mintaka, Anilam, and Alnitak in the belt of Orion, which point directly to Osiris’ star in the east, Sirius, significator of his birth. While some scholars connect Osiris with Orion, they do not know anything about wise men or a star in the east.
    # Was a devoured Host. His flesh was eaten in the form of communion cakes of wheat, the ‘plant of Truth’. Not that anyone in the scholarly lit has reported.
    # The 23rd Psalm copied an Egyptian text appealing to Osiris the Good Shepherd to lead the deceased to the ‘green pastures’ and ‘still waters’ of the nefer-nefer land, to restore the soul and body, and to give protection in the valley of the shadow of death… If this is so, no commentator in Egyptian religion or the OT knows about it. Osiris would possibly be known as a shepherd as such imagery was common in the ANE, but I have not seen it yet applied to him by anyone but mythicists.
    # The Lord’s Prayer was prefigured by an Egyptian hymn to Osiris-Amen beginning, ‘O Amen, O Amen, who are in heaven.’ Amen was also invoked at the end of every prayer. If so, we want to know where this prayer is recorded, and so would experts in Egyptian religion. The Hebrew “Amen” is never used as a salutation and means “let it be so” which means it is not “invoked” as a deity is.

    Beyond that, let’s see an etymological connection based on the original languages, not on the correspondence of English characters.
    # The teachings of Osiris and Jesus are wonderfully alike. Many passages are identically the same, word for word. If so, someone needs to put them side by side and prove it. The Egyptian religious scholars don’t seem aware of it.
    # As the god of the vine, a great traveling teacher who civilized the world. Ruler and judge of the dead. This is a bit non-specific. Frazer reported [Fraz.AAO, vii, 7] that Osiris taught winemaking and agriculture, gave the Egyptians laws, taught them proper worship, and traveled the word teaching these things.

    But this is the claim that was made of Dionysus as well, and we have answered that point within that essay. Not that it matters, since it seems literature written by scholars of Egyptian religion do not treat them as the same, though some connect Osiris and Orion, and Budge notes the travels but does not connect Osiris and Dionysius [Bud.ERR, 9]. In any event Osiris is nowhere called a “god of the vine”.

    He is ruler and judge of the dead, but this doesn’t describe Jesus, who represents a God who is not God of the dead, “but of the living.” At most it represents what might be expected of any supreme deity: to rule and to judge.
    # In his passion, Osiris was plotted against and killed by Set and “the 72.” This is a combination of terminological fudging, half-truth, and irrelevancy. There was no “passion” — in the incident alluded to, Osiris was indeed plotted against by Set. There was a big party, at which Set had a coffin brought in and encouraged everyone, including 72 participants in the scheme and one queen of Ethiopia, to lay down for a fit. Finally it came O’s turn, and he was persuaded to lay down in the coffin. Once O was inside, Set nailed the coffin shut and threw it in the river; O suffocated.

    Note that the 72 here are enemies of O, not his disciples: only the number — a multiple of 12, a number we still hold in regard today when we purchase eggs and donuts — is a common touchpoint (and that only in some mss. of Luke 10; others put the number at 70, possibly representing the number of Gentile nations, according to the Jews). They do nothing at all that could be considered like what Jesus’ disciples did.

    As the story goes further, O’s wife Isis went looking for the coffin. She found it in Syria, where it had been incorporated into the pillar of a house. She lamented so loudly that some kids in the house died of fright. Later she took it out, opened it up, then went looking for Horus.

    Meanwhile Set found the coffin and tore the body in 14 pieces which he threw all over the place. In one result Isis went looking for the pieces and buried them as she found them. An alternate story has Isis, Anubis, and Ra piecing the body together, swathing it with bandages, and reviving him — more on this below.
    # Osiris’ resurrection served to provide hope to all that they may do likewise and become eternal. This is where we find some of the biggest misuse of terminology, including by some Egyptian scholars of religion (who do not go on to posit a “copycat” relationship!). Osiris resurrected? Not if “resurrection” is defined as coming back in a glorified body. On this point Miller has done some substantial work, reporting the words of J. Z. Smith, so I will let these speak to begin:

    “Osiris was murdered and his body dismembered and scattered. The pieces of his body were recovered and rejoined, and the god was rejuvenated. However, he did not return to his former mode of existence but rather journeyed to the underworld, where he became the powerful lord of the dead. In no sense can Osiris be said to have ‘risen’ in the sense required by the dying and rising pattern (as described by Frazer; most certainly it was never considered as an annual event.”

    “In no sense can the dramatic myth of his death and reanimation be harmonized to the pattern of dying and rising gods (as described by Frazer”

    “The repeated formula ‘Rise up, you have not died,’ whether applied to Osiris or a citizen of Egypt, signaled a new, permanent life in the realm of the dead.”

    Frankfort concurs:

    “Osiris, in fact, was not a ‘dying’ god at all but a ‘dead’ god. He never returned among the living; he was not liberated from the world of the dead, as Tammuz was. On the contrary, Osiris altogether belonged to the world of the dead; it was from there that he bestowed his blessings upon Egypt. He was always depicted as a mummy, a dead king.” [Kingship and the gods: a study of ancient Near Eastern religion as the integration of society & nature. UChicago:1978 edition, p.289]

    Perhaps the only pagan god for whom there is a resurrection is the Egyptian Osiris. Close examination of this story shows that it is very different from Christ’s resurrection. Osiris did not rise; he ruled in the abode of the dead. As biblical scholar, Roland de Vaux, wrote, “What is meant of Osiris being ‘raised to life?’ Simply that, thanks to the ministrations of Isis, he is able to lead a life beyond the tomb which is an almost perfect replica of earthly existence. But he will never again come among the living and will reign only over the dead.… This revived god is in reality a ‘mummy’ god.”… No, the mummified Osiris was hardly an inspiration for the resurrected Christ…As Yamauchi observes, “Ordinary men aspired to identification with Osiris as one who had triumphed over death.” But it is a mistake to equate the Egyptian view of the afterlife with the biblical doctrine of resurrection. To achieve immortality the Egyptian had to meet three conditions: First, his body had to be preserved by mummification. Second, nourishment was provided by the actual offering of daily bread and beer. Third, magical spells were interred with him. His body did not rise from the dead; rather elements of his personality-his Ba and Ka-continued to hover over his body. [“The Resurrection of Jesus Christ: Myth, Hoax, or History?” David J. MacLeod, in The Emmaus Journal, V7 #2, Winter 98, p169

    Frazer [Fraz.AAO, viii] wrote that every dead man was given Osiris’ name on top of his own in order to identify with the god.

    So O’s “resurrection” is no resurrection at all — and in fact was actually a sort of function of the way the Egyptian gods were, shall we say, being half Frankenstein, half Lego set. There are in fact many stories of the Egyptian gods flinging various body parts around, and to no overall harm, because “divine bodies were thought to be impervious to change” [Meek.DL, 57] and so O’s dead body neither rotted nor decomposed as it waited to be put back together.

    This is how it was with all these Egyptian gods: Seth and Horus have a fight in which they throw dung at each other then steal each others’ genitals [Bud.ERR, 64]. Horus’ eye is stolen by Set, but Horus gets it back and gives it to Osiris, who eats it [ibid., 88]. Horus had a headache, and another deity offers to loan him his head until the headache went away [Meek.DL, 57]. Osiris did pay a price for his dismembering death, in that he was limited to the world of the dead [and manifestly ignorant as a result of what went on “above ground” — Meek.DL, 88-9], but that is only because he had actually died once before when his father accidentally killed him [ibid., 80].


    Now we get to the matters of Horus. Many of these have had some input from Miller, so we’ll report those and add as needed.

    * Was born of the virgin Isis-Meri in December 25th in a cave/manger with his birth being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men. The lit has confirmed what Miller offers, and I have also seen the depiction he refers to below. I have found no reference to a cave/manger — Frazer [Fraz.AAO, 8] has Horus born in the swamps, and knows nothing about a star or Wise Men, of any number.

    …Horus was NOT born of a virgin at all. Indeed, one ancient Egyptian relief depicts this conception by showing his mother Isis in a falcon form, hovering over an erect phallus of a dead and prone Osiris in the Underworld (EOR, s.v. “Phallus”). And the Dec 25 issue is of no relevance to us–nowhere does the NT associate this date with Jesus’ birth at all.

    Indeed, the description of the conception of Horus will show exactly the sexual elements that characterize pagan ‘miracle births’, as noted by the scholars earlier:

    “But after she [i.e., Isis] had brought it [i.e. Osiris’ body] back to Egypt, Seth managed to get hold of Osiris’s body again and cut it up into fourteen parts, which she scattered all over Egypt. Then Isis went out to search for Osiris a second time and buried each part where she found it (hence the many tombs of Osiris tht exist in Egypt). The only part that she did not find was the god’s penis, for Seth had thrown it into the river, where it had been eaten by a fish; Isis therefore fashioned a substitute penis to put in its place. She had also had sexual intercourse with Osisis after his death, which resulted in the conception and birth of his posthumous son, Harpocrates, Horus-the-child. Osiris became king of the netherworld, and Horus proceeded to fight with Seth…” [CANE:2:1702; emphasis mine] [BTW, the Hebrew word ‘satan’ is not a ‘cognate’ of the name ‘seth’ by any means: “The root *STN is not evidenced in any of the cognate languages in texts that are prior to or contemporary with its occurrences in the Hebrew Bible” DDD, s.v. 1369f]

    The one reference I have found to a birth of Horus has him born on the 31st day of the Egyptian month of Khoiak — the mythers have a one in 365 chance that this matches Dec. 25th!


    On the Luxor Temple Carving

    Many mythicists claim that on the walls of the Luxor Temple is a scene showing the “Annunciation, Immaculate Conception, Birth and Adoration of Horus, with Thoth announcing to the Virgin Isis that she will conceive Horus; with Kenph, the ‘Holy Ghost,’ impregnating the virgin,” complete with three wise men. When pressed by an inquirer at her site about this claim, Acharya S said: “Isis is the constellation of Virgo the Virgin, as well as the Moon, which becomes a ‘virgin’ during when it is new. The sun god – in this case, Horus – is born of this Virgin goddess.” — and alludes to a document from the 6th century AD!

    No substantiation is offered for the Isis-Virgo connection at all; it has no more authority than saying “Isis is Gomer the prostitute.” If such a carving exists it is only what Acharya thinks it is via the interpretation of Massey.

    A writer recently sent this description from an Egyptian tour site: “Kingship was believed to be ordained by the gods at the beginning of time in accordance with ma’at., the well-ordered state, truth, justice, cosmic order. The reigning king was also the physical son of the Creator sun-god. This divine conception and birth was recorded on the walls of Luxor Temple, at Deir el-Bahri, and other royal cult temples throughout Egypt. The king was also an incarnation of the dynastic god Horus, and when deceased, the king was identified with the father of Horus, Osiris. This living king was thus a unique entity, the living incarnation of deity, divinely chosen intermediary, who could act as priest for the entire nation, reciting the prayers, dedicating the sacrifices…

    A peristyle forecourt of Amenhotep III is fused with the hypostyle hall, which is the first room in the inner, originally roofed, part of the temple. This leads to a series of for antechambers with subsidiary rooms. The Birth Room east of the second antechamber is decorated with reliefs showing the symbolic divine birth of Amenhotep III resulting from the union of his mother Mutemwiya and the god Amun.

    The bark sanctuary includes a free-standing building added by Alexander the Great within the larger chamber created by Amenhotep III. Well-preserved reliefs show Amun’s portable bark shrine and other scenes of the king in the presence of the gods. The sanctuary of Amenhotep III is the last room on the central axis of the temple.”

    This is significantly devoid of a virgin conception or birth, wise men, or a Holy Ghost. You might squeeze an adoration out of it, but who does not adore newborns anyway?

    But now see the trump card, provided by a Skeptic ashamed of such a thesis; see here. You can also find more about the Luxor temple carving from my book Shattering the Christ Myth.

    * His earthly father was named “Seb” (“Joseph”). Actually Seb was the earth-god, not “earthly,” but rather the earth itself (as Nut was the sky), and he was O’s dad, not Horus’, though one of my helpful researchers tells me there is one version in which Horus was the son of Seb. And don’t fall for the etymological trick or treat: You can’t get from “Seb” to “Joseph” just by putting the names next to each other.
    * He was of royal descent. Obviously true, and Horus was often identified with the living Pharaoh, but so commonplace as to be meaningless.
    * At age 12 he was a child teacher in the Temple, and at 30, he was baptized, having disappeared for 18 years.
    * Was baptized in the river Eridanus or Iaurutana (Jordan) by “Anup the Baptizer” (John the Baptist) who was decapitated.
    * He had 12 disciples, two of whom were his “witnesses” and were named “Anup” and “AAn” (the two “Johns”). Egyptian religion scholars know of none of this. On this last Miller notes:

    …my research in the academic literature does not surface this fact. I can find references to FOUR “disciples”–variously called the semi-divine HERU-SHEMSU (“Followers of Horus”) [GOE:1.491]. I can find references to SIXTEEN human followers (GOE:1.196). And I can find reference to an UNNUMBERED group of followers called mesniu/mesnitu (“blacksmiths”) who accompanied Horus in some of his battles [GOE:1.475f; although these might be identified with the HERU-SHEMSU in GOE:1.84]. But I cannot find TWELVE anywhere… Horus is NOT the sun-god (that’s Re), so we cannot use the ‘all solar gods have twelve disciples–in the Zodiac’ routine here.]

    * He performed miracles, exorcized demons and raised El-Azarus (“El-Osiris”) from the dead. Miller notes:

    Miracle stories abound, even among religious groups that could not possibly have influenced one another, such as Latin American groups (e.g. Aztecs) and Roman MR’s, so this ‘similarity’ carries no force. The reference to this specific resurrection I cannot find ANYWHERE in the scholarly literature. I have looked under all forms of the name to no avail. The fact that something so striking is not even mentioned in modern works of Egyptology indicates its questionable status. It simply cannot be adduced as data without SOME real substantiation. The closest thing to it I can find is in Horus’ official funerary role, in which he “introduces” the newly dead to Osirus and his underworld kingdom. In the Book of the Dead, for example, Horus introduces the newly departed Ani to Osirus, and asks Osirus to accept and care for Ani (GOE:1.490).

    * Horus walked on water. Not that I have found, but he was thrown in the water (see below).
    * His personal epithet was “Iusa” the “ever-becoming son” of “Ptah,” the “Father.” He was called the “Holy Child.” Miller says:

    This fact has likewise escaped me and my research. I have looked at probably 50 epithets of the various Horus deities, and most major indices of the standard Egyptology reference works and come up virtually empty-handed. I can find a city named “Iusaas” [GOE:1.85], a pre-Islamic Arab deity by the name of “Iusaas”, thought by some to be the same as the Egyptian god Tehuti/Thoth [GOE:2.289], and a female counterpart to Tem, named “Iusaaset” [GOE:1.354]. But no reference to Horus as being “Iusa”… ]

    * He delivered a “Sermon on the Mount” and his followers recounted the “Sayings of Iusa.”
    * Horus was transfigured on the Mount.
    * He was crucified between two thieves, buried for three days in a tomb, was resurrected. None of these three can be found, either. On the last Miller writes:

    I can find no references to Horus EVER dying, until he later becomes “merged” with Re the Sun god, after which he ‘dies’ and is ‘reborn’ every single day as the sun rises. And even in this ‘death’, there is no reference to a tomb anywhere…

    I found in Budge one idea that Horus had died and been cast in pieces in the water, and his parts were fished out by Sebek the crocodile god at Isis’ request. But that’s a funny sort of baptism at best (see above). Another source notes a story where Horus is bitten by a snake and revived, which is still not much of a parallel.
    * Titles: Way, the Truth the Light; Messiah; God’s Anointed Son; Son of Man; Good Shepherd; Lamb of God; Word made flesh; Word of Truth. I found thesed titles: [Bud.ERR, 78] Great God, Chief of the Powers, Master of Heaven, Avenger of His Father (since he beat up Set, who “killed” Osiris). He may have been called rightly “Son of Man” as the son of royalty (see here) but I have found no evidence for this.
    * Was “the Fisher” and was associated with the Fish (“Ichthys”), Lamb and Lion.
    * He came to fulfill the Law.
    * Was called “the KRST” or “Anointed One.”
    * Was supposed to reign one thousand years. I have found no evidence for any of these last four.

    Conclusion: This one seems to be full of ringers. It remains to be seen if mythicists can document these claims.

    # Bud.ERR — Budge, E. Wallis. . 1961.
    # Fraz.AAO — Frazer, J. G. Adonis, Attis, Osiris. 1961.
    # Griff.OO — Griffith, J. Gwyn. The Origins of Osiris and His Cult. Brill: 1996.
    # Meek.DL — Meeks, Dimitri. Daily Life of the Egyptian Gods. 1996.
    # Short.EG — Shorter, Alan. Egyptian Gods: A Handbook. 1937.


    Some very familiar and plainly ill-founded claims, folks!


  21. John January 11, 2010 at 8:58 AM #

    ROK // January 9, 2010 at 6:18 AM

    It would seem that I don’t need to respond to you. All that you say is correct if you deem it to be correct. OR if GP deem it to be correct for you.

    Remember I asked you to consider some questions and then proceeded to show that the timeline on Egypt’s attempt to become monotheistic matches pretty well with the correction a previous generation of Egyptians received when that generation attempted to stand in the way of God and not free His chosen people?

    Consider the question: Did this pharaoh exist before or after the flood?

    Some timelines put the flood between 2400 and 2300BC but I suspect none to be very accurate and are plus or minus significant error.

    Here is what you wrote about the history of ancient Egypt.

    “In the 22nd century BC, the Old Kingdom collapsed into the disorder of the First Intermediate Period, with important consequences for Egyptian religion”.

    Here is another question to consider.

    Could “the collapse in disorder” of the Old Kingdom in 22BC have anything to do with a flood?

    Interestingly the gap between the flood and the pharaoh you speak of is about 1000 years and Moses and the Exodus occurred in this gap of 1000 years.


  22. Georgie Porgie January 11, 2010 at 9:59 AM #


    Your questions are certainly pointed poignant and pertinent?


  23. Hopi January 11, 2010 at 10:51 AM #

    @Dic………Remind me again as to which side you are on! You have just DERACINATED yourself!

    @All you christians…….The Kemetians did not worship many gods. They honoured the Gods and Goddesses the same way you honour your dishonest, corrupt political, religious and royal figure heads. The difference between the Kemetians and you today is that that society lived by MA’AT, whereas you live by the 70×7 rule & do as you please because Jesus Christ died for your sins.


  24. Dictionary January 11, 2010 at 11:52 AM #

    Ms Hopi

    FYI, the race (or races) I belong to — being of tri-continental ancestry — has nothing to do with what is objectively true about the past, and especially about Christian origins.

    In a context of ruth towards serving God, race is an utter irrelevancy.

    Further to this, it is a matter of plain and massive record, and has been copiously documented above by ROK, that Egyptian polytheism was just that: polytheistic, i.e. pagan.




  25. Hopi January 11, 2010 at 2:28 PM #

    @Dic…….There you go again getting caught up in all that noise going on in ya head! Just remind yourself that you are trying to CONvince me of your story and look at your posting…a ‘true’ advocate for christianity!

    Hold onto your tri-cestry, you’re gonna need it!


  26. Dictionary January 11, 2010 at 3:17 PM #


    FYI, I am not trying to “convince” you of anything.

    I am calling you to your duty to the truth, and in that context, to proper warrant for claims you promulgate in public fora, such as this one.

    On pain of the stricter judgement that those who essay to teach face.

    And, in light of strong evidence that you have been teaching error, as laid out in details above.

    (As to the latest turnabout accusations on con-games — I know full well your intended barbed witticism — all I will say is that con men do not call people to the serious task of comparative difficulties. A path that you are plainly baulking at. Perhaps you need to look yourself in the eye in the mirror.)



    PS: Onlookers, observe how the mocking objectors are utterly missing in action on comparative difficulties analysis. that should tell you a lot.


  27. Georgie Porgie January 11, 2010 at 3:37 PM #

    @ John
    Could “the collapse in disorder” of the Old Kingdom in 22BC have anything to do with a flood?

    Interestingly the gap between the flood and the pharaoh you speak of is about 1000 years and Moses and the Exodus occurred in this gap of 1000 years.

    You got your man cornered and tied up i his own lies and morass.

    You have sent the man with his moronic mouthings like a mendicant to Mangroove! Murdah!


  28. Christopher Halsall January 11, 2010 at 4:36 PM #

    @Dic: “PS: Onlookers, observe how the mocking objectors are utterly missing in action on comparative difficulties analysis. that should tell you a lot.

    May I please suggest an alternative reason?

    Perhaps some (perhaps most?) are not into autogratification.

    Further, perhaps some are uncomfortable watching, knowing about and/or participating in same.

    Just putting that out there for consideration….


  29. Hopi January 11, 2010 at 4:42 PM #

    @Dict………….You have not yet proven me wrong neither have you proven that your Jesus Christ was an original. All you’ve done is confirm what was ANTE-Christ. And it all leads back to HERU!

    And for anything which neither you nor any of your sources cannot or refuse to find evidence for, does not exist. Laughable!

    Did you know that Chess and Yoga were given to us by the Black Ancients?


  30. Zoe January 11, 2010 at 7:25 PM #

    The hard, factual, historic EVIDENCE for the BLATANT, DOWNRIGHT, out-and-out Crass, pagan *IDOLATRY* worship of DEMONIC *false* deities, that existed in ancient Egyptian *mythology* just THAT, ALL *MYTH* absolutely NO SUBSTANCE whatsoever IN any REAL, living person, other than the stupid Pharoah’s who called themselves *gods* could ONLY come FROM Satanically instigated LIES, from the Pit-of-Hell, just were he finally took them all!!!

    NOT ONE of you SCOFFERS, can even begin to approach the basic LEVEL of sound analysis, across comparative difficulties re Worldviews; this SPEAKS volumes regarding the real level of you intellectual understanding of such matters; FOR without such cogent, well warranted principles of analysis, NO proper, objective, coherent conclusion can be made.

    Reason IS necessary, FOR revelation, (i.e., facts, evidence) to be coherent.

    You all, obviously DON’T have a CLUE what this means!

    The structure of justification (warrant) IS coherence, it IS our sole criteria for truth.

    It is very sad, that not ONE single objector, has even attempted to come clean, honest, objective, in light of all that has been submitted.

    Any unlearned person, could easily render the sort of Redherrings, Strawmen, and personal attacks that have been so readily seen on BU.

    No DEPTH, NO soundness of argument, in short, empty, voidless, ignorance!


  31. Georgie Porgie January 11, 2010 at 10:17 PM #

    The atoning work is done,
    The Victim’s blood is shed;
    And Jesus now is gone
    His people’s cause to plead:
    He stands in Heaven their great High Priest,
    And bears their names upon His breast.

    He sprinkles with His blood
    The mercy-seat above;
    For justice had withstood
    The purposes of love:
    But justice now objects no more,
    And mercy yields her boundless store.

    No temple made with hands
    His place of service is;
    In Heaven itself He stands,
    A heavenly priesthood His:
    In Him the shadows of the law
    Are all fulfilled, and now withdraw.

    And though awhile He be
    Hid from the eyes of men,
    His people look to see
    Their great High Priest again:
    In brightest glory He will come,
    And take His waiting people home.


  32. Dictionary January 12, 2010 at 1:01 AM #


    Observe, again, this time from CH: a mocking (and slanderously loaded) dismissal of the serious level approach to worldviews choice, but no addressing of the issues.




  33. Dictionary January 12, 2010 at 2:32 AM #


    Hopi is proposing a novel assertion on Egyptian pagan roots for Christ and Christianity.

    Such, to be credible, would require pretty serious documentation on causal chain and clusters of worldview elements and concepts. For instance, as we have put up above several times, on a parallel case:

    “It is all too easy to run eagerly after superficial parallels which cannot really be sustained under a closer scrutiny. Accordingly, [i] the parallels must have similar ideas underlying them [i.e. there must be a worldview level comonality] and, [ii] second, any suggestion of influence requires that the parallels be numerous, complex and detailed, with a similar conceptual usage and, ideally, that [iii] they should point to a specific myth or group of related myths in Mesopotamia. Finally, [iv] the parallels and their similar underlying ideas must involve central features in the material to be compared. Only then, it would seem, may any claim stronger than one of mere coincidence be worthy of serious consideration” ]Greek Myths and Mesopotamia: Parallels and Influence in the Homeric Hymns and Hesiod. Charles Penglase. Routledge:1994, 7. Bracketed numbers, comments and emphases added]

    a –> By utter contrast, she has repeatedly failed to provide the required documentation on sources and evidence, and has often resorted to idiosyncratic (and sometimes slanderous and/or just plain nasty) manipulation of words and symbols. That, in a context where we can see as excerpted above just how unsubstantiated the whole category of claims she makes is, and just how shoddy and utterly outdated the known root sources are. [Cf esp here and here.]

    b –> She has not cogently addressed how a pagan source trend reflective of Rom 1:18 – 32 of an intuitive pull to recognise the Creator from his strong manifestations in nature fighting a losing battle with the resentful ingratitude that substitutes pagan images and ideas of nature for the Creator gets to be the roots of e.g. Abraham’s and Melchizedek’s common faith in the Most High Creator God c. 1800 – 2,000 BC, before Israel’s sojourn in Egypt and 500 years before Akhenaten.

    c –> She has simply repeatedly ignored the remarkable prophecy in the OT scriptures [esp Is 53] that are fulfilled historically in Christ’s death, burial and resurrection with 500+ witnesses.

    d –> But, this is the central warranting argument of the gospel and by itself serves to validate the truth of who Jesus is, whatever creative “parallels” to pagan ideas may be imagined and claimed.

    e –> It also authenticates both the OT and the NT, as the Word of Him who rose from death with 500+ witnesses, proving Himself Lord of Life, Lord of Death, of heaven, and earth and holder of the keys of death and hell. It is before this risen Lord we will all account for our words, innermost thoughts and deeds.

    f –> A may be seen yesterday, I took time to show samplers on just how well authenticated the OT scriptures are, in general and in the particular case of the exchange between Abraham and Melchizedek just after the former defeated the raiding kings of the East.

    g –> In that well authenticated context that could not have been faked by a much later writer without the most blatant anachronisms — and indeed originally it was thought so by no less a figure than W F Albright, until his 1929 digs which substantiated the raiders’ route of campaign (a route that would make no sense in any period after Abraham’s era) — we read the following exchange in what we have every reason to see is a well authenticated and trustworthy source document, down to incidental details:

    Gen 14:17 After Abram43 returned from defeating Kedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet Abram44 in the Valley of Shaveh (known as the King’s Valley).45 14:18 Melchizedek king of Salem46 brought out bread and wine. (Now he was the priest of the Most High God.)47 14:19 He blessed Abram, saying,

    “Blessed be Abram by48 the Most High God, Creator49 of heaven and earth.50

    14:20 Worthy of praise is51 the Most High God, who delivered52 your enemies into your hand.”

    Abram gave Melchizedek53 a tenth of everything.

    h –> Now, as we can see from the nature of causes in WCT’s 3, 4, & 5 , whether necessary or sufficient, they must be present earlier than or at least at the time of their effects.

    i –> But in this case, Hopi’s claimed effect, Hebraic monotheism, is present BEFORE her claimed cause, Egyptian paganism is in a position to influence during he sojourn in Egypt. indeed, Abraham’s whole significance is that God called him out to serve him, from Haran. (And again the archaeology supports the Biblical timeline.)

    j –> Moreover, we see signs that the understanding of the Most High Creator God has never been wholly lost to humanity, as Melchizedek shows, and as does Job.

    k –> Indeed, the ethnographic evidence as Don Richardson so ably documents in Eternity in their Hearts, is that around the world, peoples retained a knowledge of the Most High god, but found themselves alienated form Him and thus dealt with earth and sky bound spirits instead.

    l –> Soon, with kings and heroes being seen as indwelt or even sired by such spirits, we easily see the myths of gods and demigods emerging. thence, with priestcraft to institutionalise this, we see paganism emerging as the result of apostasy and alienation from the known God; precisely as Romans 1 explains.

    m –> And, all too soon,men refuse to even remember God in what they deem knowledge, creatign a tension between the evidence of the world without and the mind and conscience within and the isntitutionalised stories of the roots of our world. [Nowadays, under the institutionalised secularist evolutionary materialist agenda, the same is happening again, but the idols/images “made to look like men, birds, beasts and reptiles etc” are now in museums and textbooks.]

    n –> So we see a much better explanation of all the material facts, and surprise — NOT! — it is the biblical one, supported by various streams of research over the past 200 years and especially in recent decades.


    In short, Hopi is simply clinging desperately to a failed paradigm, the Afrocentrist, black racialist glorification of an Egypt of the imagination. And, in the teeth of much cogent evidence.


    But, through prayer, there is hope.



    PS: As a simple further case, the evidence suggests that chess was an originally Indian game, which spread E to China and W to Europe. Start from Wiki’s article on the history of Chess.


  34. Dictionary January 12, 2010 at 2:53 AM #

    PPS: Genesis preserves an interesting little remark on the credible process of creating myths of gods and demigod heroes through rebellion against the true God in the ante-diluvian world:

    6:1 When humankind1 began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born2 to them,3 6:2 the sons of God4 saw that the daughters of humankind were beautiful. Thus they took wives for themselves from any they chose. 6:3 So the Lord said, “My spirit will not remain in5 humankind indefinitely,6 since7 they8 are mortal.9 They10 will remain for 120 more years.”11

    6:4 The Nephilim12 were on the earth in those days (and also after this)13 when the sons of God were having sexual relations with14 the daughters of humankind, who gave birth to their children.15 They were the mighty heroes16 of old, the famous men.17

    6:5 But the Lord saw18 that the wickedness of humankind had become great on the earth. Every inclination19 of the thoughts20 of their minds21 was only evil22 all the time.23 6:6 The Lord regretted24 that he had made humankind on the earth, and he was highly offended.25 6:7 So the Lord said, “I will wipe humankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth – everything from humankind to animals,26 including creatures that move on the ground and birds of the air, for I regret that I have made them.”

    6:8 But27 Noah found favor28 in the sight of29 the Lord.

    And, again, in the original city of Babel settled after the great flood:

    11:1 The whole earth1 had a common language and a common vocabulary.2 11:2 When the people3 moved eastward,4 they found a plain in Shinar5 and settled there. 11:3 Then they said to one another,6 “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.”7 (They had brick instead of stone and tar8 [NB: how Iraq is a source of oil . . . which often seeps tot he surface in tar pits as, famously, in Trinidad] instead of mortar.)9 11:4 Then they said, “Come, let’s build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens10 [evidently a Ziggurat, or astrological observatory, i.e. here we see the substitution of divination through the false lore of sky-bound spirits for the true God . . . leading to the placing of the gods in the heavens . . . ] so that11 we may make a name for ourselves. Otherwise12 we will be scattered13 across the face of the entire earth.”

    11:5 But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower that the people14 had started15 building. 11:6 And the Lord said, “If as one people all sharing a common language16 they have begun to do this, then17 nothing they plan to do will be beyond them.18 11:7 Come, let’s go down and confuse19 their language so they won’t be able to understand each other.”20

    11:8 So the Lord scattered them from there across the face of the entire earth [which then sets up precisely the pattern of localisation of animisim (which still has in it a memory of the Most High God) and its further deterioration into full paganism (which has forgotten the true God and serves gods and idols made to look like men, birds, beasts, reptiles etc) that Don Richardson documents . . . ] , and they stopped building21 the city. 11:9 That is why its name was called22 Babel23 – because there the Lord confused the language of the entire world, and from there the Lord scattered them across the face of the entire earth.


  35. Dictionary January 12, 2010 at 6:05 AM #

    A Footnote:

    Augustine in City of God against the Pagans, Bk VII Ch 35, on the hydromancy — divination magic [note, again the fell role of magic, forbidden in the Law and accursed in the New Testament!] — through which King Numa Pompliilus {successor tot he twins] was said to have introduced the rituals for worship of Roman gods:


    >>Chapter 35.—Concerning the Hydromancy Through Which Numa Was Befooled by Certain Images of Demons Seen in the Water.

    For Numa himself also, to whom no prophet of God, no holy angel was sent, was driven to have recourse to hydromancy, that he might see the images of the gods in the water (or, rather, appearances whereby the demons made sport of him), and might learn from them what he ought to ordain and observe in the sacred rites. This kind of divination, says Varro, was introduced from the Persians, and was used by Numa himself, and at an after time by the philosopher Pythagoras. In this divination, he says, they also inquire at the inhabitants of the nether world, and make use of blood; and this the Greeks call νεκρομαντείαν [nekromanteian]. But whether it be called necromancy or hydromancy it is the same thing, for in either case the dead are supposed to foretell future things. But by what artifices these things are done, let themselves consider; for I am unwilling to say that these artifices were wont to be prohibited by the laws, and to be very severely punished even in the Gentile states, before the advent of our Saviour. I am unwilling, I say, to affirm this, for perhaps even such things were then allowed. However, it was by these arts that Pompilius learned those sacred rites which he gave forth as facts, whilst he concealed their causes; for even he himself was afraid of that which he had learned. The senate also caused the books in which those causes were recorded to be burned. What is it, then, to me, that Varro attempts to adduce all sorts of fanciful physical interpretations, which if these books had contained, they would certainly not have been burned? For otherwise the conscript fathers would also have burned those books which Varro published and dedicated to the high priest Cæsar.294294 Comp. Lactantius, Instit. i. 6. Now Numa is said to have married the nymph Egeria, because (as Varro explains it in the forementioned book) he carried forth295 Egesserit. water wherewith to perform his hydromancy. Thus facts are wont to be converted into fables through false colorings. It was by that hydromancy, then, that that over-curious Roman king learned both the sacred rites which were to be written in the books of the priests, and also the causes of those rites,—which latter, however, he was unwilling that any one besides himself should know. Wherefore he made these causes, as it were, to die along with himself, taking care to have them written by themselves, and removed from the knowledge of men by being buried in the earth. Wherefore the things which are written in those books were either abominations of demons, so foul and noxious as to render that whole civil theology execrable even in the eyes of such men as those senators, who had accepted so many shameful things in the sacred rites themselves, or they were nothing else than the accounts of dead men, whom, through the lapse of ages, almost all the Gentile nations had come to believe to be immortal gods; whilst those same demons were delighted even with such rites, having presented themselves to receive worship under pretence of being those very dead men whom they had caused to be thought immortal gods by certain fallacious miracles, performed in order to establish that belief. But, by the hidden providence of the true God, these demons were permitted to confess these things to their friend Numa, having been gained by those arts through which necromancy could be performed, and yet were not constrained to admonish him rather at his death to burn than to bury the books in which they were written. But, in order that these books might be unknown, the demons could not resist the plough 143 by which they were thrown up, or the pen of Varro, through which the things which were done in reference to this matter have come down even to our knowledge. For they are not able to effect anything which they are not allowed; but they are permitted to influence those whom God, in His deep and just judgment, according to their deserts, gives over either to be simply afflicted by them, or to be also subdued and deceived. But how pernicious these writings were judged to be, or how alien from the worship of the true Divinity, may be understood from the fact that the senate preferred to burn what Pompilius had hid, rather than to fear what he feared, so that he could not dare to do that. Wherefore let him who does not desire to live a pious life even now, seek eternal life by means of such rites. But let him who does not wish to have fellowship with malign demons have no fear for the noxious superstition wherewith they are worshipped, but let him recognize the true religion by which they are unmasked and vanquished. >>

    I of course do not cite this as a proof in itself, but to illustrate the pattern that was already highlighted.

    Notice, Augustine is here addressing at fat book length a challenge by the remaining pagans, that it is the abandonment of the gods that has brought plagues, disasters and wars etc on Rome; so, he is unlikely to be advancing claims or authorities that were not generally accepted by said pagans.

    And so, we see the precise pattern of divination and consorting with spirits that lays the base for pagan polytheism.

    Something to think on . . .


    PS: And to think I ever thought ploughing through City of God was a toilsome task! (I have found ever so many key insights therein that cut across so many of the stridently advanced claims on many topics, whether theological [e.g. disputes on spiritual gifts] or philosophical, or even political and historical etc.)


  36. Dictionary January 12, 2010 at 6:08 AM #


    A comment (a citation from Augustine City of God, Bk VII Ch 35 — oops on the link to 34 in the mod piled . . . ) is in the mod pile. Pardon my sins against Akismet. D


  37. Dictionary January 12, 2010 at 6:10 AM #

    My further comment is also in mod, David, maybe Akismet does not like links to CCEL.


  38. Dictionary January 12, 2010 at 7:22 AM #

    Thanks, David.


  39. Hopi January 12, 2010 at 11:58 AM #

    @Dictionary……….I can see that your history of the BLACK MAN clearly dates back to wiki, so we’ve just entered the threshold of boredom and folly so I have to leave you right there. No need to discredit yourself any further!


  40. Dictionary January 12, 2010 at 12:28 PM #


    Distractive and ad hominem, not substantial, again.

    FYI, I am stating very clearly that you need to surmount the Wiki threshold, as that is now the baseline that “anybody” can access. If you cannot show why and on what evidence you have a better answer, you are not good enough to be heard in public. Dismissive remarks will simply underscore that you indeed have nothing of substance to say, especially when they are laced with inappropriate personalities. As you habitually seem to be doing.]




  41. Zoe January 12, 2010 at 1:31 PM #

    Spiritual Warfare!

    From the very beginning in the Garden of Eden, (Genesis 3) when Satan subtly deceived Eve, by *twisting* and perverting the Word of God, there has been a relentless battle for the ‘souls’ of mankind.

    The kingdom of Satan, personified *Evil* a diabolical hatred against Almighty God, and His Word, and all Righteousness, has being waging on throughtout the ages, right down to this very era, this very generation, the very End-Times we are living in; unfolding on the World Stage, exactly as the Lord said it would, converging on a number of fronts, unparalled in intensity.

    Here on BU, we have a classic example of this kind of *Warfare* where the same kind of tactics are being used, as Satan did in Eden, and he has never stopped. Distortion, maliging, utter perversion of the Word of God, the Bible, in a desperate attempt to confuse those quiet onlookers, who are not sure what to believe.

    God’s Wrath on Unrighteouness.

    It is a fearfull thing to fool around with Almighty God’s Word, and His absolute Righteousness.

    “For the wrath of God IS revealed from heaven *AGAINST* ALL ungodliness and *unrighteousness* of men, who SUPPRESS the *truth* in UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, because what may be KNOWN of God IS manifest in them, for God has SHOWN it to them.”

    “For SINCE the *creation* of the world His invisible attributes ARE CLEARLY seen, being UNDERSTOOD by the things that are MADE, even His *Eternal* power and Godhead, so they are WITHOUT EXCUSE.”

    “Because, although they knew God, they (Pagans et al) did NOT glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became *futile* in their thoughts, and their FOOLISH hearts were darkened.”

    “Professing to be wise (Pagans et al) they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an *IMAGE* made like corruptible man – *BIRDS* and *FOUR-FOOTED ANIMALS* (Egypt et al) and creeping things.”

    “Therefore, God also gave (released) them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonour their bodies among themselves, who EXCHANGED the *truth* of God for the *LIE* and worshipped and served the *Creature* (Egypt et all) rather than, the *Creator* who IS blessed forever. Amen.” (Romans 1: 18- 25) emphasis added.

    You cannot have the RIGHTEOUSNESS of Almighty God, without corresponding *wrath* whenever His absolute Holiness, and Righteousness is trampled on and grossly rejected in abominable Paganistic Idolatry.

    It is the absolute temper of Almighty God towars SIN, not rage, but the warth of *reason* and law (Shedd). The revelation of God’s righteousness in the Gospel, was NECESSARY, because of the failure of men to attain it without IT, for God’s warth JUSTLY rested UPON all men, both Gentile (1: 18-32) and Jews (2: 1-3:20).

    “Unrighteousness” (akikain) Lack ( a privative and ‘dike’) of right conduct toward men, injustice ( Rom. 9:14; Luke 18: 6). This follows naturally from irreverence. The bais of ethical conduct RESTS on the nature of Almighty God, and our attitude toward Him, otherwise the law of the jungle (cf. Nietzsche, ‘might makes right’).

    “Hold down the truth” ( ten aletheian katechonton). Truth (aletheia, alethes, from a privative and ‘letho’ or ‘lanthano’, to conceal) is OUT in the open, but *wicked* men, so to speak, put IT in a box and sit on the lid, and “HOLD IT DOWN IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS.” Their EVIL deeds *conceal* the open TRUTH of God from men. Cf. II Thess. 2: 6f. for this use of ‘ketecho’, to HINDER.

    ‘Because’ (dioti). Gives the reason (dia, hoti, like our ‘for that’) for the revelation of God’s warth. ‘That which may be known of God (to gnoston tou theou). Verbal adjective from ‘genosko’, either ‘the known’ as elsewhere in the New Testament Greek, that IS ‘the knowledge’ (he gnosis) of God. ‘Manifest in them (phaneron en autois). In their HEARTS and CONSCIENCES. ‘God manifested’ ( ho theos ephanerosen). First aorist active indicative of ‘phaneroo.’ Not mere toutology. See 2:14-16).

    “The invisible things of Him’ (ta aorata autou). Another verbal adjective ( a privative and ‘horao’ TO SEE), old word either unseen or invisible as here and elsewhere in NT. (Col. 1:15f., etc.).

    The attributes of Almighty God’s NATURE defined here as ‘His EVERLASTING POWER and divinity” ( he te aidios autou dunamis kai theiotes).

    Therefore, NO people, however ancient, WAS/IS without excuse, in not knowing through Almighty God’s natural revelation in NATURE, that He IS NOT revealed in IMAGES of birds, four-footed beast, etc, etc, and as IS revealed througout the history of nations, whenever a civililization resorts to this crass Idolatry, they will FEEL His Holy Righteous Wrath, none excepted, BOTH Gentile and Jew, have being, and will continue to be subject to His Divine Wrath.

    As He IS no respector of persons!


  42. Dictionary January 13, 2010 at 2:41 AM #


    First, let us remember the plight of our sister Caribbean nation Haiti, today, as its capital seems to have been extensively damaged and/or destroyed by the Richter scale Magnitude 7 quake that hit at 4:53 pm yesterday, local time.

    Now, too, let us look back on the foal topic fro this thread, and in summing up some findings. For, as we look back on the above, we can see ever so plainly the force of what Our Lord had to say in Matt 24, as he looked across the intervening valley at Jerusalem from Mt Olivet:

    The Destruction of the Temple

    24:1 Now1 as Jesus was going out of the temple courts and walking away, his disciples came to show him the temple buildings.2 24:2 And he said to them,3 “Do you see all these things? I tell you the truth,4 not one stone will be left on another.5 All will be torn down!”6

    Signs of the End of the Age

    24:3 As7 he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, his disciples came to him privately and said, “Tell us, when will these things8 happen? And what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” 24:4 Jesus answered them,9 “Watch out10 that no one misleads you. 24:5 For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’11 and they will mislead many. 24:6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars. Make sure that you are not alarmed, for this must happen, but the end is still to come.12 24:7 For nation will rise up in arms13 against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines14 and earthquakes15 in various places. 24:8 All16 these things are the beginning of birth pains.

    Persecution of Disciples

    24:9 “Then they will hand you over to be persecuted and will kill you. You will be hated by all the nations17 because of my name.18 24:10 Then many will be led into sin,19 and they will betray one another and hate one another. 24:11 And many false prophets will appear and deceive20 many, 24:12 and because lawlessness will increase so much, the love of many will grow cold. 24:13 But the person who endures to the end will be saved.21 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the whole inhabited earth as a testimony to all the nations,22 and then the end will come . . .

    a –> Of course, the temple was destroyed in AD 70, as soldiers of Titus’ legions tore its stones apart to get at its gold that had run in between stones during a fire. (Many prophecy teachers hold that it is to be rebuilt, and there is now evidence that it was located S of where the Muslim building now stands, based on water levels and on the line of site from a Herodian palace.)

    b –> Above, we see the rhetorical power and widespread impacts of anti-gospel ideas in our time, and an associated clearly rising tide of hostility against those who adhere to the Faith once for all delivered to the saints.

    c –> At the same time, we see how the central warranting argument for the Christian faith has power to overturn such arguments, and to stabilise our faith.

    d –> For, we see just how the scoffing objectors were utterly unable to cogently address the historicity of the NT (which they tried to dismiss and displace with far, far less well supported claims; often amounting to myths), especially the record of the life, salvific death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ of God, as attested by 500+ witnesses, and as fulfilling prophecies such as in 700+ BC Is 53; and the resulting outpoured, life transforming power of the Spirit in millions across the ages.

    e –> We also saw how, once the historical credibility of the OT was addressed and in that context, we were able to see how — contrary to confidently asserted (but not properly documented) assertions that in effect the Judaeo-Christian tradition derived from Egyptian polytheistic paganism and its derivatives [cf. also here] — the faith in the Most high God was in fact never wholly lost and in the case of Abraham and Melchizedek as brought out in the archaeologically surprisingly well supported Gen 14, ante-dates the Israelite sojourn in Egypt. (And, in that context, too, we have seen just how powerful is the Warranted Credible Truths approach to grounding confidence in the understanding how the world without and our minds and consciences within jointly and compellingly testify to the reality of the Creator and God who made us.)

    f –> So, we have a far better supported account of the roots of the Biblical faith tradition than we can have for what the objectors would substitute.

    g –> Similarly, we also have a clearer account of the roots of paganism and also of radical secularism, not only today, but in ancient times.

    h –> So, then, our task is to carry forward the gospel with confidence in the power of the Spirit to all nations in our day, even in the face of deception, chaos and hostility.


    And so, let us be about our task.



    PS: To see the quality of the Wikipedia discussion of the origins of Chess, cf. wiki here, noting the seventy references. Observe how we saw a mocking dismissal above, but no well documented, cogent response, which has become all too habitually the case for mocking objectors. Cf. JPH here on the way to do good library-based research (which approach extends to the Internet).


  43. Dictionary January 13, 2010 at 2:46 AM #

    PPD: Strictly, the scale in use on Haiti is the Moment Magnitude Scale, the “successor” to the Richter scale, and which often gives results that differ by 0.1 – 0.2.


  44. kiki January 13, 2010 at 5:11 AM #

    Great British MC’s Team Rasta
    Mi God Mi King(*)
    (*)=Philip Levi
    dem trick wi from di wondaful land a AFRICA
    fi slave fi di plantation ownah
    dem tek way wi name JAH MAN dem call wi niggah
    di only word wi know “i is a coming mastah”
    dem tell wi say wi ignorant an inferiah
    an how dem intelligent an superiah
    true di complexion of dem skin colah
    but i as a yute bawn as a supah
    mi badda dan di bite from a tarantulah
    yuh hear fi mi voice a come tru di speakah
    but it soun sweetah wid di echo chambah
    say R fi di roots C fi di culchah
    say S fi SELASSIE earth rightful rulah
    say once as a lamb going to di slawtah
    now di conquering lion a di tribe a JUDAH
    yuh cann enta ZION wit a bushmastah
    a m16 or a rrrevolvah
    say tana babylon wid yuh ammunition
    cau deh so a di ultamate destruction


  45. Will Patterson April 5, 2010 at 4:56 PM #

    Well, Hal Lindsey did a great job of predicting that the rapture would happen in 1980, so I’d rely on his ability to interpret Bible passages and reality. Revelations was written assuming this was all going to happen within a couple of hundred years of the author’s life time. That was a very long time ago.


  46. dave April 25, 2010 at 6:38 AM #

    What is the name of this ‘nativity scene’ painting, and who is the artist responsible?



Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: