Apparently another member of the Acharya S fanclub has chimed in with their own opinion on my critical review of The Christ Conspiracy. The response naturally comes on the oxymoronically named Freethought Nation forums where everyone thinks in lockstep with Acharya. So how does this latest defense fare? Well, let’s take a look at their first piece of their counter-evidence (the rest will be dealt with later):
First this person quotes me from the review that “There is nothing in Egyptian mythology that ever has Horus being crucified. It is something she recycled from crank authors from over a century ago” and then answers “Oh really?” before offering the following pictures as evidence:
And then comments:
As you can see Horus is placed at the vicinity of the equinox on the zodiac of Dendera.
You might be wondering what this has to do with anything but then you need to have a little background in the “assume your theory and then make something up as you go along” hermeneutics of the Acharya S crowd. Frankly, there is so much wrong here that one barely knows where to begin.
First of all, the first photo is of the Denderah zodiac in a later Greco-Roman temple from the first century BC. The Egyptians never used the twelve-sign zodiacal system (that was a Mesopotamian idea) but instead used a system of the heliacal risings of designated stars and constellations every ten days (decans). After the conquest of Alexander the Great and the rule in Egypt of the Greek Ptolemies, the two systems were integrated to form what became the basis of Western astrology.
The importance here is that the temple was only created in the first century BC using and imported system and thus was hardly representative of any long-standing Egyptian ideas. Moreover, the entire construct assumes concerns that are not even evident in the original zodiac. Note, for instance, that the intersecting lines that appear in the diagram below DO NOT appear in the original zodiac. Nor does Horus actually appear at the intersection – it is merely assumed from the fact that Horus is associated with a stellar object somewhere near the imposed intersection. Then again, so do other depictions. So what we have even at a superficial level is the imposition of the importance of the intersection of two lines that do not appear on the zodiac and the association of Horus with a stellar object in a location nearby but not upon that non-appearing intersection.
Yet, even worse is that fact that it has absolutely nothing to do with a crucifixion! In the review, my comments were in the context of pointing out the absurd redefinition of crucifixion employed by Murdock:
Then there are the countless bogus “pagan parallel” claims in the book that she has spend the last decade and a half whitewashing with lame excuses. For example, there is nothing in Egyptian mythology that ever has Horus being crucified. It is something she recycled from crank authors from over a century ago. It just isn’t there. So what is her story now? She now states that her critics misunderstood the meaning she intended for the terms she used – including for the current discussion on the crucifixion of Horus. In other words, when she said “Horus was crucified,” she did not necessarily mean hanging on a cross or some other similar object.
Now, one might allow for a certain bit of discretion in the definition when making a parallel to Jesus. If Horus had been hung on something akin to a cross, you certainly could argue there was enough similarity to make a real parallel. However, even allowing this wider latitude, there still is no such parallel between Jesus and Horus.
So what exactly did Murdock have in mind by “crucified”? In the recent source guide by Murdock and Zeitgeist creator Peter Joseph, the term “crucified” was redefined to mean “appears with arms outstretched in a symbolic context.” Needless to say, this is not what anyone reading this book would have understood and this new definition was never mentioned prior to her claims being refuted.
Under her new definition, any iconography depicting a figure with its arms extended is now to be considered “crucified.” The figure in question might be giving a blessing, casting a spell, doing a dance, flying through the sky in the form of a falcon, or even being executed on a Roman cross. According to Murdock, these are all “crucified” and all the same. Thus with this new definition, Murdock can claim she was right all along.
While one might admire the cleverness – not to mention the chutzpah – of whitewashing previous errors through such equivocation, it also fails miserably on a number of points. All one needs to do to see this is to consider the absurdity of putting forth a depiction of any deity of your choosing with their arms extended as a parallel to the crucifixion of Jesus. Moreover, if she had really intended this to be the case, why did it take until after the severe criticism of the claim to ever mention it?
Just imagine the reaction if, instead of claiming Horus was crucified like Jesus, the claim had been that Horus was depicted with arms extended like Jesus. The reaction would have been a collective, “Yeah, so what?” It was precisely because the word “crucified” was used and the standard definition was applied that the claim had any importance at all. The new definition only creates the illusion of a parallel through generalization and lacks any real significance.
The only remaining question is whether this really was what Murdock meant all along. By reviewing Murdock’s earlier work -including this book, it is pretty clear that, when she used the term “crucified,” she meant something akin to the crucifixion of Jesus. When it was described, it was always placed within a sequence that included death and resurrection, and hence was associated with a fatality. Generally speaking, you do not die from outstretching your arms – unless something happens such as you are hung on a Roman cross.
In The Christ Conspiracy, Murdock stated that Horus was crucified between two thieves, buried for three days in a tomb, and resurrected. This certainly places the crucifixion in a death sequence with the two thieves adding to the similarities to the scene at Calvary. At no point did she give any indication that she thought “crucified” meant anything other than what we normally consider a crucifixion.
Even if she really was thinking of iconographic depictions of Horus with his arms extended in 1999, that would only indicate she was being deceptive. After all, if it were true, then Murdock knew she created a “parallel” out of something most would consider innocuous, and did so knowing her readers would misinterpret her meaning. It is far more likely, given her own prior claims, that she really believed there were stories of a crucified Horus, she was caught off guard by discovering her sources for these claims were bogus, and she redefined the term to save face with her fanboys.
Obviously what I stated was that Murdock had originally asserted that Horus had been “crucified between two thieves, buried for three days in a tomb, and resurrected” and redefined the term only “crucifixion” only after her claims were exposed as nonsense. That is, what I asserted is that there is no Egyptian mythology where Horus was executed on some object resembling a cross. What this little fanboy came up with is yet another redefinition of crucifixion that neither matches the actual meaning nor matches Murdock’s own redefinition! On top of that, he used a very late Greco-Roman temple that had little to do with ancient Egyptian mythology and imagined two intersecting lines were vital to Egyptian beliefs even though the lines were not important enough to place on the diagram. This is the usual strategy of the Murdockettes: find something that you can claim is in the shape of a cross, find some way to associate it with a pagan god, and then declare that god crucified.
Of course, if they had originally stated that “Horus was depicted as a falcon flying through the sky with wings extended and Jesus was depicted with arms extended on a cross and therefore the latter was copied from the former” everyone would have laughed mightily. Ditto for “Horus was associated with a stellar object appearing somewhere near two intersecting that do not actually appear on a zodiac and therefore the crucifixion of Jesus copied it.” This is how desperate the cult of Acharya is to defend their dear leader.
In other words, when I stated that there was no mythology of a crucified Horus, I meant there was was no mythology of a crucified Horus. I did not mean that some member of a cult of personality might examine artifacts and impose their own meanings on both the artifacts and my words and create nonsense on the fly to defend their hero. Needless to say, outside the strange world of Acharya S clones, no one takes their nonsense seriously.
Here is the challenge I have posted to numerous of these crackpots and to date have received no replies: Name a living Egyptologist who will state that the outline of parallels to Jesus that Horus is assigned in Zeitgeist is basically correct. Can they find some qualified individual to go on record with such a statement or can they just dig up other Jesus mythicists repeating the same drivel?