The Instigator
rogue
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Rusty
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points

The legend of Jesus is remarkably similar to that of the Egyptian God Horus

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
Rusty
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/9/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,568 times Debate No: 15281
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (23)
Votes (4)

 

rogue

Pro

The legend of Jesus is astonishingly similar to that of the Egyptian god Horus who came before him.

The similarities that stand out most to me are:

-virgin birth
-people were lead to their births by a star
-both born around the winter solstice
-birth announced by angels
-birth witnessed by shepherds
-Herut tried to kill Horus during infancy, Herod tried to kill Jesus during infancy
-no data of either one between ages 12 and 30
-both baptized in a river at age 30
-both of their baptizers were beheaded later in life.

There are more but I will leave the voters to read them: http://www.religioustolerance.org...
Rusty

Con



Introduction

I want to thank my opponent for agreeing to defend the accuracy of the resolution stated above and I look forward to an interesting debate.

A note on my opponent’s source

Before moving on to address my opponent’s argument, I want to take a second to address what would seem to be a rather obvious point. It’s important to remember that we are not simply comparing alleged parallels between these two figures, but rather actual similarities as described by the authoritative sources of information on the subject, including such texts as the Book of the Dead and the Bible. On that note, it seems noteworthy to mention that the webpage my opponent has provided contains a suspicious lack of citation for some of the claims being made. If we take this into account alongside the fact that the webpage’s title contains the words “Alleged Claims”, it would seem reasonable to expect that my opponent should provide a more serious and direct foundation for her claims from here on out. Also, a few pieces of information on that page, even if correct, don’t even necessarily support her accusations. In short, I would appreciate if my opponent would supply more than simply the words of some Christ myth theorist for the very simple reason that there seem to be a good deal of twisted truths presented by proponents of said position in the name of sensationalism- “truths” that just don’t line up with the facts upon further research.

====================================================

Responses

1. Virgin Birth

The fact of the matter is that this particular claim is not nearly as cut and dry as my opponent would have you believe. Even the webpage she provided admits that this may not be the case- and rightly so.

The historical legend surrounding the birth of Horus and the pregnancy of his mother goes as such

“In the Osiris myths she searched for her husband's body, who was killed by her brother Seth. She retrieved and reassembled the body, and in this connection she took on the role of a goddess of the dead and of the funeral rights. Isis impregnated herself from the Osiris' body and gave birth to Horus in the swamps of Khemnis in the Nile Delta.” (1)

From what I could gather, the last sentence of that paragraph would be referring to the following, from the Book of the Dead:

“She made to rise up the helpless members of him whose heart was at rest, she drew from him his essence, and she made therefrom an heir.” (2)

Also, here’s a picture supposedly from the Book of the Dead illustrating the reconstruction of Osiris before Horus was born.

http://www.mesacc.edu...

In the process of reconstructing her husband, Isis also formed a golden phallus, his manhood being the only part of fourteen that she had been unable to collect. (3) (4) It should be fairly obvious why I included this piece of information considering the fact that we’re debating her virginity.

As you can see, this can easily be dismissed as nothing more than a desperate effort to connect the nonexistent dots between these two mothers and their pregnancy experiences. Are both stories fascinating and out of the ordinary? Yes. Are they the same? Clearly not, when you take into account of the birth of Jesus (6).

2. People were lead to their births by a star

The webpage doesn’t seem to have a source for this particular claim. It’s difficult to argue against such a claim because I have no idea where the information came from.

That being said, it does list the name of the star. However, I can find no information on Sirius concerning it’s mechanism as a beacon for travellers. I believe it’s fair to say that the burden rests on my opponent.

3. Both born around the Winter Solstice

Here we have another example of my opponent’s source not necessarily supporting her case.

From her webpage:

Concerning Horus

“Ancient Egyptians paraded a manger and child representing Horus through the streets at the time of the winter solstice (about DEC-21). In reality, he had no birth date; he was not a human.”

Concerning Jesus

“Born during the fall. However, his birth date is now celebrated on DEC-25. The date was chosen to occur on the same date as the birth of Mithra, Dionysus and the Sol Invictus (unconquerable Sun), etc.”

If my opponent doesn’t understand how these don’t support her claim, I’ll be more than willing to address the topic in the following round (It has something to do with the difference between “celebrated on” and “recognized as” though). Regardless, I’m going to continue on since my opponent has given me a total of nine claims to address.

4. Birth announced by angels

I don’t have access to Harpur’s book, the source cited for this claim. As such, I can’t really tell where he gets his information from.

5. Birth witnessed by shepherds

Same as above. I don’t have access to the book. I assume that my opponent doesn’t either.

6. Herut tried to kill Horus during infancy, Herud tried to kill Jesus during infancy

Interestingly enough, the website that my opponent has so graciously provided doesn’t seem to be able to cite a source for this particular claim. Upon further research, it seems that the only ‘sources’ who mention someone named Herut are blogs of people who have either seen that page on religioustolerance.com or have seen Zeitgeist. I can’t find any historical texts whatsoever making this claim. The general lack of evidence and the fact that the individual actually being referred to is probably Seth (Who never seems to have been called Herut) (5) leads me to believe that proponents of this particular assertion are relying on dishonest word games.

7. No data on either one between the ages of 12 and 30

No source provided.

8. Both were baptized in a river at the age of 30

No source provided.

9. Both of their baptizers were beheaded later in life

No source provided.

A note to my opponent

As I hand it back over to my opponent, I want to respectfully request that they take my second paragraph seriously, as the general lack of sources and presence of limited questionable/inaccessible sources is proving to be somewhat of a hindrance to the quality of this debate.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.http://www.pantheon.org...

2.http://www.sacred-texts.com...

3.http://tinyurl.com...

4.http://tinyurl.com...

5.http://www.pantheon.org...

6.http://www.biblegateway.com...

Debate Round No. 1
rogue

Pro

rogue forfeited this round.
Rusty

Con

Unfortunately, my opponent has forfeited the round. Extend everything from my previous round.
Debate Round No. 2
rogue

Pro

My opponent can say what he likes about me and I can lose the debate. You win some, you lose some. It seems my opponent mislead me on what he wanted to debate. I did not know he wanted to debate the credibility of sources claiming the legends are similar. I am not a historian and so I am in no place to do so. Sorry for the waste of your time.
Rusty

Con

"My opponent can say what he wants about me"

...What?

Anyhow, the resolution was extremely clear and I've asked for nothing unreasonable. Extend my response from round one.
Debate Round No. 3
rogue

Pro

rogue forfeited this round.
Rusty

Con

Opponent has forfeited, argument extended.
Debate Round No. 4
rogue

Pro

rogue forfeited this round.
Rusty

Con

My opponent has forfeited the debate.

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Wylted 10 months ago
Wylted
Rusty, I need your help bro.......
Do you mind voting me for prssident by bolding my name in the following thread please.
http://www.debate.org...
Posted by TeenageApologist 5 years ago
TeenageApologist
I would have gladly accepted this debate.
Posted by Puck 6 years ago
Puck
/out
Posted by Puck 6 years ago
Puck
As an aside, I wouldn't even debate this topic even if I held it to be true (I share your hesitancy with this particular claim) - since all rogue can do is consistently repeat a particular translation for 5 rounds that's in dispute in scholastic circles anyway. Not much to argue from a Pro perspective.

@rogue - if you're interested in the larger topic at hand of evaluating the likelihood of Jesus' existence or not, pm after the debate and I'll point you towards some resources.
Posted by Puck 6 years ago
Puck
"Why wouldn't doubt be considered a valid response to the claims of someone who has absolutely no cited sources for half of these?"

Note what I said - it was in regards to the resolution, which is not probabilistic or evaluative. You took an opposing stance which means scepticism is not a sufficient opposing position. Don't confuse that with outside the debate itself and employing scepticism, which may be and arguably is, quite reasonable.

"Furthermore, to say that, for the purposes of this debate, I have no right to question the accuracy of these cited sources (Harpur) when they actually are present seems like a pretty blatant appeal to authority."

No I didn't say that. I said treating the source as questionable as the basis for the claim to be wrong is spurious. Note the distinction. The claims veracity is independent of the location in which it is presented to you. Adding .edu to the web address would not change the truth of claim either way. The error is treating the source presented as the deciding factor as to whether the claim is refuted - which isn't sufficient in regards to the resolution. Now this doesn't mean rogue has fulfilled her burden either, that's not what I'm saying. That's a completely different argument.

"It sounded to me like you were downplaying the use of actual evidence for little more than personal novelty as opposed to something absolutely essential to this debate"

I guess if you like strawmen and the like. *shrugs* Try not to treat comments addressed to you as necessarily directly opposed. It's a weird bias that shows in how you treat comments such as mine, where you create issues where there are none.

I've already explained what the comment was about to rogue - justification of beliefs. Outside this debate your concerns would hold more warrant about the source of the information if that's all that was presented.
Posted by Rusty 6 years ago
Rusty
I'm not sure what to say to that. <_<
Posted by rogue 6 years ago
rogue
Ok I take the last part of that comment back. I am not interested in debating sources and with someone with an attitude like yours. I am really tempted to just forfeit because I have no interest in debating the way you do or with someone who acts the way you do. You should have set up the debate if you were gonna attack the sources like this. You should have set up the resolution. I am sorry I blindly walked into this not knowing what kind of a debate this would be.
Posted by rogue 6 years ago
rogue
Your attitude completely puts me off to this debate. You basically want me to find the Book of the Dead, inscriptions on Egyptian ruins and somehow prove that I researched them myself. You can't prove you used those sources. In debates online, you HAVE to use online sources because that is the only thing you can prove. I don't even want to debate with you anymore. We weren't debating the reliableness of sources, the resolution says "The Legend of Horus is remarkably similar to that of Jesus". If almost all you will do is say " your sources aren't reliable so I don't have to answer" then this is a waste of my time. Especially when you didn't even use sources that you can prove.
Posted by popculturepooka 6 years ago
popculturepooka
Favorited.
Posted by Rusty 6 years ago
Rusty
"Sure. Irrelevant to the actual debate though since scepticism isn't a valid response to the resolution."

Why wouldn't doubt be considered a valid response to the claims of someone who has absolutely no cited sources for half of these? You'll need to be even more clear, please, because I'm obviously not getting the picture. Furthermore, to say that, for the purposes of this debate, I have no right to question the accuracy of these cited sources (Harpur) when they actually are present seems like a pretty blatant appeal to authority. (If he even is an authority, but that's not the point of what I'm trying to say.)

"1. I didn't
2. I said the opposite
3. It was referring to epistemological veracity of claims in regards one's own beliefs outside of using them in debates."

I'm sorry then if I misinterpreted you. It sounded to me like you were downplaying the use of actual evidence for little more than personal novelty as opposed to something absolutely essential to this debate.

You: "It makes good sense to check the source of these claims, not so much for debate, though it's important, but for verifying claims for your self."
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by petersaysstuff 6 years ago
petersaysstuff
rogueRustyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro could have won this but she gave no effort.
Vote Placed by TUF 6 years ago
TUF
rogueRustyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Via forfeits.
Vote Placed by LaissezFaire 6 years ago
LaissezFaire
rogueRustyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit.
Vote Placed by darkkermit 6 years ago
darkkermit
rogueRustyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO forfeited.