Jesus Vs Horus

by Christ Alone 89 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Christ Alone
    Christ Alone

    Cofty, you're wrong about that too. Jesus changed the water in SIX Jewish ceremonial washing jars into wine. The parallel just doesn't fit. You're looking for something that isn't even there.

    Fact: Dionysus did not turn water into wine

  • cofty

    Christ - No amount of evidence-free assertions will change the facts.

    Fact: Dionysus did not turn water into wine - Christ

    I know, I said exactly that. He miraculously filled empty jars with wine. Did you not bother to read my post before you replied?

    How do you explain this extract from Pausanius?

    [6.26.1] XXVI. Between the market-place and the Menius is an old theater and a shrine of Dionysus. The image is the work of Praxiteles. Of the gods the Eleans worship Dionysus with the greatest reverence, and they assert that the god attends their festival, the Thyia. The place where they hold the festival they name the Thyia is about eight stades from the city. Three pots are brought into the building by the priests and set down empty in the presence of the citizens and of any strangers who may chance to be in the country. The doors of the building are sealed by the priests themselves and by any others who may be so inclined.

    [6.26.2] On the morrow they are allowed to examine the seals, and on going into the building they find the pots filled with wine. I did not myself arrive at the time of the festival, but the most respected Elean citizens, and with them strangers also, swore that what I have said is the truth. The Andrians too assert that every other year at their feast of Dionysus wine flows of its own accord from the sanctuary.

    Jesus changed the water in SIX Jewish ceremonial washing jars into wine. The parallel just doesn't fit.

    That is lame. Six jars or three jars. Water into wine of empty jars miraculously full of wine. So what? Three times now you have ignored what I said below about the differences between pagan myths and the gospels.

    Suppose I were to mention that Bernstein's "West Side Story" was a retelling of Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet" and in response you wrote pages about all the differences between the two stories.

    West Side Story centres on Tony of the Jets and Maria of the Sharks not Romeo of the House of Montague and Juliet of the House of Capula. Juilet never worked in a bridal shop and Romeo never didn't work at Docs Drugstore. We could go on but you get my point.

    Looking even closer we find that Shakespeare in turn was influenced by "The Tragical History of Romeus and Juiet" by Arthur Brooke of 1562 which in turn was based on an Italian tale of antiquity.

    I am not claiming that gospel writers were stupid enough to just copy and paste pagan myths. I am saying they borrowed pagan myths and reworked them to prove that their god-man was the biggest bestest god-man ever.

  • Christ Alone
    Christ Alone

    I did read your post, cofty. And that is what I responded to. Dionysus did not turn water into wine. He generated wine from nothing. Jesus used the Jewish ceremonial washing jars and turned the water into wine. There is no parallel. The entire stories do not match. I've read your "West Side Story" analogy, and it seems weak to me.

    It is easy to imagine or force a parallel when you want to. For example, look at what the Watchtower did in comparing different events in Revelation to what happened in their own history. If you want to force something to fit, you can.

  • cofty

    Christ - I am claiming that John wanted to prove Jesus could do cooler miracles than pagan god-men and the wine trick is one example.

    You insist it doesn't remotely fit because ...

    1. Dionysus only managed to miraculously fill three jars with wine but Jesus filled six.

    2. Dionysus turned fresh air into wine but Jesus turned water into wine.

    The West Side Story - Romeo and Juliet analogy is an excellent one - it wasn't mine.

    Its obvious you are committed to defending biblical inerrancy at any cost.

  • fulltimestudent

    I am a student at Macquarie Uni and have taken courses taught by Chris Forbes, and have a lot of respect for his knowledge in the areas in which he specialises. He is quite clear that he is a committed Christian, but I am (personally) unsure whether he would sympathise with those who do not recognise that there are some very grey areas in the history of early Christianity. Incidentally, Chris tells me he's had another XJW enrolled in post-grad. studies. (Note: that I am a mere undergrad. student)

    I have not had an opportunity to discuss the Bible specifically with Chris, though when I was enrolled in his course dealing with Alexander the Great and the spread (influence?) of Hellenism, and remarked to him that it was interesting that out of that mix (remember, Alexander conquered the Iranian Empire into what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan) of that period came the three great religions (Buddhism, Christianity, Islam) of the last 2000 years. He concurred, but was somewhat non-committal about the possible connections (I wont labour that matter here and now).

    This semester, I enrolled in another of his courses, The New Testament in it's Times. I went to the first lecture during which he made clear his personal Christian commitments, but also seemed to express an uncertainty about direct divine inspiration of the NT, stating that he thought Paul would be very surprised that his letters handling the problems of some churches were still being read with avid interest today. For two reasons, if I recall this clearly, first that they were letters to specific churches, and second because Paul clearly expected the end in his times. Of course, there are many Christians that manage to balance their belief and the problems that can be seen in the formation of early Christianity.

    If you have some interest in Chris's study unit, you can find a public page for it at:

    I would have continued with this study unit, for its own content and because it leads to another course, that I consider much more important to my own interests, that deals with Early Christian writings. When we read (as an example) what early Christians thought and wrote about, we may start to think we are on another planet. Unfortunately, this other unit has been cancelled for Semester 2 this year, due to Chris being on long service leave, and the problem of finding a qualified substitute Lecturer. Australian Universities are facing financial difficulties, due, probably, to the loss of market share for Asian students

    I've had to drop the above study unit. I cannot handle the amount of reading and assimilation required already for my other study units. (my main focus of interest is China specifically, and Asia generally).

    One of my study units that I deeply appreciate taking in my first year was Myth in the Ancient World, that brought me face to face with some of the points being discussed here. Guys go and read some good books on the topics and then come back with to argue your case for the Bible on facts and not faith based belief.

    Macquarie also has a good Egyptian studies Department, and I still recall the shock I felt during the Myth course, when Boyo Ockinga from that department showed how easily the first few verses of Genesis fitted into ancient Egyptian beliefs. I discussed it briefly with Chris - he was not impressed by Boyo's argument.

    BTW, D.M Murdoch (aka Acharya) has offered a lengthy rebuttal to Chris's comments on Zeitgeist. You'll find it at:

    AND, PLEASE NOTE I can't contribute further to this discussion, I just have too much reading to do.

  • cofty

    Thanks fulltimestudent.

    Some people go too far and see parallels everywhere but I am certain the gospels do include plenty myth in an attempt to protray Jesus as the uber god-man.

    Dionysus is a good example.

    Biblical literalists are wrong to read the gospels as if they were a modern biography.

    Good luck with your sudies, there is nothing like scholarship to cure somebody of naive christianity.

  • SweetBabyCheezits
    BrotherDan/Christ: It is easy to imagine or force a parallel when you want to. For example, look at what the Watchtower did in comparing different events in Revelation to what happened in their own history. If you want to force something to fit, you can.

    Well, I see you're familiar with the Bible believer's motto, Dan. That should come in handy.

  • mP


    Myth 2: Dionysus turned water into wine


    You fail to understand the thought process of the ancient. Anything they could not explain in some simple mechanical like form, they said was the work of a God. When we are talking about turning water into wine we are witnessing the handy work of Dionsys. While we might call the state the final step as permentation they had no knowledge of this. Im not talking about a particular story im talking about his role in nature as a God.

    The first part of the miracle is where the plants grow needing water and the sun. In the spring the grapes are picked and squeezed. The juice then miraculous transforms into wine. That is the miracle of Dionysus.

  • mP


    Take a look at the sky chart and please tell me that the Genesis.... Doesnt match the sky charts ? - mP

    OK - Genesis doesn't match the sky charts. You're welcome.


    Sorry i didnt mean all of Genesis, i meant the initial A&E&snake story. The main characters and arrangement is there in the skies. If you explore the names of the stars and constellations in that part of the sky you will find more key parts of the story.

  • sabastious
    Careful there, you'll get Sab all hot n bothered.

    Well, he's right about the Bible being obsessed with certain numbers.


Share this