Yes, please 
. Enjoyable and insightful!
How much the various religions plagiarize each other, has always been a big clue to me that the various religions are creations of the human mind, with all the human flaws baked in. Powerful evidence that religion/bibles/etc are human creations not some sort of all powerful deity.
Are you simply plagiarizing Richard Carrier? A Theory of Yours? You are not even trying to be serious here are you?
Why not compare the life of Jesus to Apollonius of Tyana as well, that could be YOUR theory too.
The Evidence for Jesus: on Inanna (Ishtar) “Crucifixion” and Zalmoxis “Resurrection” http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/JesusEvidenceCarrier.htm
Hello Cognostic,
There is no need to be upset like that.
I never claimed to be the first one that compared Jesus with Inanna or Dumuzi, a lot of people did that
before me even before Richard Carrier did. The point is that all these people including Richard Carier only made the comparrison on the death and resurection and that Inanna was hanged after she died, the same stuff I read in the article you gave me in the link. Beside the article boomer sent me containing some comparrisons I also made, it was still missing a lot of details that I found, and I cant find any other of these in simmilar articles or reports.
For example Mary Magdalene has been indentified as a Prostitute, a female disciple of Jesus and even the wife of Jesus but nobody (I know of) made the connection with Ninshubur which in my opinion is so obvious.
So unless you can give me the links to these articles with the details I pointed out I still stand with calling my findings my theory.
There is no need to compare Jesus to Apollonius it doesnt make any sense.
LogicFTW
What can I say, its so true.
Well, actually you kind of did, in your first post.
That you made that claim suggests you are a careless autodidact rather than a trained or even experienced scholar. Either that or you are being deliberately misleading.
1 Like
Why don’t you you go back and single out the stuff that you think is yours. Mary the prostitute has been done over and over and over again. Marry the eternal virgin is another version of the myth. “After she had Jesus in the cave the midwife found her to still be a virgin. She was a virgin the rest of her life.”
You are not saying anything new and if you are… you need to cite evidence for such claims. If you have evidence for such claims, my guess is that they are historically based — someone else wrote about them first.
What do you think is yours and yours alone? You need to pull it out and stop mixing it with other people’s stuff. When you use other people’s stuff, you need to cite it and give them credit.
Honestly, I have better things to do than read a wall of plagiarized text. Pick out one idea you think is yours and post that. Not a frigging wall of text.
1 Like
Hello Boomer,
Nice to hear from you again.
I do not completely agree with you on that one, all I said I wanted to present a Theory of mine that … blah blah blah. I did said, that I thought i was the first one that connected all the dots between the Sumerian myths and the eastern story, not that I was the first with comparing Inanna or Dumuzi with Jesus. You proofed me wrong in sending a link to an article where some points were mentioned as I did, and I conceded in that. Nevertheless I have yet to find an article pointing out all the relevant simmilarities between the three stories as I did in the previous post, and this one.
I also never made a claim that Im a trained scholar, wich I told you in a previous posting. If I was, I never would have posted my findings here. This forum is for me the only way to present my thoughts and get feedback . If in anyway I make the wrong impression about me my appologies I only want to make the world aware about what I think is an original source of the NT.
Hello Cognostic,
Im not sure if you get the gist of what I said.
Im not saying that Mary was a prostitute, others did and I think they are wrong. Mary Magdalene was created in the image of Ninshubur the loyal servant of Inanna and that is new.
The two travelers to Emaus are the two sons of Inanna who went to Emush that is new.
Thomas being Dumuzi that is new, should I continue?
Did you read the text of the descent of Inanna into the underworld and my previous post? If not I would strongly suggest you do because that is the source of my evidence, at least 4000 years old cuneiform text on solid clay tablets which has been translated into english.
For the record this is not a scientific paper so I dont see your point why I have to cite others people stuff, besides, the texts are not plagiarised but are original mine, if there are other people with the same ideas I didnt found them, as I said I have yet to find an article beside that one from Boomer that points out all the relevant texts.
Don’t care about Mary. Don’t care about others. Don’t care about Carrier. You said you had a theory. Don’t care about the decent of Enanna compared to Jesus,It’s been done.
People can be as silly as they like and read what they like. What part of the theory do you think is yours?
The Road to Emaus? So we are not only assuming Jesus was a real character but Inanna was also real and so were her sons. Got any evidence?
Thomas is Dumuzi: How do you evidence your claim? Are you a polyglot? Do you have degrees in Biblical textual analysis? Please provide your credentials and I would be interested in any books or articles you have written and published in professional journals.
1 Like
Maybe its done but not in the proper way! Only comparing Inanna and Dumuzi with Jesus beause they died and being resurected doesnt cut it. It doesnt explain anything how the gospels were written. And by the way Im still waiting for the articles written by academics pointing out what I stated before.
That comment shows me you trying to ridicule me, Jesus wasnt real just as Inanna and her sons were not real, its al made up.
The idea ot Thomas was taken from Dumuzi, read my post, oh I forgot you dont want to read it.
As I said in a post before, I dont have any degrees in Biblical texual analysis, and am not academic schooled, but you dont have to be an academic to understand there is a connection with the sumerian myths and the NT.
By the way what are your credentials?
Licensed psychotherapist (Existential Cognitivist) , degrees in Sociology and Psychology, Minor in Speech Communication Theory and Process, and Published Author but not in my area of expertise. So, I know enough to recognize complete bullshit when I see it.
How in the fuck is the comment. “You are assuming Jesus was real.” ridicule? “You are an idiot!” is ridicule. The idea that you think you have some insight into the real interpretation or meaning of Biblical passages without any training at all in the area is ludicrous. (That in no way implies you are wrong, even a blind pig can find a turnip in a snow storm on occasion. It means you are unqualified and out of your depth to be making such inane assertions.) Why don’t you publish a scholarly article and submit it to some journal interested in such rubbish?
1 Like
Pithy. Have a Tim Tam. 
Awwww Shit… I had to look up “Pithy” and “Tim Tam.” HA HA HA !
So much for my education.
Easier said than done. Posting that guff on Youtube would almost certainly attract followers. Might even make some money. Perhaps disable the comments section.
Yep! Could post it right along side the flat Earth shit. People will follow anything as long as you are convinced of it yourself.
1 Like
There is a definite connection between the religions and mythologies of the ancient civilisations in which one can trace a circuitous path of some sort from the tales of Inanna/Ishtar to the life of Jesus, but I think it a bit of a stretch to say the NT was ‘plagiarised’ using those early sources.
It would be fairer to say that by the time the NT gospels were written there was nothing new, that had not already been written and added and adapted to, or from, any religious theology at the time. They were all amalgamtions of each other; only names, places and exact details had been changed. So much so, that amongst the educated and well read populace of the Roman Empire the details of the belief systems of every current or defunct sect was probably well known in sone form or another.
The only exception was the stubborn insistence of the Jewish monotheism, which surfaced after at least one thousand years of polytheism and which created tremendous problems for the Greek administrations of the Seleucid and Ptolemy kingdoms and the later Roman Empire.
As for the writing of the gospels of the New Testament, I don’t believe there was any direct reference to the ancient mythologies of Inanna and Dumuzi or their variations. The Christian gospels were written by either Greek converts or Greek educated Jews who must have been, by this time (500 years after the exile in Babylon and the declaration of the monotheistic pledge, the Shema - “Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is ONE!”) committed patriarchal monotheists. These gospel authors would not have directly sought confirmations from the writings of Akkadian pantheist religions. Paul would have denounced Ishtar as an embodiment of the demons and devils who crucified the Christ and who were charged with the destruction of mankind. The Jewish monotheists had already dismissed the sensual, sexy, powerful, feminist Inanna/Ishtar centuries earlier. This new messianic patriarchal pacifist religion preferred their women to be much more submissive.
I would suggest that any similarities perceived between the tales of Inanna and Jesus are merely co-incidental, made possible by the recurring themes that accrued in the mixing and changing and adaption and even evolution of mythologies into religions.
I do not say the similarities do not exist. I only dismiss the idea they have been intentionally copied directly from the ancient Sumerian/Akkadian texts. The history of the gospels is immensely complicated. I refer you to the Reverend Spong’s book “Liberating the Gospels” which clearly illustrates the very Jewish traditions that guided the writing and subsequent editing of those four books.
And despite all that I encourage you to continue your research.
Excellent post! Most of the stories can be traces to earlier versions with the same themes. The names of the characters and the locations were changed to make them more relevant to the listeners.
Well said! Even the Great Romulus “The Savior God of Rome” was one such example.
"Few historians, and I would venture to say none that are alive today, would assert that Romulus was in fact a historical personage. This is despite Plutarch’s and others sincere belief to the contrary. As was common for their time, the story of Romulus was placed within the backdrop of history and whose myth was supported by the insertion of known people, places and dates in an attempt to validate it. This isn’t to imply that historians such as Plutarch were being dubious. On the contrary, when relaying prehistoric events, the insertion of mythical origins was common. Again, Romulus’ story follows a very common format, in which we see the offspring of an immortal god and earthly mother, a miraculous birth, harrowing survival into adulthood, discovery of divine ancestry, great and miraculous works, disappearance or death, followed by assent to godhood.
These similarities should not be surprising and instead should be expected given the high degree of interaction and exchange between the numerous and diverse cultures found throughout the Roman world. "
Jesus may be just another example… IMO you will need to do a lot more work to do a lot more convincing. Good luck to you… I’m fully with Grinseed - continue your research. If that’s your thing, have at it.
I don’t mind to be criticized it is all part of the process.
Maybe Im not quallified to give my opinion on these matters, and maybe Im not 100% right on the issues, but I do know I hit something, and I want to know the bottom of it. The best case scenario for me would be that a scholar would take the challenge and dive into it. If the consensus is Im wrong Im wrong but foremost I wanted to start up the conversation and awareness, because most of you probably didnt even knew about the existance of the Sumerian stories, or did you?
Don’t think I took it light hearted to smash my proposals on this site, it took me more then a year to convince myself I was up to something and to muster up myself and step forward. I really had to read the texts, which I provided a link, three times in a row to make it finally dawn on me.
At first I too thought the similarities were coincidental, the judging of Inanna the hanging on the wall
etc, but when I read the text that when Inanna went out of the underworld followed by 7 demons who
wanted to take away Ninshubur who was waiting before the gates of the underworld, it triggered me.
It lead me to the comment that Mark made in his gospel about the first person Jesus met was Mary Magdalene who he casted out 7 demons. I know that the writer implied that the demons were casted out long before this event. But the fact that he did mentioned it on the right timeline as Inanna is staggering. How many ancient texts do you know of that mentions or tells something similar?
And then it didn’t stopped, what about the Emaus Emush connection, how many words look or sound the same like Emaus? What about Dumuzi hiding in the grass right after visiting his sister Gesthinana and the garden of Gethsemane I know there are differences in pronunciation but also here to me the words look and sounds far too familiar to each other. Coincidental? What about the betrayal of Dumuzi by his friend for a bribe compared with Judas? Coincidental? etc etc.
Let me acknowledge that every single comparison can be addressed as coincidental, but taken as a whole it starts to stink. Take all the comparisons I made (already 28 two more to discuss, and still counting) and calculate the odds it would all together line up with the Jesus narrative. It probably will reach near zero, implying that its certain it is an original source where they got their ideas from.
I acknowledge that it is not necessary copied from the Sumerian texts directly but it is also possible by intermediary steps (as sugested by you).
And of course the Sumerian texts are not the only source of the gospels, there are more just to mention a couple (already suggested by others before me ;p): Josephus Flavius biography, OT pieces and even NT. It is a real melting pot of stories and ideas coming from different sources, ingeniously mashed together into delicious stew, ready to be eaten and ingested by the layman. It worked for 2000 years but the secret recipe is out.
Keep working at it if it;s your thing. I am sure you will find an audience. I’m not convinced any of it is even remotely real, historical, or even useful. Good luck!