jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few weeks ago I tried to deal with the troll via jpegs. Others - I think at least two others - joined in with jpegs mocking the troll. The moderator removed them all. Oh well. Any other ideas for stopping the progress of a thread derailment attempt?

At risk of derailing this thread, the thread you describe was started by an atheist. It is not clear to me that an atheist (I don't think it was the same one, but still) could really troll it. I first became aware of that thread when a poster reported it to me complaining about the images. When I reviewed the thread, it was pretty obvious to me that the images were being used to disrupt the discussion. As the poster above confirms, the images were not being used as part of the discussion, but to mock one participant in that discussion. That is inappropriate.

Whenever posters start derailing threads, you are welcome to report it to me. Whether or not someone is trolling is a very subjective matter, but you can report that as well.

Hi, Jeff -- can you let us know when there is sock-puppeting going on too?

If I notice it. I don't really read many threads in the religion forum. Normally, other posters report suspected sock puppets. They are often correct, which is baffling to me.

Jeff -- Is the person who wrote this post
(bold and italics added):
01/21/2015 10:25 Horus and Mithras are in the Jesus Mysteries? I'm not bothering to read that book, then. The whole Horus and Mithras thing has been completely debunked so many times here, not by me I should mention, including the PP who gave a nice, concise debunking yesterday. Doesn't matter, the troll keeps trolling. That's what trolls do. That's the problem.
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/441540.page

…the same as any of the people who wrote the following posts?

01/20/2015 10:18 http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/441540.page
01/20/2015 11:20 http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/441540.page
01/20/2015 12:08
01/20/2015 12:39

01/20/2015 21:17 “Is religion the new homosexuality” http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/441540.page#6295394 full text below:
Ah, the Horus-Mithras-Christ connection!

This was originally brought up by an atheist poster who insisted that December 25 was the birth date of both Mithras and Horus. That was thoroughly blown out of the water on grounds of historical inaccuracy.

The poster then insisted that Mithras and Horus shared similar features with Christ, and other posters pointed out that it was actually Osiris who was resurrected by Isis picking up all his dismembered pieces. His penis was missing so she made one of gold so she could get impregnated with Horus. I dunno--doesn't sound much like the Christ story to me--and Isis clearly was not a virgin.

Then we have Mithras, an ancient and vague Persian god, whose cult persisted on the western fringes of the Persian empire and was picked up by Roman soldiers after the death of Christ. Many theories about Christian beliefs perhaps informing Mithraism rather than the other way around. Mithras was said to be born from a rock, which I guess earlier PP relates to virgin birth. Am surprised PP didn't equate Athena as well to Christ as she was hatched from Zeus's head.

Sorry for reminiscing about good times on DCUM.

01/20/2015 21:34
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/30/441540.page
01/20/2015 21:39
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/442021.page “No more Horus and Mithras, please”
01/21/2015 10:12

If so, it seems like a case of sock puppeting –one person writing as if they are more than one person.

I’m pressing “report” after posting this, just to bring this post to your attention.

I'm an atheist, but unlike HM poster (aka Groundhog) I don't think it makes any difference whatever whether there are earlier examples of similar stories. There were plenty of people before Lincoln who said the slaves should be freed, but Lincoln is the one we celebrate because he actually did it.

The issue is not whether there were other stories about virgin birth, but whether it actually occurred in the case of Jesus. The fact that the idea was not totally new does not prove that Jesus was not the real thing.

Anonymous wrote:"Who cares if it's not an exact match" -- are you kidding? It's nowhere near close to being a match, in fact the supposed similarities are laughable. If you don't understand how ludicrous it all looks, then you have deeper issues.

Actually, I don't think PP is being ridiculous. A story (movie, novel, comic book, whatever) can borrow elements from an earlier story and get called out for lack of originality, even if it's not an exact match. This isn't a copyright case. We're looking to where the ideas came from, not whether someone should pay royalties.

There are clearly earlier magical births. Zeus impregnating Danae in a shower of golden rain. There are earlier resurrections. There's not much original to Jesus story, except (maybe) for the content of his teaching. That's the important part, anyway... right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:tbh, I fail to see how this lack of connection btw. Horus/Mithras and the life of Jesus somehow supports a claim that Jesus did indeed exist - or at least did exist as a prophet who performed miracles.

Meta-troll: trying to derail a thread about how you derail threads. Hmmm, maybe you could switch the subject from resurrection/virgin birth to Jesus' whole existence. Snap! That's what you did!

Maybe we should refer to HM poster as Groundhog poster. Same thing happened on the other threads--once the HM analogies got thoroughly quashed, Groundhog immediately switched to assertions that Jesus's existence is a myth.

Yes, "Groundhog". I like it!

+1. Another vote for "Groundhog"!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:tbh, I fail to see how this lack of connection btw. Horus/Mithras and the life of Jesus somehow supports a claim that Jesus did indeed exist - or at least did exist as a prophet who performed miracles.

Meta-troll: trying to derail a thread about how you derail threads. Hmmm, maybe you could switch the subject from resurrection/virgin birth to Jesus' whole existence. Snap! That's what you did!

Maybe we should refer to HM poster as Groundhog poster. Same thing happened on the other threads--once the HM analogies got thoroughly quashed, Groundhog immediately switched to assertions that Jesus's existence is a myth.

Yes, "Groundhog". I like it!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:tbh, I fail to see how this lack of connection btw. Horus/Mithras and the life of Jesus somehow supports a claim that Jesus did indeed exist - or at least did exist as a prophet who performed miracles.

Meta-troll: trying to derail a thread about how you derail threads. Hmmm, maybe you could switch the subject from resurrection/virgin birth to Jesus' whole existence. Snap! That's what you did!

Maybe we should refer to HM poster as Groundhog poster. Same thing happened on the other threads--once the HM analogies got thoroughly quashed, Groundhog immediately switched to assertions that Jesus's existence is a myth.

Anonymous wrote:tbh, I fail to see how this lack of connection btw. Horus/Mithras and the life of Jesus somehow supports a claim that Jesus did indeed exist - or at least did exist as a prophet who performed miracles.

Meta-troll: trying to derail a thread about how you derail threads. Hmmm, maybe you could switch the subject from resurrection/virgin birth to Jesus' whole existence. Snap! That's what you did!

"Who cares if it's not an exact match" -- are you kidding? It's nowhere near close to being a match, in fact the supposed similarities are laughable. If you don't understand how ludicrous it all looks, then you have deeper issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Horus and Mithras are in the Jesus Mysteries? I'm not bothering to read that book, then. The whole Horus and Mithras thing has been completely debunked so many times here, not by me I should mention, including the PP who gave a nice, concise debunking yesterday. Doesn't matter, the troll keeps trolling. That's what trolls do. That's the problem.

It was debunked?

Really?

Cognitive bias is a bitch.

Thread derailment alert! (You know darn well it was totally debunked.)

Seriously, I don't.

Please explain.

Otherwise, I'm just going to assume that you think that anyone who doesn't buy your assumptions is trying to derail or troll. Like I said, cognitive bias is a bitch.

And it's not a derailment to ask you to explain one of your basis assumptions.

Here's another poster on yesterday's "Is Religion the New Homosexuality" thread, one of the many debunkings scattered around this forum. Easy enough to cut and paste here.

********
"Ah, the Horus-Mithras-Christ connection!

This was originally brought up by an atheist poster who insisted that December 25 was the birth date of both Mithras and Horus. That was thoroughly blown out of the water on grounds of historical inaccuracy.

The poster then insisted that Mithras and Horus shared similar features with Christ, and other posters pointed out that it was actually Osiris who was resurrected by Isis picking up all his dismembered pieces. His penis was missing so she made one of gold so she could get impregnated with Horus. I dunno--doesn't sound much like the Christ story to me--and Isis clearly was not a virgin.

Then we have Mithras, an ancient and vague Persian god, whose cult persisted on the western fringes of the Persian empire and was picked up by Roman soldiers after the death of Christ. Many theories about Christian beliefs perhaps informing Mithraism rather than the other way around. Mithras was said to be born from a rock, which I guess earlier PP relates to virgin birth. Am surprised PP didn't equate Athena as well to Christ as she was hatched from Zeus's head.

Sorry for reminiscing about good times on DCUM."

tbh, I fail to see how this lack of connection btw. Horus/Mithras and the life of Jesus somehow supports a claim that Jesus did indeed exist - or at least did exist as a prophet who performed miracles.

At least there's a pattern of virgin births and resurrection in pagan beliefs that DO connect to the life of Jesus. Who cares if one isn't an exact match.

from the Apostle's Creed:

He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried. He descended into hell. On the third day he rose again. He ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Horus and Mithras are in the Jesus Mysteries? I'm not bothering to read that book, then. The whole Horus and Mithras thing has been completely debunked so many times here, not by me I should mention, including the PP who gave a nice, concise debunking yesterday. Doesn't matter, the troll keeps trolling. That's what trolls do. That's the problem.

It was debunked?

Really?

Cognitive bias is a bitch.

Thread derailment alert! (You know darn well it was totally debunked.)

Seriously, I don't.

Please explain.

Otherwise, I'm just going to assume that you think that anyone who doesn't buy your assumptions is trying to derail or troll. Like I said, cognitive bias is a bitch.

And it's not a derailment to ask you to explain one of your basis assumptions.

Here's another poster on yesterday's "Is Religion the New Homosexuality" thread, one of the many debunkings scattered around this forum. Easy enough to cut and paste here.

********
"Ah, the Horus-Mithras-Christ connection!

This was originally brought up by an atheist poster who insisted that December 25 was the birth date of both Mithras and Horus. That was thoroughly blown out of the water on grounds of historical inaccuracy.

The poster then insisted that Mithras and Horus shared similar features with Christ, and other posters pointed out that it was actually Osiris who was resurrected by Isis picking up all his dismembered pieces. His penis was missing so she made one of gold so she could get impregnated with Horus. I dunno--doesn't sound much like the Christ story to me--and Isis clearly was not a virgin.

Then we have Mithras, an ancient and vague Persian god, whose cult persisted on the western fringes of the Persian empire and was picked up by Roman soldiers after the death of Christ. Many theories about Christian beliefs perhaps informing Mithraism rather than the other way around. Mithras was said to be born from a rock, which I guess earlier PP relates to virgin birth. Am surprised PP didn't equate Athena as well to Christ as she was hatched from Zeus's head.

Sorry for reminiscing about good times on DCUM."

Anonymous wrote:Haha, exactly! I too am very open to alternative interpretations of early Christianity, as long as they are credible. I've read Crossan and Borg. This HM theory doesn't pass the smell test, though, and in fact it stinks to high heaven, so to speak.

I tip my hat to you, PP, as I think my contribution was limited to pointing out that Horus was conceived by Osiris' golden penis, not exactly a resurrection/immaculate conception story. I too watched with amazement and amusement (I'm a little ashamed to say) as the HM poster kept inserting it into different threads and kept getting shot down, again and again.

^^ This was addressed to 15:31

Haha, exactly! I too am very open to alternative interpretations of early Christianity, as long as they are credible. I've read Crossan and Borg. This HM theory doesn't pass the smell test, though, and in fact it stinks to high heaven, so to speak.

I tip my hat to you, PP, as I think my contribution was limited to pointing out that Horus was conceived by Osiris' golden penis, not exactly a resurrection/immaculate conception story. I too watched with amazement and amusement (I'm a little ashamed to say) as the HM poster kept inserting it into different threads and kept getting shot down, again and again.

There are many instances of pre-Christian deities born of virgins.

So perhaps we DO need to shy away from Horus, for example, and branch out.

Nothing is new folks. Just look at fashion! We just keep "resurrecting" the old ideas and giving them a new twist.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few weeks ago I tried to deal with the troll via jpegs. Others - I think at least two others - joined in with jpegs mocking the troll. The moderator removed them all. Oh well. Any other ideas for stopping the progress of a thread derailment attempt?

At risk of derailing this thread, the thread you describe was started by an atheist. It is not clear to me that an atheist (I don't think it was the same one, but still) could really troll it. I first became aware of that thread when a poster reported it to me complaining about the images. When I reviewed the thread, it was pretty obvious to me that the images were being used to disrupt the discussion. As the poster above confirms, the images were not being used as part of the discussion, but to mock one participant in that discussion. That is inappropriate.

Whenever posters start derailing threads, you are welcome to report it to me. Whether or not someone is trolling is a very subjective matter, but you can report that as well.

Hi, Jeff -- can you let us know when there is sock-puppeting going on too?

If I notice it. I don't really read many threads in the religion forum. Normally, other posters report suspected sock puppets. They are often correct, which is baffling to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Horus and Mithras are in the Jesus Mysteries? I'm not bothering to read that book, then. The whole Horus and Mithras thing has been completely debunked so many times here, not by me I should mention, including the PP who gave a nice, concise debunking yesterday. Doesn't matter, the troll keeps trolling. That's what trolls do. That's the problem.

It was debunked?

Really?

Cognitive bias is a bitch.

Thread derailment alert! (You know darn well it was totally debunked.)

Seriously, I don't.

Please explain.

Otherwise, I'm just going to assume that you think that anyone who doesn't buy your assumptions is trying to derail or troll. Like I said, cognitive bias is a bitch.

And it's not a derailment to ask you to explain one of your basis assumptions.