The Hero Pattern (Could Jesus be fake?)...

I was raised southern baptist, and for years I never questioned what I was taught, but now that I am in my 50's I feel a little foolish for having been duped by such ridiculous beliefs. It is like I woke up one morning and realized that everything I had been taught about "God" was absolute rubbish. I do agree that society must have rules, but enforcing them via a vindictive god or boogeyman is silly. I do believe that there are powers in the universe which we don't understand, and I believe that there are powers within ourselves that we have yet to realize, but the "hero" stories should be taken with a grain of salt. There may be lessons to be learned in them, but that is all. Thanks so much for your posts!

reply to post by adigregorio


I think that you would like the first part of the film. Or at least agree with, it's not very well done in a cinematic-way if you know what I mean

Yep, Jesus was son of carpenter, but he was also Son of God, as we all are. And he was messiah because he was trying to tell that kingdom of God is within us, that everyone could heal sick, raise dead and walk on water if they had love, and if they would believe in the god, to believe in self You see, theres many contemplations of Gods, for someone it might even be a force of nature. And the bible of course is mostly rubbish, it has been edited few too many times. The biblical Jesus of course is a twisted portrayal of him, and might as well be, that biblical jesus never existed! But so didn't Socrates necessarily, and that doesn't discredit his teachings does it?

Oh well, I'll make this thread to stray from the topic if I continue with this. All I can say is that IMO this hero pattern is metaphorical description of ascension to higher awareness. They (specified heroes) never necessarily existed as real persons, but they just portray the way into greatness. Just my 2 coins of course.

reply to post by adigregorio


Heheh....yep - I think they said that about Horus too!! Mythology is a very interesting subject to be certain - but I tend to try & differentiiate between that subject matter and reality whenever possible. Disecting ancient historical or mythological works is a fascinating hobby.

J.

reply to post by v01i0

Originally posted by v01i0
Yep, Jesus was son of carpenter, but he was also Son of God, as we all are. And he was messiah because he was trying to tell that kingdom of God is within us, that everyone could heal sick, raise dead and walk on water if they had love...

I have always thought, and still do, that emotions are just chemical/electrical reactions in the brain. Of course, I am no brain surgeon, or specialist for that matter. So I could be mistaken.

Originally posted by v01i0
All I can say is that IMO this hero pattern is metaphorical description of ascension to higher awareness. They (specified heroes) never necessarily existed as real persons, but they just portray the way into greatness.

First off, thank you for the IMO in that paragraph. Many times people forget to add those three letters (or words) and it turns topics into battles rather than discussions. Anyways, I have not thought of the "hero pattern" this way. And I will have to go over some things with this thought in mind to see if I can see your point of view.

There is a pattern.
From Babylon to Egypt and beyond, Religion has been used to oppress and enslave us.
Why? Where did it come from? Why are there SO many similarities?
Because, Satan knew the Father's plan and since he couldn't reverse it, he tried to BECOME the 'Hero'.

The Two Babylons

Jesus hasn't returned to reign as King, yet.

reply to post by Clearskies


Interesting you would type that. I knew that this was the Christian's stance regarding the previous "heroes". Satan knew that JC was coming, so he (throughout the past) would take on the forms of the "heroes". Normally that would be fine an dandy, except for one thing. Are you saying that Satan was Moses? Remember, he scored 20/22 and therefore is one of the "heroes".

Of course I could have misinterpreted your posts meaning, if that is the case apologies in advance.

reply to post by adigregorio


Moses, as well as Joseph were archetypes of Jeshua.
They were blessed to have some of his characteristics, but, they were never worshiped!

reply to post by Clearskies


I did not mean to imply he was worshiped. Just that he, as JC did, fit the hero pattern.

Back to the Satan defense. While I am not discounting that belief, is that the only defense as to why the pattern exists? I'm not a Bible scholar, I have read it a couple of times front to back. And I seem to recall that it warns the Satan will show up after JC, not before him. Of course a scripture or two stating otherwise would be super helpful.

Again, and I can not stress this clearly enough. I do not say what others believe in is wrong. I am just bringing some interesting correlations into the light (no pun intended).

[edit] By before JC, I meant before his first appearance, not "The Second Coming"

[edit on 2/19/2008 by adigregorio]

reply to post by adigregorio


Remember, Satan was here since the Garden of Eden.
He will be here Bodily, during the Tribulation.

reply to post by Clearskies


That's right, so am I correct in assuming that you say Satan has been in the Material Realm (ie as a human/beast) since then? And while taking these forms he was the other "heroes" mentioned?

Lastly, how do you know that Satan is not the story of JC in the Bible? I mean, if Satan had been the other heroes, what is to say he is not this hero as well?

On a side note, does anyone want to try the hero pattern to what we know of Satan? Would be interesting to see how he measures on the scale. I do not know enough about him to form a valid pattern (well at this time anyways)

Originally posted by adigregorio

That's right, so am I correct in assuming that you say Satan has been in the Material Realm (ie as a human/beast) since then? And while taking these forms he was the other "heroes" mentioned?

Exactly, he had to use the serpent, and deluded idolaters to work. Even his minions have to have a 'host' body, now.

Lastly, how do you know that Satan is not the story of JC in the Bible? I mean, if Satan had been the other heroes, what is to say he is not this hero as well?

Read The Two Babylons, PLEASE.

reply to post by Clearskies


Fair enough, I have to pick up my younger brother from school so I have not read it as of yet. But I will read up on it as soon as I get back

Also thank you very much for your input. So far I have been talking to mostly myself and others that support the idea. Can not have a debate without an opposing viewpoint!

For everyone else, so far as it stands the current defense to the hero pattern in regards to Jesus is:

Satan, knowing "gods" plan, was the other heroes mentioned (not the Harry Potter/Data/fun ones I supplied).

If I am incorrect in this, please let me know Clearskies Or rather, post what is correct. I have a bad habit of misunderstanding things.

Originally posted by Clearskies
Read The Two Babylons, PLEASE.

I highly dislike reading internet books, however I will be making a trip up to the bookstore to see if they have a hard copy of the book.

If nay, Amazon carries it and I will order it from them. Until then may I ask for some excerpts that defend your position? I understand if you do not wish to, finding passages in an internet book can be a tedious exercise at times.

Thank you for highlighters! (and Post-it notes!)

reply to post by adigregorio


I think a hard copy would be great.
It's illustrated with archaeological findings.
It costs about 15 to 25(can't remember) dollars last time I bought it.

I'll post some later, I just posted a thread, on the Catholic Inquisitions and I have housework, thanks!

Check it out.

[edit on 20-2-2008 by Clearskies]

reply to post by Clearskies


Thank you in advance Clearskies! And do not work too hard

Everyone else:

No stance on the current Christian defense for the thread? And I only say Christian because that is the only group that has defended so far. I would welcome other faiths as well! I will have to apply the pattern to some of the other faith's "heroes" I suppose.

Original of the child

The Kronos to whom Hesiod refers is evidently at bottom a different Kronos from the human father of the gods, or Nimrod, whose history occupies so large a place in this work. He is plainly none other than Satan himself; the name Titan, or Teitan, as it is sometimes given, being, as we have elsewhere concluded, only the Chaldee form of Sheitan, the common name of the grand Adversary among the Arabs, in the very region where the Chaldean Mysteries were originally concocted,--that Adversary who was ultimately the real father of all the Pagan gods,--and who (to make the title of Kronos, "the Horned One," appropriate to him also) was symbolised by the Kerastes, or Horned serpent. All "the brethren" of this father of the gods, who were implicated in his rebellion against his own father, the "God of Heaven," were equally called by the "reproachful" name "Titans"; but, inasmuch as he was the ringleader in the rebellion, he was, of course, Titan by way of eminence. In this rebellion of Titan, the goddess of the earth was concerned, and the result was that (removing the figure under which Hesiod has hid the fact) it became naturally impossible that the God of Heaven should have children upon earth--a plain allusion to the Fall."

The Child in Assyria
"It was from the son, however, that she derived all her glory and her claims to deification. That son, though represented as a child in his mother's arms, was a person of great stature and immense bodily powers, as well as most fascinating manners. In Scripture he is referred to (Eze 8:14) under the name of Tammuz, but he is commonly known among classical writers under the name of Bacchus, that is, "The Lamented one." *

* From Bakhah "to weep" or "lament." Among the Phoenicians, says Hesychius, "Bacchos means weeping." As the women wept for Tammuz, so did they for Bacchus.

To the ordinary reader the name of Bacchus suggests nothing more than revelry and drunkenness, but it is now well known, that amid all the abominations that attended his orgies, their grand design was professedly "the purification of souls," and that from the guilt and defilement of sin. This lamented one, exhibited and adored as a little child in his mother's arms, seems, in point of fact, to have been the husband of Semiramis, whose name, Ninus, by which he is commonly known in classical history, literally signified "The Son." As Semiramis, the wife, was worshipped as Rhea, whose grand distinguishing character was that of the great goddess "Mother," * the conjunction with her of her husband, under the name of Ninus, or "The Son," was sufficient to originate the peculiar worship of the "Mother and Son," so extensively diffused among the nations of antiquity; and this, no doubt, is the explanation of the fact which has so much puzzled the inquirers into ancient history, that Ninus is sometimes called the husband, and sometimes the son of Semiramis."

Now, this Ninus, or "Son," borne in the arms of the Babylonian Madonna, is so described as very clearly to identify him with Nimrod. "Ninus, king of the Assyrians," * says Trogus Pompeius, epitomised by Justin, "first of all changed the contented moderation of the ancient manners, incited by a new passion, the desire of conquest. He was the first who carried on war against his neighbours, and he conquered all nations from Assyria to Lybia, as they were yet unacquainted with the arts of war."

* The name, "Assyrians," as has already been noticed, has a wide latitude of meaning among the classic authors, taking in the Babylonians as well as the Assyrians proper.

[edit on 20-2-2008 by Clearskies]

Cupid, the son of Venus, occupied, as will afterwards be proved, in the mystic mythology the very same position as Nin, or Ninus, "the son," did to Rhea, the mother of the gods. As Nimrod was unquestionably the first of "the mighty ones" after the Flood, this statement of Aristophanes, that the boy-god Cupid, himself a winged one, produced all the birds or "winged ones," while occupying the very position of Nin or Ninus, "the son," shows that in this respect also Ninus and Nimrod are identified. While this is the evident meaning of the poet, this also, in a strictly historical point of view, is the conclusion of the historian Apollodorus; for he states that "Ninus is Nimrod." And then, in conformity with this identity of Ninus and Nimrod, we find, in one of the most celebrated sculptures of ancient Babylon, Ninus and his wife Semiramis represented as actively engaged in the pursuits of the chase,--"the quiver-bearing Semiramis" being a fit companion for "the mighty Hunter before the Lord."" Child in Assyria


The Child in Egypt
"When we turn to Egypt we find remarkable evidence of the same thing there also. Justin, as we have already seen, says that "Ninus subdued all nations, as far as Lybia," and consequently Egypt. The statement of Diodorus Siculus is to the same effect, Egypt being one of the countries that, according to him, Ninus brought into subjection to himself. In exact accordance with these historical statements, we find that the name of the third person in the primeval triad of Egypt was Khons. But Khons, in Egyptian, comes from a word that signifies "to chase." Therefore, the name of Khons, the son of Maut, the goddess-mother, who was adorned in such a way as to identify her with Rhea, the great goddess-mother of Chaldea, * properly signifies "The Huntsman," or god of the chase.

* The distinguishing decoration of Maut was the vulture head-dress. Now the name of Rhea, in one of its meanings, signifies a vulture.

As Khons stands in the very same relation to the Egyptian Maut as Ninus does to Rhea, how does this title of "The Huntsman" identify the Egyptian god with Nimrod? Now this very name Khons, brought into contact with the Roman mythology, not only explains the meaning of a name in the Pantheon there, that hitherto has stood greatly in need of explanation, but causes that name, when explained, to reflect light back again on this Egyptian divinity, and to strengthen the conclusion already arrived at. The name to which I refer is the name of the Latin god Consus, who was in one aspect identified with Neptune, but who was also regarded as "the god of hidden counsels," or "the concealer of secrets," who was looked up to as the patron of horsemanship, and was said to have produced the horse. Who could be the "god of hidden counsels," or the "concealer of secrets," but Saturn, the god of the "mysteries," and whose name as used at Rome, signified "The hidden one"? The father of Khons, or Ohonso (as he was also called), that is, Amoun, was, as we are told by Plutarch, known as "The hidden God"; and as father and son in the same triad have ordinarily a correspondence of character, this shows that Khons also must have been known in the very same character of Saturn, "The hidden one." If the Latin Consus, then, thus exactly agreed with the Egyptian Khons, as the god of "mysteries," or "hidden counsels," can there be a doubt that Khons, the Huntsman, also agreed with the same Roman divinity as the supposed producer of the horse? Who so likely to get the credit of producing the horse as the great huntsman of Babel, who no doubt enlisted it in the toils of the chase, and by this means must have been signally aided in his conflicts with the wild beasts of the forest? In this connection, let the reader call to mind that fabulous creature, the Centaur, half-man, half-horse, that figures so much in the mythology of Greece. That imaginary creation, as is generally admitted, was intended to commemorate the man who first taught the art of horsemanship. *

[edit on 20-2-2008 by Clearskies]

reply to post(s) by Clearskies


Well that was a great read, to say the least! I will have to write down the names of the gods listed to see how they measure up to the hero pattern. (Even if they are one in the same as Satan) Of course if that is the case I would assume that they will all get the same amount of points.

Either way, I am enjoying the debate presented so far. I just wish more people would get involved, pro and con. I really think this correlation, "Hero Pattern", has some merit to it. Of course that is just my point of view, and what is right to me, is not necessarily right for others.

Just because your University teachers tell you all the world history form ancient times is a myth and everything they tell you is true does not make it so. They can't build the Great Pyramid with all of todays technology - can't even match the tolerances that the slabs were cut to. Can not! And we are suppose to believe those people were so stupid they believed in all these false Gods hmmm? What if everything you know is a lie. What if ETs are really one in the same as Angels and the old Gods? Extra Terrestrial means not of this earth. God created the hosts of the heavens, the elohim. Yes there are loads of ETs if you want to call them that. I can explain the Hero Pattern if you'll give me a chance.

The Bible teaches that there was a war in heaven, Satan and one third of the Angels rebelled against God and were cast out.

And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8 But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9 The great dragon was hurled down--that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.( Rev.12:7)

This where the term fallen angel comes from. They are not demons however; Demons do not have bodies, but seek to “possess” others. From the Book of Enoch we can draw the conclusion that the demons are the disembodied spirits of the Nephilim who died in the flood. These fallen angels are much more powerful beings. They violate the laws of God and man through kidnapping and rape/ fornication with humans (2 Peter 2:4,5; Jude 6). They are referred to in ancient Jewish texts (Genesis, Job, Daniel, Enoch, Jasher, Jubilees) as "sons of God" and as "Watchers". Angels can take on physical bodies and are often mistaken as human (Gen 19:1). We do know that God created the angels before he created man and the universe. The book of Job describes the angels worshiping God as He was creating the world:

Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone - while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy? (Job 38:4-7).

When Adam and Eve sinned by disobeying God a curse was placed on the serpent.
So the LORD God said to the serpent,

Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life. And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel." (Gen.14-15)

Christians understand the serpent to represent Satan. The term seed is obviously referring to the reproductive process. The seed of the woman is understood to be the Messiah Jesus who will crush Satan’s head. A clear genealogy from Eve to Jesus is presented in the Bible to reinforce this notion. What does not get discussed is who the seed of the serpent is? If we accept that it is a literal seed from Eve, it must be a literal serpent seed as well. Clearly the battle lines are drawn but where are the Serpents offspring.

The Bible teaches that angels mated with human women during the days of Noah, both before the great flood "…and also afterward…”. Their offspring were the Nephilim (fallen ones) genetic mutants, many were giants - "…heroes of old, mighty men of renown" (Genesis 6:1-4) These Nephilim most likely form the basis for much world mythology. This is where your hero profile comes from and this is why so many ancient s fit it.

The other Gods in the old testament and "mythology" are not just idols but some were real. To make it simple there are angels and arch angels who are like Gods. The creator main God is Jehovah and he kept the Jews to himself with Michael as the arch angel. Other races and areas were divided up to other arch angels and they became their "Gods". Some of these angels were bad news and mistreated their people - even having sex with them and creating hybrids etc. The problem with the hybrids is they have un-resserectable bodies. Which is where demons come from (when they die) - spirits looking to possess someone.

I believe this was a genetic warfare of sorts; the goal was to pollute the seed of woman with the serpent seed. The corruption became so great that God decided to flood the world and start over. Noah was spared from the great flood because he was “perfect in his generations,” (Gen 6:9). Meaning his genetics was pure, preserving the line to the Messiah.

Take heed that we draw near the end and Jesus said

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. (mat 24:37)

It is happening again. In other words, the genetic activity of the fallen angels is back. The Alien abduction phenomenon has a sinister similarity to the events of Genesis. Jacques Valles , respected UFO researcher, “The medical examinations to which abductees are said to be subjected, often accompanied by sadistic sexual manipulation, is reminiscent of the medieval tales of encounters with demons.” What about cattle mutilations? The female abductees who have babies taken away? Perhaps the Fallen Angels are engineering a superior Nephilm Antichrist? They probably already have. This is the greatest conspiracy theory of all time and it has the Bible and ancient tradtions of the world behind it. Think about it.



edit- fixed punctuation




[edit on 2/20/2008 by Bigwhammy]

reply to post by Bigwhammy


Now that was an awesome response!

So am I correct in assuming you are saying that Zeus, Oedipus, Hercales, Theseus, Romulus, Perseus, Jason, Bellerophon, Pelops, Asclepios, Dionysos, Apollo, Joseph, Moses, Elijah, Watu Gunung, Nyikang, Sigurd (or Siegfried), Llew Llawgyffees, Arthur, and Robin Hood. Are all descendants of these "Fallen Angels"? For these are the examples Lord Raglan uses in his book. Not to mention the ones I listed as "current heroes". Well aside from me, for as to my knowledge I am not a fallen angel.

And am I also correct in assuming that the stance has changed for a defense against the pattern from:

Satan was the aforementioned heroes.

to

The aforementioned heroes were other "fallen angels", or their offspring.

Or a combination of both?

And if you respond with, just the ones prior to JC. Then how do you explain the pattern still showing up today? Clearly Harry Potter is not a real person, and can not be the spawn of a fallen angel.