What do u think of Jesus Christ?(God)

An education on the greatest story ever sold:

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2012/02/...

Ms. Murdock contends that Jesus as crucified savior was merely borrowed from other religions. For her, one of the most striking similarities is found with Krishna, the Hindu god. Indeed, her forthcoming book, "Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled" expounds on this position.(21)

What about Ms. Murdock’s claim that Krishna is so similar to Jesus that Christianity must have borrowed from Hinduism? Dr. Edwin Bryant, Professor of Hinduism at Rutgers University is a scholar on Hinduism. As of the writing of this paper, he has just translated the Bhagavata-Purana (life of Krishna) for Peguine World Classics and is currently writing a book to be titled, In Quest of Historical Krishna.

When I informed him that Ms. Murdock wrote an article claiming that Krishna had been crucified, he replied, "That is absolute and complete non-sense. There is absolutely no mention anywhere which alludes to a crucifixion."(22) He also added that Krishna was killed by an arrow from a hunter who accidentally shot him in the heal. He died and ascended. It was not a resurrection. The sages who came there for him could not really see it.(23)

Then I read a statement by Ms. Murdock from her article "Krishna, Crucified?" an excerpt from her forthcoming book, Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled.(24) In it she states, "it appears that Krishna is not the first Indian god depicted as crucified. Prior to him was another incarnation of Vishnu, the avatar named Wittoba or Vithoba, who has often been identified with Krishna." To this Bryant responded, "She doesn’t know what she’s talking about! Vithoba was a form of Krishna worshipped in the state of Maharashtra. There are absolutely no Indian gods portrayed as crucified." Then he became indignant and said, "If someone is going to go on the air and make statements about religious tradition, they should at least read a religion 101 course."(25)

Later I emailed him regarding her 24 comparisons of Krishna to Jesus which the reader may find in The Christ Conspiracy.(26) He stated that 14 of her 24 comparisons are wrong and a 15th is partially wrong.(27) What about her 9 _ that are correct; especially Krishna’s virgin birth, the story of the tyrant who had thousands of infants killed (a parallel to Herod), and Krishna’s bodily ascension? Benjamin Walker in his book, The Hindu World: An Encyclopedic Survey of Hinduism provides an answer. After tracing similarities related to the birth, childhood, and divinity of Jesus, as well as the late dating of these legendary developments in India, "[t]here can be no doubt that the Hindus borrowed the tales [from Christianity], but not the name."(28) Bryant also comments that these parallels come from the Bhagavata Purana and the Harivamsa. Bryant believes the former "to be prior to the 7th century AD (although many scholars have hitherto considered it to be 11 century AD."(29) Yet this is hundreds of years after the Gospel accounts. Of the Harivamsa, Bryant is uncertain concerning its date. However, most sources seem to place its composition between the fourth and sixth centuries, again hundreds of years after the Gospel accounts had been in circulation.(30) An earlier date is entertained by David Mason of the University of Wisconsin, who states that there is no consensus on the dating that he is aware of but that it may be as early as the second century.(31) Even if this early date is accurate, it is still after the Gospels, not before as Murdock’s thesis requires.

Ms. Murdock further claims that Christianity has failed in India because "the Brahmans have recognized Christianity as a relatively recent imitation of their much older traditions."(32) To this, Dr. Bryant simply commented, "Stupid comment."(33)

Ms. Murdock’s claim that Christianity has borrowed substantially from Hinduism is without merit. Her claims are false, unsupported, and exhibit a lack of understanding of the Hindu faith.

Ooogah Boogah wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, the NT was compiled in 325 AD, I was talking about when the constituent texts were written. Try to pay attention dang it. You are so irritating that way.

Try using the propper words and terms.
You are so iiritating that way.

The Epistles of Paul are not the New Testament.

Tough to follow someone who does not use the correct words.

Captain Oblivious 88 wrote:

Ms. Murdock contends that Jesus as crucified savior was merely borrowed from other religions.

The facts are irrefutable. Organized religion is a hoax. All of the scientific evidence fully supports entirely natural origins for the universe and life on earth without any supernatural involvement.

Christianity is a derivative cult with very little originality. The terrestrial authors of the damn bible included a mythical savior because the religious cults preceding Christianity by thousands of years had mythical saviors.

You personally are unwilling to accept these historical and scientific facts purely for narcissistic reasons. Any godbot who lacks the capacity to recognize organized religion as nothing more than a hoax created to control the retarded should seek professional de-conversion assistance immediately.

Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
http://www.amazon.com/Christ-Egypt-Horus-Jesu...

"Murdock's scholarship is relentless!

My name is Ken Feder. I am an archaeologist, and I play one on TV, as a talking head in various documentaries on the National Geographic Channel, the Discovery Channel, the History Channel, ScFi, BBC Horizon, and, as it turns out, even the Weather Channel. Having conducted research and written extensively over the course of the last thirty years, I think I have developed a good eye for recognizing valuable research that is worthy of serious consideration when I see it. And the research conducted by D.M. Murdock concerning the myth of Jesus Christ is certainly both valuable and worthy of consideration.

Everyone who reads Murdock's Christ in Egypt should understand that the sources she cites are anything but marginal or questionable. In fact, her sources are, at least as far as I can tell, entirely within the Egyptology mainstream and many are, in fact, revered, and deservedly so, within the community of Egyptologists. The fact that these sources are mainstream, highly respected, or even seminal does not, of course, make them right about the origins of the Christ story. However, it does make them, and Murdock's thesis in which she incorporates their work, impossible to dismiss out of hand.

Read her book. Criticize it if you believe it deserves criticism. But to dismiss it or get apoplectic about her thesis simply because it shocks you is plainly foolish."

--Kenneth L. Feder, PhD, Frauds, Myths and Mysteries

Pomona Atheist wrote:

<quoted text>
The facts are irrefutable. Organized religion is a hoax. All of the scientific evidence fully supports entirely natural origins for the universe and life on earth without any supernatural involvement.
Christianity is a derivative cult with very little originality. The terrestrial authors of the damn bible included a mythical savior because the religious cults preceding Christianity by thousands of years had mythical saviors.
You personally are unwilling to accept these historical and scientific facts purely for narcissistic reasons. Any godbot who lacks the capacity to recognize organized religion as nothing more than a hoax created to control the retarded should seek professional de-conversion assistance immediately.
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connectionmm
http://www.amazon.com/Christ-Egypt-Horus-Jesu...
"Murdock's scholarship is relentless!
My name is Ken Feder. I am an archaeologist, and I play one on TV, as a talking head in various documentaries on the National Geographic Channel, the Discovery Channel, the History Channel, ScFi, BBC Horizon, and, as it turns out, even the Weather Channel. Having conducted research and written extensively over the course of the last thirty years, I think I have developed a good eye for recognizing valuable research that is worthy of serious consideration when I see it. And the research conducted by D.M. Murdock concerning the myth of Jesus Christ is certainly both valuable and worthy of consideration.
Everyone who reads Murdock's Christ in Egypt should understand that the sources she cites are anything but marginal or questionable. In fact, her sources are, at least as far as I can tell, entirely within the Egyptology mainstream and many are, in fact, revered, and deservedly so, within the community of Egyptologists. The fact that these sources are mainstream, highly respected, or even seminal does not, of course, make them right about the origins of the Christ story. However, it does make them, and Murdock's thesis in which she incorporates their work, impossible to dismiss out of hand.
Read her book. Criticize it if you believe it deserves criticism. But to dismiss it or get apoplectic about her thesis simply because it shocks you is plainly foolish."
--Kenneth L. Feder, PhD, Frauds, Myths and Mysteries

So then, care to refute or rebutt Dr. Bryant on Ms. Murdocks inaccuracies?

Captain Oblivious 88 wrote:

So then, care to refute or rebutt Dr. Bryant on Ms. Murdocks inaccuracies?

It's totally irrelevant even though Murdock herself addresses criticisms of the Christ Conspiracy in latter books such as the above.

Once again, Christianity is a derivative religious cult based on religions which preceded the abomination by thousands of years. The terrestrial authors of the damn bible didn't invent the concept of mythical deities and saviors.

You're desperately trying to find fault with meticulous research in contradiction to your programming because you just can't let go of your personal delusions of an imaginary father figure in the sky and afterlife.

You're both feeble-minded and weak-willed and will probably need professional de-conversion assistance to leave the Dark Ages behind and return to the modern world.

Although irrelevant, the following is from Acharya S:

First of all, Mike Licona is not a credible individual, as his stated life's mission is to 'prove' that a Jewish man was 'the' God of the cosmos, and was born of a virgin and raised from the dead - a ridiculous premise that is unprovable.

Secondly, Licona's methodology of 'debunking' my work included making random phone calls to professors, reading them a couple of sentences taken out of context, such that they pronounced my book to be 'ridiculous' and made other disparaging comments about my person, and then hanging up. As an example of this unethical behavior of Licona - during which time he apparently also identified some of these 'ridiculous' sentences as mine when they were not - we received the following response from one of his main 'sources' in his attempts at discrediting me, Professor Edwin Bryant.

When we asked Prof. Bryant about this affair concerning Licona, my work and Bryant's derogatory comments, Bryant responded as follows:

"'I somewhat remember receiving a phone call from someone sometime back requesting my views on Krishna in connection with a book he was critiquing. I had no time or interest to read the book to which he was referring, nor was I criticizing the book itself, as you suggested in a previous email since, not having read it, I had no grounds to do so. As a scholar of the Krishna tradition, I felt duty-bound to answer his questions, which I did, and gave my opinion of the views he represented to me regarding Krishna's supposed crucifixion. There are no traditional sources indicating Krishna or any avatara of Vishnu was crucified. If western authors from (I assume) the colonial period have published claims that there are alternative folk narratives that do represent such a version of events, then the onus is on them to provide specific references to these sources if they are to be taken seriously by scholars."

'best wishes, Edwin Bryant'

Obviously, Licona was not as cozy with these scholars as the impression he gives in order to depict himself as an authority. Nor did he give much a disclosure concerning my arguments, which Bryant acknowledges he has never read. Moreover, again, my book "Suns of God" goes into greater detail regarding this issue in particular, much of which data I would think would be fascinating to a "scholar of the Krishna tradition." In specific, I address the assertion concerning the depiction of Krishna as 'crucified' or in cruciform.

Please also see my rebuttal of Licona vis-a-vis my work -

'It is obvious that apologist Licona's main tactic in refuting The Christ Conspiracy is to attack my credibility, constantly misrepresenting statements from my book and website in order to make me look absurd. Such is a classic tactic of apologists and other used-religion salesmen attempting to sell their shoddy goods to an unsuspecting public. Apologists are not generally trained to think independently or to refute facts but to assail the credentials and credibility of the individual who does not buy such shoddy goods. In other words, don't bother them with the facts or the science, they will simply retort that your hair is the wrong color or you will be punished by God or some other playground rubbish.'

In any event, even if a few assertions from my work are shown to be in error, and I admit to being fallible, the general premise - to wit, Jesus Christ is as mythical as Hercules - remains sound and unrefuted.

- Acharya S

G_O_D wrote:

<quoted text>
Try using the propper words and terms.
You are so iiritating that way.
The Epistles of Paul are not the New Testament.
Tough to follow someone who does not use the correct words.

1 Thessalonians was not in the NT?? Really?? Alert the Catholic Church and the Christian Churches!! They need to know!!

Dumb butt!!

Pomona Atheist wrote:

There are no traditional sources indicating Krishna or any avatara of Vishnu was crucified. If western authors from (I assume) the colonial period have published claims that there are alternative folk narratives that do represent such a version of events, then the onus is on them to provide specific references to these sources if they are to be taken seriously by scholars."

Said sources were never provided...the only thing Murdock ever cites are other Christ mythers such as Graves, Freke, Gandy, etc.

Pomona Atheist wrote:

Although irrelevant, the following is from Acharya S:
First of all, Mike Licona is not a credible individual, as his stated life's mission is to 'prove' that a Jewish man was 'the' God of the cosmos, and was born of a virgin and raised from the dead - a ridiculous premise that is unprovable.
Secondly, Licona's methodology of 'debunking' my work included making random phone calls to professors, reading them a couple of sentences taken out of context, such that they pronounced my book to be 'ridiculous' and made other disparaging comments about my person, and then hanging up. As an example of this unethical behavior of Licona - during which time he apparently also identified some of these 'ridiculous' sentences as mine when they were not - we received the following response from one of his main 'sources' in his attempts at discrediting me, Professor Edwin Bryant.
When we asked Prof. Bryant about this affair concerning Licona, my work and Bryant's derogatory comments, Bryant responded as follows:
"'I somewhat remember receiving a phone call from someone sometime back requesting my views on Krishna in connection with a book he was critiquing. I had no time or interest to read the book to which he was referring, nor was I criticizing the book itself, as you suggested in a previous email since, not having read it, I had no grounds to do so. As a scholar of the Krishna tradition, I felt duty-bound to answer his questions, which I did, and gave my opinion of the views he represented to me regarding Krishna's supposed crucifixion. There are no traditional sources indicating Krishna or any avatara of Vishnu was crucified. If western authors from (I assume) the colonial period have published claims that there are alternative folk narratives that do represent such a version of events, then the onus is on them to provide specific references to these sources if they are to be taken seriously by scholars."
'best wishes, Edwin Bryant'
Obviously, Licona was not as cozy with these scholars as the impression he gives in order to depict himself as an authority. Nor did he give much a disclosure concerning my arguments, which Bryant acknowledges he has never read. Moreover, again, my book "Suns of God" goes into greater detail regarding this issue in particular, much of which data I would think would be fascinating to a "scholar of the Krishna tradition." In specific, I address the assertion concerning the depiction of Krishna as 'crucified' or in cruciform.
Please also see my rebuttal of Licona vis-a-vis my work -
'It is obvious that apologist Licona's main tactic in refuting The Christ Conspiracy is to attack my credibility, constantly misrepresenting statements from my book and website in order to make me look absurd. Such is a classic tactic of apologists and other used-religion salesmen attempting to sell their shoddy goods to an unsuspecting public. Apologists are not generally trained to think independently or to refute facts but to assail the credentials and credibility of the individual who does not buy such shoddy goods. In other words, don't bother them with the facts or the science, they will simply retort that your hair is the wrong color or you will be punished by God or some other playground rubbish.'
In any event, even if a few assertions from my work are shown to be in error, and I admit to being fallible, the general premise - to wit, Jesus Christ is as mythical as Hercules - remains sound and unrefuted.
- Acharya S

You'll also notice that nowhere does Murdock try to defend her work from where Dr. Bryant pointed out her fallacies.

Captain Oblivious 88 wrote:

You'll also notice that nowhere does Murdock try to defend her work from where Dr. Bryant pointed out her fallacies.

The ignorance you've demonstrated in the self-degrading delusional tirades above is found in few place on earth outside the Bible Belt region of the United States.

It's historical fact that the biblical Jesus began as an amalgamated myth then became an object of worship although it's highly unlikely a severe case of mental retardation via Christian indoctrination like you will ever possess the intelligence, common sense and courage to acknowledge this irrefutable historical fact.

You need professional help, kid!

"In any event, even if a few assertions from my work are shown to be in error, and I admit to being fallible, the general premise - to wit, Jesus Christ is as mythical as Hercules - remains sound and unrefuted."

- Acharya S

Pomona Atheist wrote:

<quoted text>
The ignorance you've demonstrated in the self-degrading delusional tirades above is found in few place on earth outside the Bible Belt region of the United States.
It's historical fact that the biblical Jesus began as an amalgamated myth then became an object of worship although it's highly unlikely a severe case of mental retardation via Christian indoctrination like you will ever possess the intelligence, common sense and courage to acknowledge this irrefutable historical fact.
You need professional help, kid!
"In any event, even if a few assertions from my work are shown to be in error, and I admit to being fallible, the general premise - to wit, Jesus Christ is as mythical as Hercules - remains sound and unrefuted."
- Acharya S

So if not Krishna who do you think Jesus was based off of?

"In addition to Krishna, Ms. Murdock cites similarities between the Buddha and Jesus as an example of how Christianity has borrowed from Buddhism. As with Krishna, she lists 18 similarities Jesus shares with Buddha in The Christ Conspiracy.(34) Regarding these, I emailed Professor Chun-fang Yu, Chair of the Department of Religion at Rutgers. Dr. Yu has specialized in Buddhist studies. I listed the 18 similarities recorded by Ms. Murdock and asked if these were actual traditions of the Buddha. She replied writing, "None of the 18 [are] correct. A few, however, have some semblance of correctness but are badly distorted." She then listed a total of eight that had some similarities and provided details.(35)
Dr. Yu ended by writing, "[The woman you speak of] is totally ignorant of Buddhism. It is very dangerous to spread misinformation like this. You should not honor [Ms. Murdock] by engaging in a discussion. Please ask [her] to take a basic course in world religion or Buddhism before uttering another word about things she does not know."

It is appropriate to mention here that Ms. Murdock claims to have mastered several religions. Her book, The Christ Conspiracy claims a mastery of Christianity and her new book, Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled, with excerpts found on her web site also indicate that she believes Hinduism and Buddhism to be two other religions which she has mastered in terms of her knowledge of them. However, as we have seen, she is terribly ignorant of the actual traditions of Hinduism and Buddhism. And as we are about to see, she is likewise mistaken when it comes to her understanding of Christianity."

Care to refute Dr. Yu?

Captain Oblivious 88 wrote:

So if not Krishna who do you think Jesus was based off of?

You're making a complete ass of yourself and obviously need professional help, kid!

If you're so fascinated with the disingenuous actions of the founders of the Christian cult then you should examine the original documents plagiarized in assembling the damn bible. Of course, you can't because the bastards destroyed them and altered others although the undeniable truth is known by all rational people.

Once again, Christianity is a DERIVATIVE CULT with very little originality. The fictional story of the biblical Jesus was PLAGIARIZED from more than a dozen other MYTHICAL SAVIORS preceding the damn bible.

More importantly, it's never been rational to believe the universe was created by design because there's never been a single scientific observation in the history of the human race which would lead a sane person to even hypothesize something so utterly ridiculous.

"In any event, even if a few assertions from my work are shown to be in error, and I admit to being fallible, the general premise - to wit, Jesus Christ is as mythical as Hercules - remains sound and unrefuted."

- Acharya S

Pomona Atheist wrote:

<quoted text>
You're making a complete ass of yourself and obviously need professional help, kid!
If you're so fascinated with the disingenuous actions of the founders of the Christian cult then you should examine the original documents plagiarized in assembling the damn bible. Of course, you can't because the bastards destroyed them and altered others although the undeniable truth is known by all rational people.
Once again, Christianity is a DERIVATIVE CULT with very little originality. The fictional story of the biblical Jesus was PLAGIARIZED from more than a dozen other MYTHICAL SAVIORS preceding the damn bible.
More importantly, it's never been rational to believe the universe was created by design because there's never been a single scientific observation in the history of the human race which would lead a sane person to even hypothesize something so utterly ridiculous.
"In any event, even if a few assertions from my work are shown to be in error, and I admit to being fallible, the general premise - to wit, Jesus Christ is as mythical as Hercules - remains sound and unrefuted."
- Acharya S

If they were destroyed where did Ms. Murdock get her information from?

Captain Obvious 88 wrote:

<quoted text>
If they were destroyed where did Ms. Murdock get her information from?

For that matter how do "all rational people" know it when the proof has been destroyed? Did you see this alleged proof before it was allegedly destroyed?

I believe in Jesus, I believe he is the savior! I don't need approval from anybody nor do I seek approval. I'm only a man that believes in Jesus and that is enough for me. God Bless you and if your not a believer then Good Luck.

Captain Oblivious 88 wrote:

If they were destroyed where did Ms. Murdock get her information from?

You alleged that you've read her first book. She's since written others addressing the concerns of fellow religious retards regarding her sources as stated above.

Can you provide scientific evidence to support your delusion that the universe and life on earth was created by design no less by the monstrous deity of Christian mythology? No, you can't as absolutely none exists.

Can you provide credible historical evidence to support your delusion that the biblical Jesus was an historical figure and the offspring of an imaginary father figure in the sky. No, you can't as only forged documents exist outside the damn bible.

The undeniable truth is certifiably insane and should be institutionalized to receive professional treatment of your personal delusions instead of making an ass of yourself on an international forum, kid!

"In any event, even if a few assertions from my work are shown to be in error, and I admit to being fallible, the general premise - to wit, Jesus Christ is as mythical as Hercules - remains sound and unrefuted."

- Acharya S

Jesus was no Brian.
(Monte Python)

Tom wrote:

I believe in Jesus, I believe he is the savior! I don't need approval from anybody nor do I seek approval. I'm only a man that believes in Jesus and that is enough for me. God Bless you and if your not a believer then Good Luck.

Amen Tom.

Brainwashed Tom wrote:

I believe in Jesus, I believe he is the savior!

You've been brainwashed into believing an amalgamated myth from a plagiarized work of fiction is the savior of the human race. Your personal belief is a delusion signifying mental illness and the need for immediate help by mental health care professionals.