I just read your refutation of Jesus being plagiarized off of previous Mediterranean deities and I must say you cannot believe your own drivel. To argue that it couldn’t be plagiarized because only portions of the stories are similar is beyond ridiculous. I have several questions for you:  1) Was Jesus the first deity born to a virgin?  2) Was Jesus the first deity born on December 25th?  3) Was Jesus the first deity symbolized with a lamb on his shoulder?  4) Was Jesus the first deity resurrected from the dead?  The basis of Jesus is plagiarized. The first stories of Jesus were written by many decades after his apparent death. His birthdate and certain divinity took 100s of years to come to be claimed. I don’t believe you can be this blind to reality. I hope for your sake you are simply a con man trying to capitalize off of religion monetarily. If not, you will be very disappointed.


First of all, may I suggest that if you want to have a good, reasoned conversation, then using disrespectful words such as “drivel” and “beyond ridiculous” certainly do not help.  Let us behave in a more mature and respectful way, please.  Calling someone a “con man” and accusing him of doing this for money, when you do not even know me, is also disrespectful and uncalled for.  Please, treat others as you would want to be treated.  This is my respectful request.
But, I will respond to your charges, of course.
Jesus is the only ACTUAL deity who really and actually physically lived on this earth who was born of a virgin.  Perhaps there are stories about mythical (ie not actual) people who were similarly born, but, no, there is no other actual, historical figure, about whom it was claimed within his lifetime that he was born of a virgin.
Jesus was not born on December 25th, as all students of the New Testament are well aware.  He was born when the shepherds were out in their fields (see Luke) which certainly was not in December.  The date for the birth of Jesus is not given in the Bible.  Therefore, it certainly was not plagiarized from another religion! This charge is simply wrong, as anyone aware of the New Testament knows.
Jesus was never symbolized by a lamb on his shoulder in the Scripture or even in the first two centuries of Christianity.  Whether a believer in the eighth century “borrowed” this imagery from another source is worth discussing, but what I can say for sure is that the apostles never used this imagery and the Bible never uses this imagery.  So… biblical Christianity certainly did not borrow this from anyone.
Jesus is the only religious figure who was in fact, actually raised from the dead.  We know as an historical fact that he was crucified in Jerusalem.  We know as an historical fact that his tomb was empty.  Whether he was resurrected as an historical fact can be debated, but that it was claimed by his believers withing just a few days that he was resurrected is also a fact.  Jesus is the ONLY historical figure about whom these things can be said.  Has there ever been a religion which claimed that a mythical (ie note real) figure was raised from the dead?  Sure.  The difference here is that such claims are not about an actual person about whom we know when and where he was born, where he lived, the names of his father, mother and brothers we know, the names of many of his friends we know, and how, when and where he was killed are know.  Jesus is completely unique, not necessarily that it was claimed that he rose from the dead, but that he is a real person, with many actual historical facts which support the public belief, immediately after he was resurrected, to having been resurrected.  This is unique.  The story of the resurrection was not borrowed, it was recorded based on actual events, many of which, such as the crucifixion and the empty tomb are confirmed by contemporary non-Christian sources such as Tacitus and Josephus.
These stories were not written “many decades” after the events.  1 Thessalonians, 1 Corinthians and Galatians were written within twenty years of Jesus’ death.   Mark and Matthew were written within about thirty years of his death.  What you say is simply not true.  These accounts were written down at a time that the vast majority of the eye-witnesses were still alive.  This is a fact. No scholar, even atheists, deny that some of Paul’s letters were written within 20 years, and some of the gospels within about thirty hears of his live. His divinity was declared during his lifetime, and recorded in written form within 25 years, not 100s of years later.  Where did you even come up with this claim???  I am not blind to reality.  My belief is based on historical evidence.
John Oakes

Comments are closed.