Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ut-ngp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!judy
From: judy@ut-ngp.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Myths similar to Christ?
Message-ID: <465@ut-ngp.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Apr-84 09:48:04 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-ngp.465
Posted: Wed Apr  4 09:48:04 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Apr-84 00:52:43 EST
Organization: Comp. Center, Univ. of Texas at Austin
Lines: 87



 I'm not sure if the article I refer to here was posted to this group or 
net.flame, but it belongs here. I am AMAZED that no one else seems to know 
enough about Greek mythology to have answered yet! Well, here goes....
(Jon, please don't think I'm picking on you; but the truth is ...)

 
> "Those who read only Hebrew mythology believe there was only one Christ, and
> Savior; they do not know that there were at least sixteen...One has only to
> read in full the story of Hercules to realize the pagan and mythic nature of
> the whole Christ story.  He too was born of a virgin, Alcmene; he too had a 
> god for a father, Zeus; he too was the `only begotten' of the father; he too 
> was called `Saviour,' the Greek Soter, and `the good shepherd,' Neulos Emelos.
> And just as with Christ, he died, went to the lower world and then ascended to
> heaven from Mount Orca.  He was also called the Prince of Peace...(Deceptions
> and Myths of the Bible, pp. 286-7)"

 I suppose that one should expect such a viewpoint from a book with that title.
Unfortunately, it is not true. I looked up the story of Hercules (a.k.a.
Herakles) and found that he did indeed go to the "lower world" (Hades), but he
was ALIVE. He went down to bring back the hell-hound Kerberos (kinda like a  
guard-dog) as one of his 12 labors. He then returned the hound. 
He was fathered by Zeus (that much is also true) - but so were Apollo, Hermes,
Ares, Perseus and at least a half DOZEN other male childern. And though Alcmene 
might have been a virgin when Zeus seduced her, Hercules was born at the same 
time as the son of her husband (his womb-mate; sorry, couldn't resist). He 
ascended to Olympus from Mount Orca after catching on fire. Sorry, I fail to 
see much resembalence between him and Jesus. As for the various titles, I think 
they are hardly significant.

 
>The author, Lloyd M. Graham, goes on to cite other avatar myths that are
>suspiciously similar to (and predate) the Jesus myth.  Here are the names of
>the avatars and their origins:
>
>Jesus--Nazareth	Krishna--India		Sakia--India
>Iva--Nepal		Indra--Tibet		Mithra--Persia
>Tammuz--Babylonia	Criti--Chaldea		Attis--Phrygia
>Baili--Orrissa		Thules--Egypt		Orontes--Egypt
>Odin--Scandinavia	Hesus--the Druids	Quetzalcoatl--Mexico
>Witoba of the--Telingonese
>
>Note that almost without exception, these mythological characters were born
>of a virgin (human) mother and fathered by a god.  Each was considered to be a
>savior and was crucified on a cross.  After dying, each joined their father
>in heaven.

 I haven't had time to research all of these, so I concentrated on the ones 
that were most familiar to me and therefore the easiest to find.
	Krishna - considered by the reference I used (Myths of All Races)  
as an incarnation of Vishnu who also appeared as a dwarf and several kinds of 
animals. According to this reference, he had an earthly mother and father. I 
don't think the Hindu's even THOUGHT in terms of people being fathered by
gods. In any case, he definitly was NOT crucified on a cross! He was shot 
accidentally in the foot with an arrow. It was his only vunerable area. 
Shades of Achilles perhaps, but hardly similar to Christ.
	Odin - Gee, I always thought he was a Norse GOD, not the son of a 
god - and I was right. I could not even find a reference to his birth or death.
Of course, I COULD have missed it, but I doubt it. This must be another 
exception.
 
>Graham also comments on the lack of historical information on Jesus:
>
> "Had there actually lived a man who could raise the dead, heal the sick, and
> walk on water, history would have recorded it.  Why then did it not?  For lack
> of historians?  Had this been the case, the believers would have at least a
> negative proof, but oddly enough the period was peculiarly distinguished in
> this respect.  There were many historians just then and some of them the most
> illustrious of all time... (Ibid p. 290)"

 Is this to say that there is no mention of Jesus AT ALL? Or that there is 
no historical reference to him raising the dead, etc.? I could understand 
not writing the miracles down, MOST historians want to be taken seriously.
But NO mention of Christ at all, not even the MAN? That is perplexing. I 
shall have to research this also, when I have time. Of cource the reference 
will have to be from an unbiased source, probably Roman - they had no reason 
to lie either way.


Judy