Who was Lazarus?

I found an interesting article edited by Hugh Fogelman, a Jewish scholar, on the real meaning of Lazarus, the brother of Mary Magdalene and Martha, and what his story is about. Could it be possible that Christianity is nothing more than Egyptian astrology?


LAZARUS...EGYPTIAN OSIRIS

Edited by Hugh Fogelman

The story of Ausar (Osiris) is one of Egypt's most ancient myths. So old, it's origins have been lost in time. It was an important story to the Egyptians because of Ausar's (Osiris) role as the king of Egypt who is resurrected as the "King of the dead".

The god Ausar was the central deity in ancient Egyptian mortuary rituals. In Egyptian mythology he is ruler of the Underworld and associated with resurrection. Ausar is also associated with agricultural renewal and the resurrection of Mother Nature as well.

Are people aware that the European plagiarizers changed El-Ausar (Osiris) of Egypt to Lazarus? Are Christianas aware that similarly Heru or Horus was changed into Jesus, the son (Sun) of God? This original story (prototype for Constantine's bible) is published in detail in the Egyptian Book of the Dead.

Are Christians also aware that the word Lazarus when translated into the Egyptian language means "El- Azur or El-Osiris" which means "God Helps"? We find these similarities with Judeo-Christianity due to the influence of the Alexandrian influence of Hellenistic Judaism. I have a book in my library written by Randel Helm's entitled Gospel Fictions and it this book it relates that the "Pyramid Texts" describe a story of Osiris being raised from the dead by Horus. Now what follows next is very important to our understanding of the Lazarus story in the gospel of John.

The word "Lazarus" is a thinly disguised depiction of "L-ASURAS". "Ausar" is the real name of Osiris in Egyptian. 'L' just means "the", and functions as a definite article in English. This means that "L-Asuras" or Osiris is just another name for Lazarus and it was this Osiris who was raised from the dead following 3 days in the tomb. It is interesting to note that in Hindi the Sun is called Asurya or Surya or Sri. This is where we get our Sire or Sir, when referring to a man of status and education.

The Lazarus story has a connection with Egypt and we find parallels to it in the "Pyramid Texts". The Pyramid Texts are inscribed on the walls on ten pyramids which are all situated at the necropolis of Saqqara. It is in these "Pyramid Texts" that we first find a unique play on words when we look at the word Bethany.

Christians should ask themselves; (1) Where did Lazarus supposedly live? He is mentioned at living at Bethany. (2) Are you aware that the word "Bethany, when translated back into the Egyptian language is "Beth-anu" and it means the House of the Sun? (3) Are Christians aware than many of the details of that story of the raising of Osiris have analogs in the story of Lazarus? Helms' book Who Wrote The Gospels has a section on Lazarus. On pages 121-126 Helms talks about the Lazarus myth in relation to the "Pyramid Texts". He uses R.O. Faulkner as his primary reference.

When compared to the story of Osiris that predated the Lazarus account by thousands of years we find that the resurrection of Lazarus is nothing more than another version of the story of the solar year. Robert Taylor, a Christian minister, gave a sermon about this very thing in 1830 which you can find in his famous work that got him imprisoned in the colonies which is entitled The Devil's Pulpit. He shows us that the resurrection of Lazarus is a plagiarized story taken from the Ausarian Resurrection (Osiris) of over 12,000 years ago, which was also based on the Sun and its resurrection from the dead at the Winter Solstice.

How many Christians know the Osiris story? I believe that all Christians and followers of all world religion must understand this story for it is from this story that all religions emanate in some degree. It is in this story that the God Ausar (Osiris as the personified Sun) was killed by his brother, Set (personified darkness from which we later get the concept of the adversary of the Sun whom we call Satan).

Whether or not you believe in battles between the forces of light and darkness, this idea nevertheless occupies an important place in a substratum of collective belief in Western culture. The idea of light-and-darkness is as old as the hills. The alternation of night/day and winter/summer has been a fundamental human experience throughout time. The interaction of light and dark created life. To the Ancients all creation was seen to result from infinite variations of these two polarities which together make one. As prehistory unfolded, people became increasingly habituated to hurting and harming one another. A shock to human values and sensibilities, this brought up the 'problem of evil'. What made people do this?

Was there an evil force causing people to act anti-socially or to go against the Laws of Creation? Thus arose the idea of a universal battle, not merely an interaction, between the forces of light and darkness. This is generally known as dualism.

In this scenario, light became 'good' and darkness 'evil'. This Cosmic principle was preserved by the Ancients through the aid of myths and legends that captured for all time this Eternal Principle and we find it expressed through the agents of Osiris, Horus, and Set to begin with but others would follow in every nation under the Sun.

This contest between good (life) and bad (death) and light and darkness is played out in many legends the world over; only the names change. The New Testament account of Lazarus is but one of many of these myths. The original story of such a tension between good and evil and light versus darkness goes all the way back to Egypt and the legend of the triumph of life and light over darkness and death begins with Osiris. Thus the stories of being raised from the dead goes back to Egypt. It relates to one of the best known and most powerful myths, the raising of Osiris, the god of the dead.

Osiris, Ausar, is the god of the dead, and the god of the resurrection into eternal life; ruler, protector, and judge of the deceased, and his prototype (the deceased was in historical times usually referred to as "the Osiris" [L-Ausar/Lazarus..see above the word play]). His cult originated in Abydos, where his actual tomb was said to be located.

The essence of Osiris left to establish a kingdom in the constellation of Orion, while his body went to the underworld.

So we have now see that Lazarus, or L-Asuras or Osiris is raised from the dead. Asur, is the real name of Osiris in Egyptian. But this again goes back to Egypt. It relates to one of the best known and most powerful myths, the raising of Osiris, the god of the dead which is nothing more than the personified story of the rebirth of the Sun from the dead following the Winter Solstice.

The worship of Osiris, like that of the sun god Ra, was one of the great cults of ancient Egypt. It gradually spread throughout the Mediterranean world and, with that of Isis and Horus, was especially vital during the time of the Roman Empire and it would be Rome again who gives us the New Testament. After all, the Church Fathers who canonized the New Testament were all Romans (ex-pagans who converted to Christianity).

Identified variously with the waters of the Nile, the grain of the earth, the moon, and the Sun, Osiris was the great symbol of the creative forces of nature and the imperishability of life (the triumph of life over death and light over darkness as seen in the path of the Sun through the Heavens).

Osiris died and the Sun stood still on the horizon for 3 days and men feared the Sun had died. Through the power of Birth (Isis) under the authority and skill of Thoth (The Higher Genius) Osiris arose on the physical plane as the great avenging god Horus, his son. On the spiritual plane Osiris became the great god of the underworld. Like Jesus he became the god that the Egyptians needed to become in order to be saved.

What this means is that unless the initiate allows for the complete transformation of the self under the direct guidance of the Higher, no true and lasting power can be obtained.

Osiris, being the first living thing to die, subsequently became lord of the dead. His death was avenged by his son Horus, who defeated Set and cast him out into the desert to the West of Egypt (the Sahara). Prayers and spells were addressed to Osiris throughout Egyptian history, in hopes of securing his blessing and entering the afterlife which he ruled; but his popularity steadily increased through the Middle Kingdom. By Dynasty XVIII he was probably the most widely worshipped god in Egypt.

It is in this 18th dynasty that emerges the Pharaoh Moses who overturns this worship of the godman and refocuses worship of Egypt upon the invisible Creator of the Universe.

We need another Moses today to refocus our worship from the false godman of Nicea, Jesus of Constantine's doing, back to the invisible Creator God.

Let us now remember the ancient quote from Thomas Payne:

"The Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the Sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ, in the place of the Sun, and pay him the same adoration which was originally paid to the Sun."

Fortunately, centuries of Christian book burning (like the burning of the Alexandrian library and its 700,000 volumes by Rome in the 4th century) cannot erase the stars. By looking at the Gospels through the eyes of an astronomer and astrologer, we can understand why the Gospels follow the same story outline.

The tale of Jesus takes place within one Zodiac year. By breaking down the Gospels according to each of the twelve Zodiac constellations, we can track Jesus as the sun through references to each motif that the constellations correspond to.

A Christian's religious belief system, when tested and exposed to contradictory facts from Archeology, Biblical languages, Biblical history, Biblical culture, Comparative religion, Astronomy and Astrology must in the Spirit of Truth and Repentance, be flexible enough to change.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wow that is an amazing story. Going to take a while to read it and punch key stuff like robert taylor devils pulpit into yahoo searches. thanks for sharing it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

How wonderful. Here we have Medicine Woman bringing us "the real meaning of Lazarus", aided by her "Jewish scholar". The latter is relevant because she has a long history of ignorant pandering to Judaism. Consequently, we are assured that what follows comes from a "Jewish scholar" - his area of scholarship is apparently irrelevant, only his cultur. The whole approach is rather disgusting.

In fact, the story of Lazarus is almost certainly inauthentic. This is discussed by Helmes as noted, and also at Pascal's Wager. (You might wish to compare the latter to the innuendo stream authored by Fogelman to get a sense of what is, and what isn't, scholarship.) In authenticity in Paul is hardly big news, as the Adulterae Pericope shows quite well. But this conflation of story and myth hardly represents evidence of some "real meaning" hiding under the surface, eagerly awaiting exposure by Medicine Woman's real Jewish scholar.

You tell us. Leave the inane rhetorical questions at the door and provide the evidence. And don't suggest that your Jewish scholar provided it. Adapting some story picked up in Alexandria is no more evidence of an Egyptian provenance than is the relationship between the Passion narrative and the Yom Kippur tradition evidance of a Jewish one.

So, we get to the punch line. For those who missed the evidence leading up to this piece of conjecture, I have no doubt that Medicine Woman's will summarize it for us. Specifically:

• What is your Jewish scholar's field of scholarship? What are his credentials?
• What is the evidence of an 18th Dynasty Exodus?
• What is the evidence of a Pharoah Moses in Canaan?
• What, for that matter, is the evidence for Israelite monotheism (as opposed to monolatry) before the Josiah reforms?

This is crap. If you're at all interested in real scholarship, you might consider starting here ...

From Epic to Canon: History and Literature in Ancient Israel

The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel

Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There were very few people, aside from emperors, that were as documented or influential as Jesus Christ. There is no doubt that he walked the Earth and started Christianity, and that is the bottom line. Another thing. In Christian theology, Good is more powerful than Evil, there is no "power struggle between dark and light" going on. Whose the master of all Evil? Satan. Who created Satan? God.

 

There is no extra-Biblical documentation of Jesus Christ.

 

Frisbinator,

Umm, well yes there is significant doubt by many that he ever existed. So that blows away another baseless Christian assertion.

Ah ha, pity you have no facts to backup your claim.

I think mythology is a more accurate term than theology. But neither term has any bearing on truth. There are only degrees of chaos and there is no indication that total chaos could not dominate.

As told from within Christian mythology of course. And if this mythical character had really wanted to be compassionate and loving he would never have created Satan would he?

Kat

 

Since there is, in fact, doubt, your statement can only reflect ignorance or dishonesty.

 

Here's the fact:

Lazarus wasn't considered a god (not to my knowledge at least

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

).

Therefore, this is all more heresy and BS from MW.



Unless you wish to dispute the story of Lazarus the beggar as well... this is way too farfetched. Reminds me of a certain PM making propaganda threads..

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

It doesn't matter if Jesus did walk the land or not. Just because he may have actually existed, does it mean the magical stories written about him are true? I don't think the problem is that Jesus was a real person or not but rather if everything written about him is true. The reason why is because everything he has supposedly done, past religious prophets have as well so it looks as if his stories were ripped from other sources, ya know?

Heck, I'm alive right now and if people write stories about me hundreds of years from now saying I did this and that which I didn't, does it mean I did all that? I mean hey, they have proof that I did exist, so that must mean that I can walk on water and do other nifty things? No, heh.

And even if everything Medicine Woman says is true about the stories of Lazarus being ripped from Egyptian beliefs, one has to realize again that the beliefs of Egyptians aren't unique either. All of those were taken from Babylon. Babylon was taken from Sumer, etc. If one wants to find the REAL truth (if it is all true or not), you have to trace the root back to the base from which it first came. Talk about one hell of a word of mouth (and written) story passed on through the years! That's the problem I have with the somewhat modern religions. They act as if this is all something new. Your stories and history and all that aren't new or unique to just your religion. But they don't wanna accept that fact in fear of all their beliefs being false.

It doesn't matter whether your religion is ripped from another. There's nothing wrong if I believe a pink elephant is telling me the ten commandments. The only thing that matters is the message. Everything else is all semantics. Who cares if so and so said this or that [haha, unless it's the difference between the good guy saying this and the bad guy saying that.. don't wanna worship the wrong person.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

] if they all say the same good things? Don't get so worked up over the details unless you're a historian trying to root back to the origins. For religious people, all that matters are the good words being said/read.

- N

 

You say that as if it's a negative thing. When the autographs appeared, Paul's epistles, John's gospel, and everything else were all "extra-Biblical". The act of compiling them into some or other collection hardly makes any of them less or more historical.

 

The adulterae pericope is actually from John, not Paul. Besides, it has its own claims to authenticity.

 

That is an assumption, not an evidenced claim of authenticity.

 

Could you explain, or expand, the meaning of your statement, which is contrary to what historians say that there is extra-Biblical documentation of Jesus Christ? Just curious.

http://www.paracletesystems.co.uk/inj/inj005manmyth.htm

http://www.hnn.us/comments/6184.html

 

The Bible, as a Book, is a compilation.

When the "documentation" of Jesus was being written, there was no Bible, as a Book.

I am sure it then qualifies as "extra-Biblical documentation of Jesus Christ".

 

What historians say "there is extra-Biblical documentation of Jesus Christ"?

Your former link very nice evidence of an early CE Christian movement. It is not evidence of an historical Jesus.

The latter link is seriously dated and essentially worthless. See Essays on the James Ossuary.

 

You know nothing about your source, less about his conclusions, but offer it up as a source of enlightment. Let me suggest that you are a perfect example of what that type of scholarship produces. You seem little more than a gullible little girl sadly driven by your neurotic hatred of Christianity.

 

Agreed, but there is no evidence fo a lot of things.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

*************
M*W: Hah! You really don't know me at all!

 

Hmm.. Scully. Appears to be extra terrestrial evidence of a dual personalitiy.. :bugeye: