Religion is the cause of most of the worlds problems since the beginning of time! why can't all of us agree that we exist because we can! We have air, sun, gravity, and water, and it doesn't matter how we got it, but how we can take care of it. And in all honesty no one knows for sure how it began, but if we don't unite globally, we know how it will end!!

Hey Henry,

you said, quote:"in all honesty no one knows for sure how it began". Interesting, but I was wandering how do you know THAT? Your worldview sounds quite exclusive and opiniated.

The views in films like this are, unfortunately, often too simple. Religions, like most things, evolve from the bottom up, not from the top down. That means that as they grow, they are influenced from the outside and by philosophies and cultures in which they arose. Most of the conspiracy theories are probably better explained by the influence of Hermetic teachings, which in turn probably came from Egyptian religious traditions. It doesn't necessarily mean Jesus didn't exist, but it does mean that the figure of Jesus is explained in the common religious terms of the day, those of the Mystery religions, which very much depended on Hermetic philosophies.

In all honesty there is a 50% chance that Jesus Christ did not exist and a 50% chance that he did...

If one believes and lives fully for Him and he actually does not exist... that person will have at least lived happily.
If one does not believe, but Jesus actually does exist... when he dies, oh dear...

Remember, 50% chance, that is big.
Evaluate the risk versus opportunity.

Henry with you saying, "why can't all of us agree that we exist because we can! We have air, sun, gravity, and water, and it doesn't matter how we got it, but how we can take care of it."

I personally believe that it is because society is constantly questioning everything. They constantly need answers!

Kristin,

That is Pascal's Wager. But the problem is you can use that argument for all the other 10,000+ religions in our world's history. Shouldn't betting on evidence be the best
bet? And you are assuming that every believer lives happily. You are forgetting the one's who feel guilty for committing thought crimes or the one's that are deathly afraid of hell just to name a few. Please take these few variables (and there are many more) and reevaluate the risk versus opportunity.

Kristin says, "Remember, 50% chance, that is big. Evaluate the risk versus opportunity." What if it is Allah we should be worshipping? that would make it a 33% chance. If it should be Catholic doctrine? (25%) Buddhism? (20%) Taoism? Judaism? Protestant? Pentacostal? What if Mithra or Jain? What if the Cristian God has a mean streak (as quite clearly indicated in the Bible). If he/she/it did, then the right choice might be to doubt without tangible evidence. Let's see - so far, that is 12 choices to gamble on, reducing my chances of being right to about 8%, and there are any number of faiths I have not counted. Compare those odds to the time and expense (10% of income to a Christian) required, and I would say reason and testable evidence get my bet.

I think that Jesus existed , but the Christian belief was contaminated by pagan beliefs during the first centuries. People wanted to make God close to them , as close as a man. That is why Jesus became God for Christians.

Kristin both your logic and your probability leave are a tad wanting. The question isn't whether Jesus existed. As you said he may have, then again he might not.

The question is, if he existed was he a deity? The question can even be advanced to if he was a deity is he the only true deity?

godchecker.com has a database of all the deities, that have been worshiped as such that they've been able to find to date . They have over 2,850 of them!

Your probability just went from 1 in 2 to 1 in 2,850+ - that is assuming he existed at all. Looks like you might be the one taking a risk.

Two years ago, the documentary on the DaVinci Code told me that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and sired children; and the Catholic Church has been covering it up for 2,000 years. Now the Pagan Christ tells me that Jesus never existed; and Catholic Church has been covering it up for 2,000 years. I am very confused and don't know what to believe. Please CBC - I am relying on you to tell me what to believe.

When I saw my local TV Times - I was floored.
I'm quite happy that CBC has chosen to air The Pagan Christ.
I rather liked Harpurs approach esp. in regards to Myths.
If people have a real problem with that they might want to check out Joseph Campbell's - The Power of Myth.
(Now wouldn't that be an great show for CBC to air...)
Anyway, Good for them for being brave enough & forward thinking enough to air this. That's two different shows in as many weeks. That's awesome! More! More! More!

I actually was not a Christian until very recently and I actually took a course to actually get to the bottom of a lot of the questions I had about Christianity. I see in previous posts some misinformation from those that I am assuming are Atheists or anti-Christian.

Henry started us with one of the biggest falsehoods used against religion and that is that "religion is the cause of most of the worlds problems since the beginning of time".

Look up the stats on the Hitler and Stalin and how many people they killed/otherwise persecuted in the name of Communism and secular humanism (master race and all that), and compare it to all other events of the 20th century that could be considered religuosly motivated and you'll see that they do not even compare to those 2 tyrants.

Besides, under the covenant of the New Testament there is no circumstance that would allow wars and massacres in the name of Christ and anyone who did that would be living outside the teachings of Christ.

As a Christian I has seen many kinds of attacks on my faith. Every year they just get better and better. The real question that All you non-believers should ask when looking at one of these programes is this. "Why do are they trying to prove this? There must be something to the story and life of this Jesus if every year people are trying to prove things about him. The next thing that must come to mind is "If He is God as the New Testament teaches and He is the only way to God the Father and you reject Him than you have been duped!

From all the comments it appears not many have read the actual book. There is a monumental amount of documentation which Tom Harpur researched that supports his suggestion.

What everyone seems to have missed is not whether Jesus really existed or not. The main issue is how to grow in your faith and use what the Bible talks about as a message of hope and inspiration.

To believe that the Bible is literal in every word is pointless. To build your faith and spirituality around the messages in the words of the Bible IS the point.
To believe that God is a part of everyone of is not sacriligous as it is breath-takingly joyous.

One would think everyone doth protesteth too much.

Personally I'm so well grounded in my spirituality that Tom Harpur's book didn't shatter my beliefs but did exactly what he wanted it to do. It gave me a hope greater than I've ever had before.

Read the book.

I agree with you, Marouane. Harpur is trying to thoroughly paganize Christianity, rather than purifying it of paganism. Here is a quotation that makes all this clear:

Christianity must cut itself loose from paganism, and paganism must be converted to Judaism. If Christianity is to become what it wants to be, it must renounce the desire to know anything that pure Judaism in Christ neither knows nor wishes to know: it must renounce symbols, dogmas, articles of faith, liturgy, worship; it must want to know nothing of creation, the Fall, redemption and justification, heaven and hell, the incarnation of God, the Three Persons of the Godhead, the single Personality of God; it must not hold on to a single item of religion's superstition. If Christianity is to come about, Christ must be the Master, revealing to the heathen that they are but men (Ps. 9:21).--Constantin Brunner

It seems like many people will do anything to attribute the origins of Christianity to pagans and deny them to Jews.

Sigh. The point is not so much whether Jesus existed or not, but that God is in each of us. The point is not whether Jesus existed but how we use the Bible to guide our lives.

It seems rather pointless to argue over the existance of Jesus after all this time. It DOES however allow us to do what we love to do as Human Beings. It allows us to focus on something else rather than what is most important: our relationship with God.

It's not like Tom Harpur is suggesting we throw out the baby with the bath water: our belief in anything. He is suggesting that this is breathtakingly exciting to know that our relationship with God is MUCH more than we thought it was...Jesus or not.

I find it far more empowering and breathtakingly joyous to have faith that God is part of me and he left me a guidebook on how to get closer to him in spirit.
It seems a lot of people did not read his book based on what I have read so far. Read the book and THEN come back and comment.

You will come to notice that I am about to quote from another source. You have to make a decision on weither the source is trustworthy or even if I am trust worthy. Knowledge is, by nature, dependant on others for it's existance. Faith is a necessary component of all knowledge.

A passage from "The Jewish War" by Josephus, a Romanized Jewish Historian taken from the book "Christ the King, Lord of History" by Anne W. Carroll.

"It was at this time [when Pontius Pilate was procuator of Judea] that a man appeared-if 'man' is the right word-who had all the attributes of a man but seemed to be something greater. His actions, certainly, were superhuman, for he worked such wonderful and amazing miracles that I for one cannot regard him as a man, yet in view of his likeness to ourselves I cannot regard him as an angel either. Everthing that some hidden power enabled him to do he did by an authoritative word..."

All Glory and Praise to our Lord and King, Jesus Christ, in whom I believe.

Leaving my prayers for Tom, in whom I don't believe.

I am very happy that CBC is bringing this material to the public eye. For too long, the three Religions of the Book have taken their authority from the arguable notion that the events in the Bible are literally true and therefore that proves that their religion is the True Faith. That stance requires us to take the batteries out of our rational minds (by ignoring historical and scientific facts) and too easily brands internal debate about the religion as heresy.

An approach that refines the faith into its essential and applicable tenets is far more valuable than wasting more energy on the "My God is the right God and can kick your God's @&&" nonsense that pervades far too much of what passes for religious thinking.

Well done Mr Harpur and CBC.

Thirty five years ago the book "Chariots of the Gods" professed through the author's investigation of archiology that clearly the piramids and other great monuments were built with the help of outer space aliens.He included cave drawing of space ships. It was also the subject of a television documentary. That fall I forwarded this knowledge to my first year university seminar.

Junk science will alway get air time but never taken seriously amidst scolars because of the overwhelming evidence against it. Tens of thousands of archiologists have studied ten of thousands of evidence in tens of thousands of universities all subject to peer review.

There is a belief and documentary stating that man has never landed on the moon and another forwarded by a professor at Bringam Young who believes a ton of explosives were secretely hidden in each Word Trade tower without anybody knowing and detonated by the U.S. government. Demolition experts, physisists at Bringam and every person with any building experience can only describe this as thundering stupidity or junk science.

Guess what. No peer review supported these submitions because they are stupid. There is no law against stupidity but if truth is important, spend an evening at a university library. That will indicate that truth is at least a few evenings research...Peter, Wpg.

I could never swallow the literal interpretation of the Bible, even as a twelve year old boy I couldn't believe it. Maybe I was never meant to blindly believe in something.
I have read Harpur's book and re-read certain chapters over again. Through this interpretation of the Christos myth, I have found myself coming as close as possible to getting some divine inspiration.

This Doc sounds interesting. Nice to see the CBC put this educational film on. Just from my own study I have learned that since its start Christianity has Co-opted many Pagan holidays and practices and rites . Great chunks of the bible has been lifted from other religions ( Gilgamesh for one example ) . Will pop some popcorn and tune in with a few friends .

Todays some are saying that the point of this book is to build you up in faith. I only have a question. "How does viewing Christ as less than the God/Man union build up my faith. It will have the opposite effect. Just as the other claims about Christ has tried to do. I believe that this is just another attack on the Christian Faith which can stand up to every one of these.

Well well, CBC does it again! Attack Christ near Christmas? Well what would happen if the CBC had a show about Mohommad and that he never existed? No no, they would never offend people who believe in that god.

Christianity today hinges not so much on the events from 5 B.C. to 30 A.D. (the time of Jesus) as they do for the period 100 to 400 A.D. This is the time of infighting between different groups that each "knew the truth". This was the time period when learned men made the decisions on what we should believe today. They accepted some writings and trashed others. Maybe they got it wrong.

It is unfortunate that the CBC has taken to helping spread "new age" lies. Tom Harpur disagrees with the exhistence of Christ and validity of the Bible, so now he wants to take evrybody down with him? Why would the CBC, a national network in a predominently Christian country want to help him spread that message?

To air a program that attacks Christianity during the Christmas season is sickening. Why could this not have waited until the new year?

Jesus Christ loves each and every one of us. He is waiting for you to invite Him into your heart. Love Him and follow His commandments and He will take you to places you never dreamed possible. All it takes is faith.

I believe in God, with every breath that I take, with every beat of my heart, with all that I am. I believe in God. It is that simple. No man, no theory, no reason, will ever shake that. It is, just the way it is. However, I will enjoy watching the show, ponder Tom Harpur's rational, thank God for free will and come out the other side with a stronger Faith.

"If one believes and lives fully for Him and he actually does not exist... that person will have at least lived happily.
If one does not believe, but Jesus actually does exist... when he dies, oh dear..."

If there was no reward of Heaven and the threat of, oh dear... I wonder how many would follow the christian religion?

To follow the same lines, If one believes and lives fully for him(pick your god) and he actually does not exit...that person will have at least lived happily. If one does not believe, but (pick your god-man) actually does exist. whe he dies, oh dear...

Mel, you just recycled Pascal's wager - which has already been dealt with if you scroll far enough down. Or else do a quick google search and I'm sure you'll find the answer to it.

The wonderful aspect of living in a "free" society is that we are exposed to beliefs that might be contrary to our own. The greatest enemy of knowledge is "contempt prior to investigation".

I salute CBC for airing controversial material that might possibly cause people to think and evaluate various opinions in order to form their own conclusion.

Rather than crucify Tom Harpur, we should empathize with the hundreds of millions of people in this world who are prevented from exposure to controversial thoughts.

I sent an email to the PMO's office and my
local MPP constituent.

CBC airing a program like this ..let alone in December is tantamount to harassment and infringes upon my human rights as a Christian. It deeply offends me.

I think this is the beginning of the end for the athiestic/agnostic leftist TV program people at the CBC.

You can only insult True Canadians to a certain point. As another poster said ..if it was Allah or whomever we would never see a program like this.

Incredible that the far-leftists at the CBC promote this easily-disprovable tripe. Why noe spend some time in more fruitful pastures, discussing how Islam predates Mohammed, and whose roots can be traced back millenia to the worship of the moon god.

Maybe the CBC could do a story on the fallacy of evolution. It would be a fascinating look at how people were duped into believing something that had its roots in non-scientific thought. The followers of this cult were lied to and told to take this ridiculous idea seriously, despite its clashing with science, reason, and fact. This could inject a revitalizing study into the diminishing religion requiring mountains of faith known as evolution.

The CBC should be ashamed of itself, promoting sensationism and passing it off as though the hypotheses and conclusions presented were even slightly credible. Will the increased ratings benefit CBC somehow? What, in fact, is the point? I thought the CBC was mostly nationaly funded.

Whatever the motive, I'm sure that many people will feel comforted and confirmed in their belief in nonsense i.e. monism, materialism, philosophical naturalism etc. Must be nice to stick your head in the sand and ignore all facts that lead to conclusions other than the ones you personally want to believe, all the while giving credence to anything at all that supports your own bias.

Really too bad that CBC doesn't stand for good journalism, and misleads its viewers and readership respectively. Clearly, the only reason that such sensationistic nonsense is even given air time is because it is just continuing the popular trend e.g. Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins etc. Christianity has been attacked since its conception in varying degrees, but at present there is nothing more popular, nor more politically correct than to attack Christianity.

All that being said, the claim that Jesus never existed has to be about the most obvious indicator that the documentary is nothing more than sensationism. No scholar, or thinking person for that matter, would ever forward such nonsense, since he or she would know that even the earliest opponents of Christianity, the Jewish Sanhedrin, recorded the story of Jesus.

Have a look at Sanhedrin 43a for example, where it is claimed that Jesus was a sorcerer and blasphemer. That corroberates the gospel account pretty well, I'd say. Not to mention other non-Christian sources that also make mention of Jesus, such as Tacitus, Suetonius, the Jewish historian Josephus, Thallus, Pliny the Youngeer, Emporor Trojan, Emporor Hadrian, a second century Greek satirist Lucian, Mara Bar-Serapion... So, when there exists such a plethora, for ancient standards, of non-Christian sources that mention Jesus, and even Christ's enemies provide an account of him, evidently he did indeed exist.

Once again, shame on you CBC for not standing up for good media and for good, credible documentaries. You have shown that we can only count on the CBC to hold up status quo, and can expect nothing better from you than the continuation of sensationistic trends, and popular consensual beliefs, no matter how gratuitous the claims may be. What a disappointment. You might as well rename yourself "The Canadian National enquirer"

Christianity is the greatest fraud of all time. Most Christians do not know its history. Humanity is in peril due to the lies spread about and by Christians.

I fully support CBC's journalistic freedom in showing a documentary like "The Pagan Christ" especially near the "Holiday Season".

The day the CBC shows a documentary on "The Pagan Mohammed" or "The Real Mohammed Uncovered: What Islam Doesn't Want you to Know", then I will respect the CBC's role in Canadian society as a news organization that attempts to simply uncover the "facts" and tell us news stories from varying perspectives.

I have enjoyed Tom Harpur's articles in the Sunday Star for years. I am sure I will enjoy the documentary. However, I hope the CBC will show journalistic courage and accept my challenge to explore the "mythical" origins of other faith systems. It's too safe to go after "mythical Jesus". Why not delve into topics which show more journalistic risk taking?

I'm not sure I would even want to read that there might not have been a Jesus or watch a movie based on that fact, I found it hard reading about the Divinci Code....but I have to say I find that more beleivable. I think I would rather beleive that Christ was married, than think there was nothing.

All major world religions including Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism lack any empirical or scientific foundational evidence. Why then would the CBC give this yutz a platform for challenging the non scientific foundations of a major world religion, and the religion of 75% of the Canadian population?

My goodness, Christians are tolerant, thick skinned creatures. What if CBC gave a platform to someone who's axe to grind is the inequities and antiquated ways in which women are subjugated by Orthodox Jews and Muslims? We must always question not only the content, but the motives as well.

The use of the term 'cornerstone' is questionable. Christianity, Judaism and Islam all hold beliefs in an a single, all powerful God. Christians believe in a Holy Trinity, essentially three manifestations of God, namely The Father, The Son - Jesus Christ and The Holy Spirit; which is quite different than believing in three separate Gods, a common misconception held by non Christians.

The big question I have been asking myself, based on this documentary and the "7 Days" report on The National about Christianity, plus other media articles and documentaries, is, why is the world so interested in disproving Christianity, yet so afraid to disprove other religions - or even comment on them!

If I tell others that I am a Christian, I am looked upon as small-minded and ignorant; on the other hand, if I tell others that I believe in Fen Shui and that it does make a great impact which way my bed is positioned in my bedroom, then I am enlighten and open-minded. Draw your own conclusions!

it's common knowledge there are problems in the bible. My research has indicated the Old Testament looked forward to a military leader.

The New Testament takes that plot, and distorts it into a virgin born saviour god who dies for the sins of mankind.

examine Is 7:14 where the words apply to that event, towards the distortion as Matthew applies it.

"During his research, Harpur discovered that the New Testament is wholly based on Egyptian mythology"

This wording is highly debatable: Harper "discovered" nothing. He has put forward a theory that has been around for centuries.

It is a shame that CBC promotes this pseudo-intellectual anti-scholarship. (The book, that is; I haven't seen the documentary yet.)

I hope that they give some time to real scholars, (almost?) all of whom disagree with Harpur.

Please read: Stanley E. Porter & Stephen J. Bedard, Unmasking the Pagan Christ: An Evangelical Response to the Cosmic Christ Idea (Toronto: Clements Publishing, 2006).

How absolutly wicked can you get!!!!!!
Oh when he will blow on you with his spirt there will be nothing you can do other then follow. Every true Christen knows in his heart because of the peace and joy he gives.

Interesting. The christian's main objection here seems to be that Pagan Christ is only challenging their religion. From my understanding the author takes on all religions equally.

The problem with believing is that it means one stops questioning.

I would think that if you want to make your faith stronger you would investigate and disprove any allegation that questions the veracity of your religion.

Watch the program then submit your proof, not your belief, to those of us who still have an open mind.

The reason people are exploring this issue is because Christianity/Islam/and Judaism are the only religions in the world that claim to be fact and not myth. If Jesus really did ascend to heaven, body and all, like the bible says, travelling at the speed of light he still wouldn't be out of this galaxy. It's completely absurd. There's nothing wrong with believing in it, as long as you interpret it metaphorically instead of literally. Because the science of today is one by one, disproving everything the bible says.

I think the bigger question is, does our conscience survive death.?

What if it could be proved that YOU never existed?

The program hasn't even aired yet and there are accusations flying around like crazy.

Sean in Ottawa writes "CBC airing a program like this ..let alone in December is tantamount to harassment and infringes upon my human rights as a Christian. It deeply offends me."

Airing a program like what? You haven't even seen it yet! This is just as expected, when religion is brought up, people get up in arms over nothing at all...they close their minds and their hearts, and hear only what they want to. I on the other hand will try to draw my own conclusion after tonight.

Whether or not Christ existed as a human or whether his existence on earth as a human is a myth or not, is redundant.

All religions are generational brainwashing and indoctrination by adults of their young children. Religion is merely superstition passed on in a controlled and packaged manner, through the doctrine and religious practices and symbolism of each religion.

Since there is no god or superior being, Christ was not a supernatural being; therefore the question has no value or meaning.

This is last time I will ever view or contribute toward any CBC broadcast. I'm so sad that my tax dollars go toward a public entity hell bent on discrediting Christianity. These increasingly not-so-subtle attacks masked in "free will" and "journalistic freedom" are themselves in contradiction to the very "liberties" they claim to operate within. So calculated; so one-sided; so selective; so intolerant; so desperate.

Why do you seek to destroy this gift? What's driving your fear?

I have read the book and really enjoyed it. For me it was one more piece to the puzzle.

As a person who was brought up as a Catholic, I understand how religion is inculcated at an early age. It is enforced with a carrot (heaven) and a stick (hell). It essentially becomes part of your operating system software and for most remains unquestioned.

Somewhere underneath it all though, at least for me, there was a cognitive dissonance. I spent a considerable amount of effort on trying to consolidate the omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent aspects of the christian god with reality (including old testament stories - quite horrific - , natural disasters, mass extinctions, childhood cancer) - it does not add up!! Apologists argue that we cannot understand (never mind question) a deity's ways - I say why not? Question, question, question. And do not be afraid to let the answers lead you to where they might.

I believe what is most important to recognize is that religions (all of them) are set up by and for the benefit of those setting them up. Religions are useful to the political ruling classes (particularly in the form of monarchies and dictatorships) and to the religious institutions themselves.

Nick - I agree with you - the question is does consciousness survive death - this is after all the bottom line (once you remove the temporal power issues). From the reading I've done, it appears that - mind is what the brain does. This is evidenced by the effects of brain damage. A stroke can change someone's personality; cause them to loose sight or speech or sense of taste. Alzheimer's disease victims can loose their entire personality - this clearly indicates that the personality resides in the material of the brain.

For what it's worth, I don't think there is any good evidence to show that consciousness survives death. I am certainly open to changing my mind though if the right objective evidence were to come along. Who wouldn't desperately want to believe that they will go on - that is what gives this "meme" such holding power!

One last point - believing that this life is all you will ever have is very liberating. It makes your time here more precious - not less. The software is tough to remove but the effort is worth it. Make your time count.

What a ridiculous premise for a documentary! (or should I say "crockumentary"). Any respectable historian accepts the evidence that Jesus really walked the earth. In the New Testament the apostle Paul says the if Christ did not live and die for our sins, and was resurrected again, then our faith is meaningless. This whole premise has been around for 2,000 years, and sensible people have dismissed it.

I was always taught that you could prove that something existed, but it's not possible to prove something never existed. This is a wasted exercise because it can never be proven.

Well, as a faithful Christian - I can't say that I see the need for this documentary -especially at a time when we are preparing to celebrate the most important holy day of the year.

However, people are free to discuss whatever they want in this society and I suspect that whatever outcry the CBC will receive - will be in the form of letters and people choosing not to watch. Rightly so - insensitive or not, people do have the right to explore whatever issues interest them.

I would strongly recommend a documentary about the non-existence of Mohammed in the lead-up to Rammadan and see if the reaction is as restrained and whether the documentarians have to go into hiding.

My point is that if we are going to censure ourselves out of fear of the reactions of militants and extremists, while being completely insensitve to the cultures and tradition of those who are more tolerant, we are going to end up with a rather unfortunate society.

CBC - get on that Mohammed documentary and check out Buddha too while you are at it. It is an interesting question and it would be more balanced to look at other religions too.

Of course, these will never happen as they would be preceived as racist and culturally insensitive - which they would be. How unfortunate that this same sensitivity is never applied to christianity or european cultural heritage.

What a sad state of affairs.

Tom Harpur's regurgitation of late 19th century fringe-Masonic writings has the potential to make as big a stir as the DaVinci Code's regurgitation of 1980's fringe-Masonic writings.

Fortunately for him he doesn't have living authors to sue for plagarism. His own contribution to this brand of "scholarship", if it could be called such, is mostly about marketing.

The Pagan Christ provides a comfortable ethos for Christians with torn loyalties to the faith in which they were raised yet who are equally enthralled with 20th Century Neo-Pagan and New Age concepts - but ultimately fails as Theology.

This story is a work of fiction, a concoction brewed from a sad little man's desire for attention and money. It is too bad the CBC fell for this pack of lies and have the nerve to present it as a documentary purporting to have a basis of truth to it.

It is wrong from beginning to end and is full of mis-truths, half-truths and outright fabrication. It lacks any semblance of investigative reporting and was simply an opportunity for the atheists at CBC to spend money, travel the world and bash God at the same time.

I used to be a roman catholic but have walked away from the religion. I have walked away for only one reason. I cannot call myself a catholic and see so many people suffer in third world nations. The vatican is sitting on billions of dollars, but will not make any attempt to wipe out poverty/hunger/disease in Africa and other third world countries.

I truly respect people Like Bill gates with his gates foundation he is doing much more for poverty than all the other religions combined. In my opinion he should be cannonised a saint instead of the past pope's who frankly havent done any real good for the unfortunate.

So I welcome this article by Tom Harpur. We should keep our minds open to contraversy. In my opinion if each one did a little bit for his less fortunte brother this world would be a beautiful place.

I'll come right out and say I'm an atheist. That being said, I find that there is no way to disprove whether or not there is or is not a god, it's a personal, rational, choice that led me away from my faith.

I did however, come to the conclusion after much research (historical, scientific, etc) that Jesus Christ was a real man. Whether or not he was the son of God, or just a man who tried to teach humanity the values of love, compassion and forgivness much like several wonderful scholars before him is another question best left to individual faith.

My biggest fear of religions, and the various accompanying texts, is that many of their followers believe it to be historical fact (ie; Joana and the whale, Moses, Noah, the earth was created in seven days) and thus all too often taught as historical and geological fact. I can recall my grade 10 history teacher telling the class to read the Bible because it is a history book (this guy taught history in a public high school?).

For many, intelligent design is now the new compromise to suit the faithful. The intelligent design compromise only truly serves to distort that humans, with 99 % assurance, evolved from an ancestor that resembled an ape hundreds of thousands of years ago.

Religion taught as fact only serves to distort, discredit and mask real scientific and archaeological research. Religions are certainly an influential part of human history, for better or worse, 'but any resemblance to historical fact, is pure coincidence'.

G Henry, your point about religion causing some of the world's problems is accurate. But you must remember many of mankinds great legal reasoning and democratic thinking is based upon religious ideals (Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights etc).

Also it was the the American abolitionist movement (which was which was preached from the pulpit) which brought the issue of slavery to the forefront in the USA in the 19th century.

These are two points to consider when attacking religion. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The modern humanistic mind is unwilling to believe any uncomfortable truth that connot be dissected or personally examined under the mocroscope of whatever test we prefer, but the eternal truth is that Jesus Christ walked this earth as the only begotten son of the One God and the people who were his contemporaries defied the greatest persecution in history to proclaim their belief in that Truth, the truth that they had seen and handled.

You cannot prove or disprove to the satisfaction of believers and unbelievers alike, but if you say you don't believe, just try to stop using a calendar. This everyday item proclaims in a very basic way that we all collectively believe in the existence of a very real man who lived in our frame of existence.

It's a good read and I strongly recommend that all believers read the Pagan Christ. Especially those who are having trouble believing in the status quo. In it you will find the true meaning of who we are, the spirit and flesh.

It does not say there is no God. It clarifies what the spirit is and that there is a spiritual bond between everyone and everything, and in it's totally makes God. Hence, why God is in us. It is truly a great awakening to me.

I hope that any rationale human being wouldn't justify the horrendous crimes and cruelty inflicted by the Church over the last 2000 years and the billions that have died because of religion. Religion divides. The spirit joins. If you are familiar with the term "Self Full-Filling Prophecies," then you must be able to see the ludicrousy of the Jesus story.

Watch the documentary or read the book and make up your own mind. But be certain, it sheds a new light on God and from my perspective has further enlightened my belief in the spirit.

Timing is everything. I am profoundly hurt by the insensitivity of CBC to air a program which degrades the heart of the Christian faith integrity during the holy season of Advent and approaching Christmastide. There are ten months of the year (excluding the month incorporating Easter), to air such controversial programming. To do it during a month dear to Christian holy observances is both insensitive and prejudicial.

For several years now I have tracked the almost pathological need of Canadian media agencies to raise controversial programs and articles during the approach of Christmas and Easter. When did it become acceptable to ridicule Christianity? Intellectually, I have become tired of simplistic characterizations of religion as conspiracy based, or non-factual accusations based upon simplistic conjectures and/or hollow innuendo.

Let's learn to practice some religious tolerance here, and be mature enough to be kind to those who believe. There are ten other months for such programming. Such considerate thought would manifest the acumen for sensitivity that we Canadians think we are capable of.

In reply to D. Moir:

'But you must remember many of mankinds great legal reasoning and democratic thinking is based upon religious ideals (Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights etc).'

The American style of democracy is much more closely based on the ancient Roman model of democracy, which existed long before the argued time of Christ. The Americans even went so far as to copy Roman architecture in most of their buildings and monuments. I am almost sure the Romans used the gods of the day to bless, uphold and argue their democratic values too.

In North American history, christian values were used to free slaves and oppress Native Americans as much as it is also responsible for enslaving them.

You don't need god to have values, man kind may be simply evolving.

I just finished reading 'god is not great' by Christopher Hitchens, and was pleased to see that he pointed out the damage done and empty promises of all religion, not just Christianity. It might be a better choice than this more narrowly focused documentary.

That said, no documentary or book is likely to knock the belief out of a believer. As Hitchens points out, religious believers can not be reasoned with, as they are unwilling to present a solvable thesis regarding their faith. You can not prove that something like God does not exist, any more than you can prove that he does.

For those of us who live a rational athiests, that means that Ockham's razor can prevail and we can set religion aside as an explanation for any natural phenomenon and pursue real answers. For those too frightened to face reality and ask difficult questions, religion will continue to be their life raft.

As for the poisonous results of religion, I say just look at the comments on this board. The only anger and irrational response is coming from those who espouse to be Christians, those who should be turning the other cheek. Why can't your faith survive some questions?

For those of you who decry Tom Harpur, read the book. He writes thoughtfully and carefully. You will also find Mr. Harpur does not reject Christianity, he embraces it.

Its simple.....those who are in power at the time write the history of the time. How many people in power write badly about themselves or write something that won't keep them in control over the masses? The masses needed something to believe in and they got it. (And those that didn't want it were erased).

This documentary is exactly what the world needs. Tip of the hat to the CBC for airing such a great program.

If this does infringe on your rights as a 'True Canadian', then it would be in my right to sue every retailer who plays 'Christmas' music? It's ridiculous. Besides, if Christianity actually has any real value, then what do you have to worry about?

I remember saying 'the lord's prayer' in school so does that mean it is in my rights to sue the government for forcing me to repeat such gibberish? It meant nothing to me then and it certainly means nothing to me now.

For those that have had their ignorance exploited, tune in to CBC tonight to see the other side, the truth. It's not too late to think for yourself.

There is merit to the argument that Christ was manufactured by cultural influences. Anyone who seriously wonders if Biblical texts have ever been tampered with should read "Misquoting Jesus", the story behind who changed the Bible and why. By Bart Ehrman.

Whether or not Jesus really existed, there is ample empirical evidence to suggest he did not say a lot of what is attributed to him.

I ask ALL christian these simple questions. If Jesus really existed, why won't you accept that Simcha Jacobovici actually found his bones? (as depicted in THE JESUS FAMILY TOMB)

Many Christians answer Becuase he ROSE AGAIN.

Bunk! Either he existed and died just like you and I, or he is a fabrication.

either way, he was not a GOD

J

Wow ! All these so-called Christians rising up in self righteous anger that someone should DARE to even attempt to screen another quite logical and researched alternative to the Christian "line"

Having spent many years studying Biblical history and many visits to research in Palestine and analysing the mythological source of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, there is incontroversible evidence, much taken from the Dead Sea Scrolls, which the Vatican still is hiding in it's vast repository, that repudiates the divinity of Yeshua (Jesus).

This rabbi was not born of a virgin and nowhere in the New Testament is there any reference to this. The Gospels all affirm that Jesus was born of a young woman, never a mention of an "immaculate conception", born of ordinary parents in Nazareth. Of his childhood and youth, virtually nothing is recorded, only three years of his preaching to his fellow Jews.

The Mel Gibson pornographic depiction of the crucifixion portrayed in "The Passion of the Christ" Is pure unadulterated fantasy and fiction.

For any historian conversant with the Roman method of crucifixion, the removal of the apparently dead body would have been against Roman military law. ALL persons subjected to this punishment were, by law, left on the cross for at least three days to ensure they were dead. The remains were taken down and placed in a shallow pit for wild dogs to consume. Allowing one of the three who were crucified to be removed after only three hours,was a result of a request to Pontius Pilate, by a rich businessman known as Josephus, to bury Jesus in his own tomb. This was granted and Jesus was carefully taken down, taken to the tomb where his wounds were dressed using medicinal herbs. As soon as he was well, he was taken away at night and spiritited to Egypt along with his wife, Mary Magdalene.

There is written evidence that this rabbi, Jesus, was still alive in the year 45 ad. Truly, the Catholic Church have been responsible to the greatest fraud in the last 2000 years.

The first Gospel was written about 90 years after this alleged "death". None of the disciples were anywhere near the crucifixion site. They scattered far and wide, lest they to, would be charged with sedition as was their Master.

Once again the CBC shows why it should NOT be funded publicly. To be funded by tax dollars, they should program their shows to more closely mirror society as a whole. Most recently, polls showed well over 75% of Canadians believed in God. If CBC wants to air "documentaries" going against such a large chunk of the populations' beliefs, then these fringe shows should be put on in the late night slots with the rest of the trash.

STEVE from Ontario

Sadly, you have chosen to quote A passage from "The Jewish War" by Josephus, a Romanized Jewish Historian taken from the book "Christ the King, Lord of History" by Anne W. Carroll.

I suggest that most scholars agree that the text you refer to was doctored by another hand and is a fake. (sorry!)

If you seriously seek out any physical evidence that Jesus existed, you will be disappointed. While I still beleive Jesus was likely to have been an authentic historical figure, I just don't buy any of the supernatural stuff that comes with the myths about him.

How fitting to bring about a mockumentary that seeks to disprove the foundation of Christianity just as we enter the Christmas...oops...I mean Holiday season. I take great delight in reading everyone who has done their own "empirical research" to concurr with Harpur's findings. How open minded they must be!

As a historian, Mr. or Ms. L. Day, yes the Bible can indeed be considered a history book (Old and New Testament). What many people do not comprehend is that history can be written to support or deny a certain event, or in this case person, based on analysing the same material. Yes, one can compile evidence to argue Christ did not exist; however, it cannot be proven.

The point of Christianity is that as believers we have faith in Christ, a faith by definition cannot be proved or disproved through research or scientific reasoning.

if in fact Jesus did not exist, the Holy Book is no longer holy for all the OT writers prophesied and testified to His coming. If He didn't exist the Bible is not worth a thing, for it deceived us. It may at the very most be a book of literature. No one has the logical luxury of claiming that Jesus did not exist while at the same time saying there is something meritous in the Bible and Christianity for that matter.

"The Pagan Christ" book and CBC documentary are garbage. Pure Garbage.

The evidence that Jesus existed is that the Romans who crossified and knew of his exisrtance became Christians. That is the correct history.

It is disgusting that CBC is attacking its viewers, Christians, Jews and Muslims That is what the book and the program is all about.

Jeremy, what does the use of a calendar have to do with believing in the Christian Myth?

Well, kudos to the CBC and Mr Harpur for at least putting together a 60 min documentary. God only knows (no pun intended) that it needed so many more hours of broadcast material.

My life changed when I read 'The Pagan Christ" and Harpur's follow up book.

I even wrote to Harpur's webmaster a few months ago, but was gently reprimanded to keep going to the (Roman Catholic) weekly Mass as I would still get something out of it. No such luck. I'm gay because I was made this way (thanks, God) but I have very little to believe in anymore, and as my Father gets progressively closer to death, I am searching. For something.

thanks,
Bruce

I can hardly believe it. I am watching a Canadian Broadcasting Company ( a public tax payer network) program The Pagan Christ a one hour documentary.
The first half is terrible, one could not imagine something more sacriligous.No Christian presence except showing Holy places as if they are made up.

Oh good ,it is going to give the Christian side it looks like for the second half hour.OOPs! the Christian side of the story is weak with Tom Harpur and a Timothy Freke still making enraging comments (for me).

The Jesus figure stands for the higher self says Tom Harpur. The virgin birth is that new birth inside each of us, well ..Come Lord Jesus truly to any one in sincerity who is misled by this.

That Tom Harpur is a practising Anglican priest shows how far they have gone. It is not surprizing 400,000 Anglicans want to become Catholics. Let them in, they are do not deserve this.

As for the CBC oh man, this is really bad, bad, bad, awfully horribly bad.

As many readers of the CBC website will notice a facade of "freedom of expression" is being excercised. However being from europe and have lived trough the nazi regime and ideology that destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives I must make my voice heard.

This is not freedom of expression. The CBC has comitted the same violation of religious respect that the Jews suffered in nazi Germany. It is wrong and un-excuseable to run these stories leading up to the christian holidays. Never in human history was calling in question the fundamentals of another faith ever precieved as dialouge.

If someone is an atheist he will have to explore the core beliefs of why he chooses his ideology. Not an explonation of why someone elses religion is fundementally flawed. Sorry but this is outright racisim and a violation of human rights. Human rights takes the premise of freedom of belief and worship of one's own choosing. The breakdown of european society in the nazi era was to "allow" and publicise the platform of a anti-semetic group.

These papers and media outlets were proven guilty of aiding a murderous regime dissimenating their campaign of ideology. So what is the CBC doing today? Sadly I know, and don't expect my comments to appear anytime soon on your website. I suppose the "moderator" will see it in his best interest to look the other way, hit the delete button, a reaction of too many fine people I witnessed as others were dragged away on the streets of Berlin.

Maybe it is time for those who are willing to believe anything others tell them, be it in a church, synagogue or on the street, start searching history for answers rather than follow a Religion that has only been concocted to control the masses. I'm sure they will learn most of the real answers are not in the Religious texts they swear by so faithfully. After all, why would you have a Jewish Spirituality with headquarters in the country that steam rolled the Jewish empire 2000 years ago (Rome-Italy)? If Jesus was so against Romans, why do they claim Christianity. Christians get a grip. Your Creator gave you a brain----use it.

I'm not sure why this raises any controversy at all. While a man may have existed with the name he did not come from a supernatural birth. Even if he was what the myths proclaim he should surely be embarrased by the intolerance, ignorance and superstition he spawned.

It's interesting that someone said that science is disproving religion. I find science proves there was a Creator.

Science says you can't get something out of nothing, so it can't determine where all this matter came from.

Science has laws of gravity & magnetic attraction and can't calculate the first couple nano-seconds of the Big Bang, yet it still happened. (According to science.)

And science said that the first thing to happen was an explosion of photons, which are light particles. The first thing the Bible says is, "Let there be light, and there was light."

There's masses of stuff that science has found that point to a Creator. From the distance the earth is from the sun and how that specific distance only can support life to how complex a single cell is.

We can argue as to what parts of the Bible are poetic stories: myths to tell a tale, and what parts are fact. Archeologists have found some of the cities that are mentioned in the Bible and never thought to have existed. But can you still prove that Jericho's walls fell down by the people walking around the walls blowing a trumpet?

Jesus discussed showing grace to others, even if they don't deserve it. I know there are days that I don't, but still appreciate it. Could you imagine what this world was like if people actually loved each other and didn't barf their agitation & stress all over each other? Yeah, Christians aren't necessarily known for looking after the poor etc. But we do it; we just tend not to brag about it. And the media hates those stories so the good stuff Christians do can get unnoticed. The bad stuff is the stuff that gets aired on TV. From what I understand Asian muslims are very peaceful. But we only hear about the terrorists. Personally, I think the media does a terrible job in showing the positive side of just about anything. So we probably shouldn't get our knickers in a knot if CBC is trying to disembowel Christianity. Can you really expect any less?

Thanks, CBC, for daring to air something controversial. It's never a bad thing to examine or re-examine one's faith, or that of others. Like those below, I agree that being fair might require one to examine other religions as well.

On the Harpur front: I've read the book. I've read a few pro and a few con arguments, both scholarly, secular mass-market, and Christian (whether academic Christian or fundamentalist rebuttals). In short, the jury is, as ever, out on the issue of the nature of Jesus of Nazareth.

Was he real? I think so. Can I prove it? No (and the mention of contemporary scholars is difficult at best--most only mention the Christian *faith,* not Jesus, and the trouble it caused Rome, being Romans themselves or Greeks).

I would, however, really appreciate one thing from both the CBC and those of us who post here occasionally. Let's try and actually debate the matter, without descending into baseless assertions. If you think Harpur's full of it, then by all means, say so--but more importantly, say why, without simply re-asserting the point or quoting scripture without context. It's not good argument. Similarly the other side. As I've mentioned, I've read both scholarly and less scholarly commentary on Harpur--often, however, the response from the non-academic Christian is to scream fire and brimstone, instead of actively responding and questioning the other side. No major issue is decided permanently, especially with screaming--it just makes people recoil.

So. To those who have thus far argued eloquently or been challenged to think on the subject, Christian or non-Christian, thanks for the comments. To the others, I'd love to read your intelligent commentary. And before you go tearing my own head off or calling me a hypocrite:

I'm a Christian myself. I do think Harpur's got a point--much of the data I've read on the subject indicates that a lot of the Christ story is re-hashed mythology from other cultures (Mithras, Horus, and others all had virgin births, died, and were born again, among many other stories). Does Harpur fail in some respects? Yes--his citations are not as precise as I might like as an academic (something he tries to defend himself against), and he doesn't definitively prove that Jesus wasn't real--only that, like many figures, stories became attributed to him that may or may not have been stories about the man himself. Similarly, he makes a big leap that similar names in different languages = the same place (Beth Anu in Egyptian where Horus rose a dead man, to Bethany in Aramaic where Jesus rose Lazarus). That said, the point's been well made elsewhere that some of the Roman Christians took deliberate steps to make the religion mainstream (see the Saturnine/Christmas feast's history, or that of Samhain/All Saint's Day/Hallowe'en), or to produce texts to support their perspective that may or may not have been accurate.

An interesting point Harpur raises is the issue of historical data, in the book: the closer one gets to just about every major figure, the more data and the more accurate data we get about him or her--the Prophet Mohammed, for example, had a lot of contemporary information written about him, and mythologies gradually sprung up as time passed. So too Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Paul, Buddha, and others.

Jesus is an odd distortion of that pattern: the closer we get to the Nazarene's birth, the less actual hard facts we have. The further from his lifetime, the more facts get added in. Hence, Harpur's concern that the Jesus story may not be entirely truth has, at least, some traction--what's true and what's myth is hard to determine at times.

All in all, an interesting book. Do I agree with it? No, but then, do I think that means I must burn it or condemn CBC for asking questions? No. The timing (i.e., Christmas season) is definitely awkward, so I sympathize with those who wrote below that they were being attacked-- I doubt that was CBC's intent, since the goal of any corporate organization is profit-maximization, and the best time to boost ratings and therefore profits for a Christian-themed documentary is when? Christmas!

Perhaps some more subtle timing would be appropriate (the comment about a similar movie on Mohammed during Ramadan is particularly apt!), but other than that, again, thanks to the CBC and those below who've contributed to intelligent debate about faith and the Christian faith.

Im glad im a tax payer tonight..Its about time for CBC to teach some real history on religion..Hopefully it will shock a few people into reality .

I just finished watching Harpur's 'documentary' and was shocked to see Harpur in a Christian Church, singing Christmas Carols, watching the Christmas play, claiming that he is still a Christian, after his hour-long tyrade denying that Jesus even existed!!! Can we say... inconsistancy... boys and girls? Harpur sold his soul for a few pieces of silver. How sad.

Harpur's scholarship is poor, erroneous, biased, and self-serving. Unfortunately the CBC did not offer strong scholarly counter- arguements to Harpur's falacious monologue. There is a new fundamentalism in our country and it is called secularism which Harpur has totally bought into. The four gospels were written before the end of the first century (all biblical scholars are in agreement here)... Emperor Constantine didn't write them in the 4th century... in other words... Constantine didn't cook Jesus up... there was no conspiracy as Harpur insinuates.

As a "Christian" Mr. Harpur, you will be judged at the end of your life by God. Misleading believers from Jesus who is the Way, Truth and Life is a very serious sin and you will be both responsible and culpible for your choices and decisions in this life.

How sad that we had to endure this conscious attack on Christianity and Jesus the Christ just days before the feast of Christmas. I hope the CBC remembers that Canada still is predominantly a Christian country and that its citizens will not put up with this kind of attack time and time again.

Imperical evidence, that is what most seek and the typical, institutional christian church cannot provide those answers or evidence. All they DEMAND is a blind faith in what THEY tell you.

Many historians have issues with whether "jesus" ever existed. They even have issues, as shown below in several observations made by others, with whether Nazareth even existed at the time of Jesus' "birth".

No "ancient historians or geographers mention [Nazareth] before the beginning of the fourth century [CE].

Nazareth is not mentioned in the Old Testament, the Talmud, nor in the Apocrypha and it does not appear in any early rabbinic literature.

Nazareth was not included in the list of settlements of the tribes of Zebulun (Joshua 19:10-16) which mentions twelve towns and six villages

Nazareth is not included among the 45 cities of Galilee that were mentioned by Josephus (37AD-100AD).

Nazareth is also missing from the 63 towns of Galilee mentioned in the Talmud.

If Nazareth, as a town, isn't mentioned in contemorary narratives of the period, in parallel discourses to that of the bible, which is more accurate? The MANY instances of the lack of Nazareth's inclusion in contemporary historical texts or the bible?

If Nazareth didn't really exist at the time of "jesus'" birth, did "jesus" even exist?

There are many holes in the history of "jesus" in the bible. Even the new testaments aren't credited with existing before, at the EARLIEST, 70 years after Jesus' "death". And that is giving the widest possible latitude in dates that the testaments were written.

The first historical mention of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, was made by the Christian Father, St. Irenaeus, about the year 190 A.D. The only earlier mention of any of the Gospels was made by Theopholis of Antioch, who mentioned the Gospel of John in 180 A.D.

The First Council of Nicaea, in 325 CE (hosted by that famous pagan "convert" Constantine the Great), was the first real attempt to create a uniform christian doctrine. Almost 300 years after "jesus' death".

Are we just supposed to accept that the "bible" is actually "history" at face value and not ask questions that are so out there, begging to be asked?

By the tone of most responses, the answer would seem to be a resounding YES?

Worried about fundamentalism in the world folks? Have a look in the mirror!

I am not bashing christianity folks, I am just highlighting the glaring HOLES that one could drive a truck through, and these are just simple ones that don't even ask the questions the documentary does.

After all these glaring holes, asking the questions this documentary does just makes sense.

It saddens me to see a program like this on during Advent, a holy time in the Christian Year.

The CBC has used this holy time to sensationalize their story. It's too bad that they cannot do a show on all the good works that have been done in the name of Christianity.

Imagine the words flying if this was said about the Muslim religion during Rammadon. It would be considered an attack on their human rights and an attack on their religion.

Merry Christmas to all!!

Faith is faith. Don't let research or learned speculation get in the way.

Frankly I like Harpur's exercise if only that it affirms for me that, whether Jesus of Nazareth lived, spirituality (even that of The Christ) is available to any who seek it.

Wow, what an enlightening film, i've always been a huge believer in altruism and empathy, Jesus' main doctrines. though it has always disturbed me that people need a reason to be good people, as in the wrath of god or the dissappointment of Jesus.

The idea of gods/god, is just mans excuse/reasoning, for the mysteries of the universe, i think it is far nobler to let oneself float on whims of mystery than it is to attune false reasoning to mysterious effects.

I am a little dissappointed with the selection of "scholars" -I use the term loosely, the CBC decided to site in this documentary. Surely there were more reliable sources than the vague and contradicting views of Mr. Freke and Mr. Gandy. The fact that Jesus was a man who "walked the dusty roads of Palestine" and who was crucified on a cross is probably the most evidenced event in history. To say otherwise is quite damning to your credibility.

An interesting read that has just come out is The Case For The Real Jesus by Lee Strobel. Deals with all of these issues of mystery religions and gnostic gospels.

This documentary has certainly set one heck of fire under some people. I am truly delighted. Every time someone attacks Tom Harper's documentary/book through either their ignorance or blind faith I only pray that a few more copies fly off the shelf.

If you are open minded and fed up with money grabbing evangelicals, radical and intolerant church leaders, religious zealotry, literalists, apologetics, Christian and Muslim fundamentalism, and the growing hypocrisy of institutional religion (more concerned with either spreading their religion through terrorism of the mind / body or building and maintaining churches - than truly helping humanity) - please read the book. 'The Pagan Christ' is not an attack on Christianity, it is an attempt to 'right the record' and give a deeper and far more meaningful spirituality to human kind. Go the library and borrow this book or buy this book asap!

Many posts talk about Tom Harper simply trying to ply new age humanism for personal gain. They don't have a clue what they are talking about. Those who make such ridiculous assertions are the same kind of people that probably think Al Gore is milking the environmental movement for his own personal gain and that global warming is psuedo-scientific poppy-cock. Harper is a very thoughtful man sharing his long religious journey, ultimately attempting to make the world a better place.

This is NOT A CONSPIRACY theory - this as a fairly compelling attempt to de-mystify early Christianity. This is the complex unfolding of a long buried history. The similarities between gnostic belief and pre-Christian Egyptian myth is a little too close for comfort for orthodox Christians - and so it should be - they would rather have us believe that Christianity was created in a giant vacuum; a sort of religious 'big bang theory' with little or no connections to the past - and they want to keep it that way.

Unfortunately for traditionalists, we are coming closer and closer to the real organic foundations of Christianity (with every archeological dig) - and its nothing to be afraid of. And by the way - Harper does not take personal credit for these findings - he makes every effort in his book to credit Alvin Boyd Kuhn and Gerald Massey (and others) for their pioneering work in this field.

The documentary and the book are no threat to Christianity - they the very opposite - they are road-maps to it's very survival!

Remember Nicolaus Copernicus, that self-serving psuedo-astronomer who arrogantly articulated that the Sun was the centre of the Universe. Here is what he had to say to one of his critics (Lactantius) 1543:
-Perhaps there will be babblers who claim to be judges of astronomy although completely ignorant of the subject and, badly distorting some passage of Scripture to their purpose, will dare to find fault with my undertaking and censure it. I disregard them even to the extent of despising their criticism as unfounded. For it is not unknown that Lactantius, otherwise an illustrious writer but hardly an astronomer, speaks quite childishly about the Earth's shape, when he mocks those who declared that the Earth has the form of a globe. Hence scholars need not be surprised if any such persons will likewise ridicule me. Astronomy is written for astronomers.

As for the CBC airing this documentary before Christmas! Bravo.

Have you lost your heads????

Regardsless of your beliefs to question weather a man from Nazerath named Jesus existed, is unlearned. And these "scholars" are historical and agonostic disadents would not and have never been excepted in any proper form of debate.

Even Muslims know that Jesus existed. Now if you want to question a religous figure you should really look into Mr. Mohammad. You don't have the guts. You polictically correct wimps!!!

Come on now lets be fair.

Jesus Christ is the most Proveable character in history . Maybe you should have some proper apologists rather than these crack pots.

Also before Christmas?? Come on that is no scheduling accident.

Shame on you guys.
The CBC has a reportation as a world class documentary show, with no bias.

The arguements presented are nothing new or new revelation. these arguements have been dismissed in the 1st & 2nd centuries.

You guys are going down hill fast, Maybe Jerry Springer would like a follow up show!!!!

I question why these e-mails have to be approved by your board, so much for an open forum,

Too bad you don't have the same thinking in your documentaries. I look forward to my previous e-mail being posted.

Hey folks - Harpur is rehashing long discredited pseudo-research. Notice that the whole presentation is manipulated by the directorial eye to eschew any proper examination of the sources.

The "authors" (of the caliber of Dan Brown) whose retelling of history would be laughed out of any history course at a secular university have their frankly WRONG facts bolstered by clever graphics and music.

Unfortunately, this is one more example of how the bias of anti-Catholicism when wedded to the consistent avoidance of any intellectual rigour ends up profoundly unsatisfying.

Who cares if Tom Harpur is "convinced of the ... metaphorical reading of Christianity"? There are a thousand web pages where uninformed or poorly informed folks are convinced of lots of wacky stuff. None of this bears the weight of any scholarship ... but unfortunately folks think that faith is simply a personal leap into belief in any thing that they wish. So Elvis Presley, UFOs and Jesus Christ all are interchangeable.

In actual fact - responsible reason and Christianity have resulted in the western heritage in which we share. No wandering personal sentiment or metaphorical fantasy could have produced such a legacy. Christian faith been such a trans-cultural and trans-historical communal effort that what is remarkable is the common agreement of Christians after so many years. There is an ancient belief that reason (and scholarship) is essential to the process.

Harpur's arrogance is that he has discovered something "hidden"? Take a number Tom, there have been a long litany of such folks who feel that their insight is actually the truth for all. There books end up in the bargain bin.

Why are my tax dollars being used to support such shoddy rapportage? Airing this programme on December 8 - the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception is a deliberate slight. Would CBC do a programme on the "mythological orgins" of Islam for Ramadan? I doubt it.

I haven't made a habit of writing to papers or contributing in online forums, but I've decided to start to speak up. I finished watching the documentary about 20 minutes ago.

Im saddened that my dollars have gone into putting that on the air at this time of year. How hypocritical is it of the CBC to cut and edit portions of the documentary on Falun Gong in fear of drawing the ire of the Chinese, but have no qualms in stepping on the beliefs and values that founded this great nation.

We must ask the questions, why this program, why now? What is on the overall agenda? Another reader made an awesome point when she said to try doing if with Muhammed before Ramadan, and see about the response. It would be considered biggoted and racist, yet they see it as totally okay to smear Christianity.

I have been a born again believer for 18 months, and a taxpayer for years. Freedom of speech is a fundamental part of our society, and I don't see anything wrong with that man putting his viewpoint out there, I can choose to disregard it. But when it is promoted so shamelessly on our "Public Broadcaster" is when I take offence.

CBC, I'm just a young adult and won't make an impact by myself on the giant you are, but you've turned me off. It's a shame that in a way, you represent me as a Canadian.

I just finished watching this program. Why does the CBC insist on airing this garbage? I wonder how many people will be duped into believing it without question, when there is no serious contention that Jesus did not exist? I am thankful that he is still alive, and has always been so. His opponents will learn of this, soon enough. It's better to come to the truth before death rather than after, of course.

Knowing these same facts that this wonderful documentary presented is why the Christian academics who wrote and published Encyclopedia Brittanica in 1768 wrote many pages about Mohammed but nothing of a christ or Jesus: They needed to stick to the facts to be credible and every major academic institution taught that Mark and Luke fashioned the character that Constantine later refined.

Both Greece and Rome were desparate for a "major position" in the emerging world of monotheism happening at that time and so the stories were written in a way to ensure that Hebrew monotheism would be an unnatractive alternmative, as it asked its community to continually challenge their Rabbis and elevate women -- threats to both Greek and Roman strategies.

The finest journalists of today, when writing a biography go to whom? They go to those who knew the individual the most, and they go to the eye-witnesses. Take into account the biographies of great Prime Ministers and Presidents. The significance of the gospels is that we have the benefit of reading the accounts of not just one, but many different authors who were there at the time of Christ.

Re: journalists of today, check out Lee Strobel's (Chicago Tribune reporter) website. He, like atheist C.S. Lewis, tried to disprove Christ, but became a follower (see leestrobel.com).

Some three years ago, a CBC correspondant for the "National" spoke about real Christ followers at the site of natural and war disasters. Every where he went to report on disasters, there were already effective Christ-followers who on the ground with Christ-like compassion before he got there.

The first three hundred years A.D., there was a perpetual effort to cover up the claims about Jesus. Jesus claims that he was God, his countless miracles of the deaf, lame, blind, the resurection of dead people and reinforced his claims by his own resurrection. The Apostle Paul writes that more than 500 people (1 Corinthians 15) witnessed the resurrected Christ - the Apostle Paul writes, "...most of whom are still living today." He writes this as if to say, "Go ahead and ask the ones who saw it - it's true!"

What about the eye witnesses? Why would people not only die, but be brutally tortured for their testimony?
His disciples all died of torture because of their claims (except for John who had his eyes gouged out and died in prison). Early disciples, Stephen, one of the early witnesses of Christ, was martyred by Saul (who soon later had a theophany of Christ and "came to faith" on the road to Damascus). He actually became a follower of Christ, and brought Christianity to Europe after many beatings (being left for dead multiple times).

Today, the reports are that people are encountering the risen Christ around the world like never before. More have become believers in the last 100 years than all centuries before. In 1900 5% of Africa was Christian - now over 50%. In the 1950s the communists took over the Christian hospitals, seminaries, etc. in China, kicked out and tortured thousands. The communists tried to suppress. Today, there are reports of 100 million). Seven of the top ten-sized churches in the world are -guess where? South Korea. Latin America had great revivals in the 1980s (hundreds of millions putting faith in Christ).

Check out what Christ said himself. There are many "voices" and "experts" out there on both sides making claims. Don't interpret through someone else's eyes without even checking the facts out yourself.
See the New Testament Gospel of John or Matthew, Mark, Luke). See 1 Corinthians 15 (re: resurrection)

Extra-biblical early writers close to first century AD: Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin, Josephus, Origen
Jesus Christ is an undeniable fact.

This is just an absolute joke. Why is it that the CBC is spending tax payer $$$ on this? Why not create a documentary on Mohammed? Why is it always so anti-Christ?

Looks like freedom of religion only exists for other faiths, those other than Christianity...but the CBC and other media always make it a point to bash those who follow Jesus Christ.

CBC... I have to hand it to ya, you pull this stunt at a Holy time of the year, yet again. Can't wait till Lent when you start this nonsense yet again. How do I hold back whatever percentage of my tax dollars you get????

A nice attempt to disprove Christianity, but in fact, the documentary only reinforces the fact of Christ's existance. As the ancient profits forsaw Christ's birth, life, death and ressurection...so, the ancient mystics of Egypt also forsaw the events which would eventually lay the foundations of today's Western Civilization...the greatest civilization of all time. Thank you for this stimulating show.
Now please, lets have some critique of Mohammed.

Seems Harper has been peeking at Joseph Campbell's work - among that of others. Egypt - the mythological or metapforical literal versus symbolic interpretation of common religious forms and personalities goes even further back to rgw supoposedly Greek Zoroaster or Zarathustra (Avestan: Zaraθu�tra), also referred to as Zartosht (Persian: زرتشت Zarto�t; Kurdish: Zerduşt), an ancient Iranian (Persian) prophet.

The hymns attributed to him, the Gathas, are at the liturgical core of Zoroastrianism. The alleged date/s for this variation on the them cover at least a thousand and by some two thousand years, but again, all the classical symbols are there - as believe it or not, they are in South America with Quatzacoatl worshipped by the indigenous peoples there to such an extent that the Mormon's founder assumed the only way these people could have know about such things was by an appearance by Christ there.

And so it goes with such things...if it works for you, go with it. If not, try another approach to , for want of better words: spirituality, humanity, enlightenment, etc.

JFR

Sometimes, an institution or agency does something so remarkably transparent that it eliminates all doubt as to its beliefs and motives. The airing of the pseudohistory "The Pagan Christ" during the Christmas season is such a moment of clarity for Canadians.

The meaning of this self-serving, divisive decision is self-evident: the CBC is a secular-progressive institution that seeks to mock Canadian Christians and undermine the basis for their beliefs. Moreover, the inconvenient reality that CBC is generously funded by all Canadians makes this network's editorial decision all the more disquieting.

Every Canadian that believes in religious tolerance should call or write their MP for this reason alone. My message to CBC is as follows: choose to represent every Canadian, or go private. You do not deserve to receive my tax dollars.

My comment isn't for the film itself, but for the people commenting on the film. I have read many comments of angry and annoyed people saying how they wish that CBC plays similar documentaries on Islam and Hinduism, etc.

As well there are those who appear to be outright enraged and disgusted with the CBC for showing a film that discredits the very foundation of Christianity. But my question to you people (and I'm not saying you don't have a right to your opinions) is if they show other documentaries similar to this one but for other major and minor world religions, would you have the same feelings? Seeing as CBC would then be treating everyone equally (in time).

And on the other side, if this film hadn't been played, and instead a film about how Jesus (Muhammad, Moses, whoever) did exist, would you have then praised the CBC for playing it instead of shunning it?

And I do ask that you don't respond with anything like 'the CBC would never do that' or 'the CBC is to left/liberal to play other sides' or anything like that. Because a) you don't know if they will or they won't, only they do. And b) that's not an answer to the questions I asked.

Thanks for reading

Congratulations.

A thoughtful and well crafted documentary with great cinematography.

I'm sure that the zealous, christian fundamentalists will come shreaking out of the woodwork to castigate Mr. Harpur and the CBC. Good.

The easily predicatble controversy will encourage more people to see the program and, perhaps, give them pause to think about the foundations of their faith and why they believe what they believe.

I am proud of the CBC for airing this documentary, particularly in December.

Recently, on ABC's "The View", one of the co-hosts, a rather conservative Christian, was confused about history. She seemed to think that nothing pre-dated the appearance of Jesus on Earth. (How she reconciles the Old Testament with this belief system, we're not sure, but there it is.) (See: http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=Ckb0Pwfpkbc ) It boggles my mind that her religious education is so sorely lacking despite her fervent belief in said religion.

I figure that anything you can learn about the religion you follow is meaningful. I think a lot of what is taught in some churches is revisionist. I think it is critically important to learn about who actually wrote the Bible, who the Gnostics were and why their gospels were not canonized, learn about the incredible violence between Christian factions prior to the Nicene Council, about the concept of satan (how it started out as an *idea* along the lines of "but for the grace of God, there go I") and how there are a plethora of pagan gods who have similar life stories to Jesus Christ's. It makes no sense to me that people who make religion so much a part of their lives wouldn't be willing to actually learn about it. Is their faith so flimsy it can only survive in ignorance?

I encourage people to do their own research into an important period of history that has profoundly shaped our modern world. Watching this documentary gives them a place to start. For this reason alone the documentary is valuable and I applaud CBC's decision to air it.

Gee! Jesus never lived. Then how is it that he has revealed Himself to me and so many others? How is it that He answers the prayers and directs the steps of so many?
This Program is arrogant rubbish!

Perhaps Josephus (an ancient independent witness of the life and death of Jesus). Perhaps the Roman Emperors who slaughtered so many never existed. And, perhaps all those terminally ill people I have seen recover were not really healed in His name?

If you think Muslims get outraged when you print cartoons about Mohammed just wait until you see what is coming your way!

This is not intellectual questioning or the pursuit of "Truth". This is intellectual RAPE of the first order. Regrettably, CBC, you have simply allowed your station to become a diabolical mouthpiece for Satan and his AntiChrist.

Look to your souls, brother and sisters, while you can! For without a living Christ, you will NOT enter into the Kingdom of God. The Words of Jesus have echoed throughout history to every man of good will. They will never fail.

Sadly, these "scholars" who have published this documentary are not men of good will.

They are curse and barren of heart. They will find no hope for their lives or for eternity. I expect that "common men" will turn their backs on such hopeless rubish.

Such brazen dishonesty takes my breath away. I challenge the makers of this drivel to debate Todd Bentley of Abbotsford, CA to prove whether Jesus is Alive!

This New Age ONENESS is nothing less than the Spirit of AntiChrist predicted in the Scriptures. If you value your Liberty, you will oppose this wickedness.

I'm happy with the thought that 'God created evolution and man to interpret it in many different ways, and then fight/argue over who's right.' Won't it be ever thus?

My opinion is that undeniable proof of God would have to be found through some kind of psychology... Science may one day prove that Jesus Christ (the man) existed... But this doesn't undeniably prove that this man was God... Science may one day prove that Jesus Christ (the physical being who rose from the dead, split the sea, etc.) existed... but this also doesn't undeniably prove that this physical being was God... This may just as likely prove that aliens exist, and that they have a nasty sense of humour.

God does exist... However, if God just exists in the minds of those who choose to believe... or if God exists in the minds of all humans (and/or living things), I'll flip a coin...

Quiz Time:
A. The Bible is true and you live for Him
B. The Bible is not true and you live for Him
C. The Bible is true and you don't live for Him
D. The Bible is not true and you don't live for Him.

Answer Guide
A - Welcome you good and faithful servant!
B - Doesn't matter - society thanks you.
C - Depart from me, I never knew you!
D - Doesn't matter.

Which one will you wager eternity on?

God, I hate the CBC anymore. It's just sensationalism masquerading as sincere journalism.

Here I thought you needed at least a basic undergraduate degree to get any kind of respectable job these days. I guess the CBC wiaves the educational requirement when hiring their executives.

I appreciate that my tax dollars funds your organization; I hope next year you decide to put more money towards university tuition for your staff.

I don't even need to get into the absurdity of this documentary and a good 80% of the respondents. There is simply no hope for redemption here.

Tom Harpur be praised for his courage to publish the result of his investigation. If believers like it or not , is not relevant. It`s the "truth" or more accurate, the "search for truth" that counts. Harpur has mainly assembled opinions which have been around for a long time.

He is good scholar and theologian and I will certainly read his book.

CBC : I like your Doc. Zone.

Well, I just watch the documentary last night, and I can't say it has shaked my faith in any way. It just seemed like another cry of 'conspiracy conspiracy!' and with very little information at all, they did not give any quotes (at least none that I can remember) to any ancient texts all they did was make some allusions to the four gospels and Josephus.

Also another thing I found quite dissappointing, that the documentary gave the impression that there were other gods who had virgin births... this simply is not true at all. The Greek and Roman gods (which they were probably refering too) all had supernatural births according to the stories, no question, but none had a virgin birth, just check out the stories for yourself, not the summary of the story by other people.

I do plan to read the book too see if there is any real weight to the argument, but the documentary was very weak.

As an atheist, I find it amusing that Tom Harpur is being attacked by his fellow christians because he chooses to experience and write about his beliefs in a different way than prescribed by mainstream religion.

I don't see how this documentary is an attack on christianity, from my perspective it promotes it.

Hey Maureen right on. The route to higher enlightenment is the fact that the teaching of Jesus and God is a pathway to our inner self.

Tom Harper is a believer if you really listened to his side of the documentary. He in fact is far more religious because of his own questioning of the bible and its' historical accuracy. Of course we are not going to believe in the fairy tale stories such as Johnah and Whale, verbatim; they are meant as illustrations, how we can resolve problems and realize a more humanistic approach to any given situation. Without belief we have no HOPE.

Thank you CBC for your doc now on to the other religions. Let's face it we need all sides right?

I am troubled by the lack of understanding of the people who chose to broadcast this show. They need to realize that to many people, their faith is a deep and personal treasure. Their faith and belief system go to very core of who they are. To broadcast such a show that calls into doubt all they believed in, can be very unsettling, and deeply hurtful.

I am trying to understand why the CBC would engage in such a "intellectual" argument on something so personal and dear to some many people. Why would it matter to a non-believer if Jesus existed? I hope they would not do a similar program on Islam.

I hope that my email may be helpful to some who find it hard to understand why Christians would be so offended by the program

Practically all historical records of the literal son-of-god Jesus are 2nd hand accounts. The texts that talk about him while he was actually alive can be summed up in a few sentences.

Surely, in this time period of unprecedented record keeping, journal entries and historical documentation, there would be at least 1 description of this man who performed miracles on a daily basis, healed the sick and crippled, turned water into wine, fed thousands off a small bit of food, and so infuriated the Roman empire.

But no... only a few passing references to a man named Jesus, one of the more common names of the time. Most documentation Christians now use as their "proof", miraculously turned up only after Constantine decided it was to be the official religion and needed proof to warrant that claim, even though others had scoured the same sources for centuries previous. This tells me that either a)Jesus was a regular man who didn't really perform any miracles, or b) didn't exist at all, but was created as a figurehead after the fact. Either one has no bearing on my life, as it is the teachings that are meant to be remembered more than the teacher.

There is hardly an original thought in the New Testament. Almost all stories, miracles and teachings can be seen throughout all the previous Pagan beliefs that preceded it. Some are taken almost word for word from Egyptian texts written thousands of years earlier. Early Christian apologetics like Justin Martyr had to continuously claim Satan "foresaw" the events, and created those earlier beliefs just to confuse people, since the similarities were so obvious. If only copyright law worked like that today!

At their cores though, the teachings of the NT, Pagan and Gnostic mysteries are beautiful stories. I personally don't believe anything is to be taken literally, but that doesn't stop me from reading the Bible, Gnostic gospels or other ancient religious teachings to enrich my life today.

Thank you CBC for this film.

This just reaffirmed my believe that science and faith can and should be separated. Science should be shared, while faith should be kept close to and within yourself.

Sadly the spread of organized religion has created more suffering and pain than it has cured.

Having been an agnostic for many years, this neither proves or disproves my beliefs. I am waiting for proof, not just some writing of men a couple of thousand years ago. Most men write what they want or think others want to hearor to make themselves look big and important in others eyes.

This was a good doc but leaves many questions unanswered. We will likely never fully know the truth with so much information being destroyed.

Tom Harpur's Report was so biased it is unbelievable and who were the other people who evaulated Christ on the report? Where does their credability come from?

I have talked to many research historians at the University of Western Ontario in London who give a contrary report to your findings.

You never provided balanced reports on CBC - you tend to give one side to a situation. Very cowardess!! Why don't you talk to Lee Strobel "A Case for Christ" about his research as a journalist on whether Christ existed. Your credability as journalist just went down the tube for me and my family. Last time we watch CBC!! Bye Bye

Timing is everything - would you tear apart
Mohammed at the Moslems holy time of Ramadan? Yet you choose to rip a part our saviour and Messiah because unlike other factions in the world we will not convict you for your wrong doings. The world will not put up with a bear being called Mohammed but you feel very free encouraging the thought that our Christ never existed.

By the way we didn't really land on the moon and Churchill never lived and I saw Elvis at Burger King!!

The documentary was an eye opener for many, but after reading several posts here today I see that there are many people who would rather bury there heads in the sand than open their minds to historical fact.

The book was well written and relied on published history that is available to all whom wish to learn the history of their religion. It is amazing how many people have written in their comments without actually doing any personal research, other than repeating what they have been told since childhood. Tom Harper began his quest due to personal research and, though raised with a belief system held by a third of the world population, was able to be open minded and look at historical fact.

I find it amusing how many people, including leading Christian teachers, disregard any history before the time of "Jesus" and ignore what led to Christianity, calling it circumstance. How can something that existed long before be considered circumstance? The fact alone that December 25 was celebrated as a "pagan" holiday thousands of years before the arrival of the gospels should make one consider the obvious: that religion either repeats what has come before or copies it in a new form that is digestible to those needing guidance and faith. I do not believe in "God" nor in "Jesus" as pertaining to the New Testament. But I do believe that behind the knowledge or gnosticism of the time two thousand years ago, teaching one to believe in themselves and in their own Christos or spirit was looked down upon by those in charge of religion. Only due to the fact that they would lose their flock, in turn losing out on the payments accrued by believers. If "Jesus" was alive now he would cringe at the notion of how many churches expect to be paid for services rendered.

"Let US make man in OUR image" God said.

"Let US confound the language of man so that they won't understand..."

For those who wish to know the truth, it is out there, but then that would mean giving up on a system of belief that gets you through the day.

THANK YOU CBC! What a wonderful show.

Either Zoroastrianism or the Worship of Ra through the Aten (sun disc) are arguably the FIRST monotheistic religions in the world.

It is pretty much a dead heat with respect to which of the above came first.

Surprisingly, the followers of the "book" don't enter into the picture at all, with repect to whether judaism was, in fact, the first monotheistic religion in the world.

With this fact in mind, it is certainly plausible that the followers of the "book" incorporated ideas/concepts/practices of other religions into their theology (principally the monotheistic aspect), as other religions have done for thousands of years.

Christianity took the entire old testament of Judaism, Mosaic Law and a host of other beliefs and customs, in addition to adding new testaments to the old belief structure.

Strictly speaking, christianity isn't a "new" religion, it is a sect of Judaism, not a stand alone religion with beliefs that are independent/stand alone.

If Jesus (Jeshua actually) existed, he was a practicing jew, NOT a christian.

Several writers have commented that one could not do a documentary on Islam or Mohammed in this vein. Maybe, or maybe not. But what western newspaper editor would dare publish cartoons similar to those published in Denmark with respect to Mohammed?

Can you see a cartoon of Jesus standing behind Spanish Conquistadors, smiling approvingly of their slaughter of natives, getting published (got was on the side of the Conquistadors, right) being published, or a cartoon of Jesus standing behind a Grand Inquisitor, as the Grand Inquisitor throws a torch onto the bonfire where a "heretic" was being burned to death, all the while smiling approvingly?

It seems it is ok to poke fun at Mohammed, through cartoons, in a way that would be pretty much HATE SPEECH in Canada (racist at the least), but Jesus is absolutely NOT to be made fun of in cartoons!

Islam is constantly derided in Christendom (read the industrialized west), like no other religion.

The portrayals of Muslims in western entertainment genres has always been in a most denegrading way.

Christians, as always, have always been portrayed as absolutely wonderful folks who only want to bring "god's message" to the world.

As for broadcasting this show during the Yuletide season (Yuletide is a pagan Scandinavian festival welcoming the return of the sun after the winter solstace), what better time than during a pagan celebration?

Oops, sorry, I forgot. Yuletide/Christmas is an original Christian festival that wasn't poached from any other tradition? Right?

The documentary was interesting, but only in revealing the variety of religious belief. Harpur's (and Freke and Gandys) is so flawed with errors that there was little of historical value in the show. I co-wrote a book called "Unmasking the Pagan Christ" with Stan Porter (who was featured in this documentary). We do not attack people's beliefs but show the errors in historical facts. For example, despite what Harpur claims, no Josephus scholar claims that the Jesus passage is a complete forgery, but rather that it was just added to by Christians. Not only that, there is another reference to Jesus in Josephus' discussion of the death of James, plus there is a reference to John the Baptist. Scholars do not question these. Also, the stuff about Horus is completely false. I challenge anyone to pick up a book of mythology and demonstrate his virgin birth and crucifixion. Horus was conceive through sexual intercourse between Isis and Osiris (who was dead at the time). Horus was not crucified, he was stung by a scorpion as a child. There is so much more and it is described more fully in Unmasking the Pagan Christ. If people want to believe in a Cosmic christ rather than a historical Jesus, that is their right, but they should not make historical claims that are false.

This was one of the best Documentaries I have seen in a very long while. Both sides were presented quite elequently. Kudos to the CBC for presenting such a view.

I am a devote Catholic who has always had issue regarding the literal translation which has been forced upon us. But maybe the message is more important than the messenger. Too bad most of the 'christians' would have such a negative and hateful response towards oposing viewpoints, they should look to their bible. I seem to recall a passage about turning another cheek?

The main point of the peice was not that Jesus didn't exist, but that a few hundred years after his 'death', religion was used as a tool to control a largely uneducated populace. The most simple way was to usurp Pagan practices which had existed in Europe and Africa for ages before Christianity arrived. My favorite point was regarding the worship of the Sun on the steps of St Peter's, a practice which still goes on to this day. Explain that practice using the Bible...

This doesn't make the teachings of the Church wrong or deceitful, but it does show absolute intolerance for free thought, and taken in an historic context how else could any one military power truly control such a vast empire without convincing its people that their eternal salvation was through one true god, administered by the state.

Remarkably insightful, thank you for supporting the film industry in Canada. Too bad there are not more networks committed to our shared history.

No one denies that there are pagan elements in Christian religion. The point is that Christ himself is nothing but pure Judaism. This pure Judaism was contaminated by pagan influences after his death. Harpur and others like him want to extend this pagan contamination to Christ himself, trying to wipe out all trace of his pure Judaism. Why is that? Part of it may stem from a well-meaning desire to end centuries of Christian brow-beating of Jews. But, however well-intended, it remains a lie. Christianity in its essence is not paganism, but is Judaism FOR pagans.

Wonderful show.

I grew up in Alberta's bible belt, where I was taught to take the bible literally (except the part about the wine - that was grape juice).
Years later I find myself sitting firmly on the fence between atheism and theism, and I wonder how superstition is able to retain so much strength. Hopefully the 'Pagan Jesus' planted seeds of question in the 'fundamentalist' minds that were watching.

This was a fantastic show. As for those who say it was anti-Christian missed the point entirely. The literalistic views were well-represented, however, I was shocked to hear a professor of church history claim that the four gospels are "four independent witnesses." Anyone who has read anything about the relationship of each gospel to the other knows that Matthew and Luke plagiarize Mark to an extraordinary degree. That's just an example of a fearful response to a suggestion that the traditional understanding of the Bible is open to question. In any event, the CBC should be proud of this documentary and particularly of having someone of the calibre of Tom Harpur working with them. Congratulations.

First of all, Christ?s birth sequence is completely astrological. The star in the east is Sirius, the brightest star in the night sky, which, on December 24th, aligns with the 3 brightest stars in Orion's Belt. These 3 bright stars are called today what they were called in ancient times: The Three Kings. The Three Kings and the brightest star, Sirius, all point to the place of the sunrise on December 25th. This is why the Three Kings "follow" the star in the east, in order to locate the sunrise -- the birth of the sun.

The Virgin Mary is the constellation Virgo, also known as Virgo the Virgin. Virgo in Latin means virgin. The ancient glyph for Virgo is the altered "m". This is why Mary along with other virgin mothers, such as Adonis's mother Myrrha, or Buddha's mother Maya begin with an M. Virgo is also referred to as the House of Bread, and the representation of Virgo is a virgin holding a sheaf of wheat. This House of Bread and its symbol of wheat represents August and September, the time of harvest. In turn, Bethlehem, in fact, literally translates to "house of bread". Bethlehem is thus a reference to the constellation Virgo, a place in the sky, not on Earth.

There is another very interesting phenomenon that occurs around December 25th, or the winter solstice. From the summer solstice to the winter solstice, the days become shorter and colder. From the perspective of the northern hemisphere, the sun appears to move south and get smaller and more scarce. The shortening of the days and the expiration of the crops when approaching the winter solstice symbolized the process of death to the ancients. It was the death of the Sun. By December 22nd, the Sun's demise was fully realized, for the Sun, having moved south continually for 6 months, makes it to it's lowest point in the sky. Here a curious thing occurs: the Sun stops moving south, at least perceivably, for 3 days. During this 3 day pause, the Sun resides in the vicinity of the Southern Cross, or Crux, constellation. And after this time on December 25th, the Sun moves 1 degree, this time north, foreshadowing longer days, warmth, and Spring. And thus it was said: the Sun died on the cross, was dead for 3 days, only to be resurrected or born again. This is why Jesus and numerous other Sun Gods share the crucifixion, 3-day death, and resurrection concept. It is the Sun's transition period before it shifts its direction back into the Northern Hemisphere, bringing Spring, and thus salvation.
However, they did not celebrate the resurrection of the Sun until the spring equinox, or Easter. This is because at the spring equinox, the Sun officially overpowers the evil darkness, as daytime thereafter becomes longer in duration than night, and the revitalizing conditions of spring emerge.

Now, probably the most obvious of all the astrological symbolism around Jesus regards the 12 disciples. They are simply the 12 constellations of the Zodiac, which Jesus, being the Sun, travels about with.

In fact, the number 12 is replete throughout the Bible. This ?holy? text has more to do with astrology than anything else.

Get back to me on this, I love reading these comments.

Mr. Harpur has his core beliefs summarized in the 'Seven Principles of Cosmic Spirituality' (taken from his own web-site). Based on these beliefs, he is declaring himself to be a non-Christian. So, it seems quite convenient for him to make a book, which has become a 'documentary', where Christianity is 'exposed' to be a myth. His own presuppositions and religious convictions would not allow for any other outcome anyway. Quite self-serving.

To bad that the whole TV network has been duped too.

Let's do be honest and recognize that Vatican imperialism has amassed a fortune on the myth of Christ. To those who refuse to think the narratives developed by misogynist Saul of Tarus are fantasy, he nor gospel writers do not offer first hand accounts of the guy that is in reality an amalgamation of the Sun God, Mithras, Osris etc. Actually there are no Roman records either and we all know that was a culture of scribes that made note of everything. As much as some of you want to embrace the fantasies from Christian mythology get a grip and accept that human virgins do not give birth. Surely you know too that it is ridiculous and a huge lie to suggest that our dead mammal bodies can be resurrected or fly off to magic lands other than in fictional stories.

Monotheism is the root cause of terrorism, misogyny, cruelty, slavery and anti-social behaviour. It's time that adults cease being afraid of death and grow up intellectually. To date no gods, supernatural events or life after death are proven facts. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are rooted in primitive Bronze Age science fiction. Adults that continue to embrace such stuff are infantile and a threat to modern life. No child should ever again be forced into joining a religion cult.

Oh and how dare the Pope declare that those who visit Lourdes shrine will have their time in Purgatory knocked off. On whose authority does he dare speak such lies? The pope has no more insight into anything supernatural than my cat Kitty. Is it any wonder the Roman Cult Church is warning people off of Philip Pullman's masterpiece His Dark Materials which simply exposes deceit from that group?

Oh and stop using your absurd superstitious beliefs to lie about Atheists not loving or being loved. That is the height of ignorance.

The book list: The God Delusion (Dawkins), god is not Great, How Religion Poisons everything (Hitchens), The Case Against Judaism, Christianity and Islam (Michael Onfray) and His Dark Materials Triology (Philip Pullman).

The time to boot the priests out of the Vatican is over due. The site will soon be a world museum and the assets in the Vatican bank used to feed the poor.

I have my own conspiracy theory, the reason for the little evidence regarding Jesus in secular texts is because He did exist and threatened the authority of the Ruler of that time. Realizing too late what Jesus had accomplished by His death and resurrection, this Enemy of the truth proceeded to try to erase all knowledge of Jesus by persecuting His followers, infiltrating the church and influencing mere men to commit atrocieties in the name of Christ.This is the real cover-up, and the secular media of today is still being used in this way to discredit Jesus's message, that man cannot save himself and the only way to reconciliation and peace with God is through Jesus. This however requires a humblying and a step of faith, for if it was conclusive that Jesus was the Son of God would the heart change that God is looking for be given of our own free will?

I watched the show, and was a bit surprised. I understand that the minister is questioning his faith, and wants all people to know that he is not questioning Christianity, but rather the literal truth of Christianity.
The problem I have with that is that he is in fact questioning Christianity. I have a couple questions for him to answer :

1.If Christ did not exist, but rather was a character in a story borrowed from other religions (ie. Egyptian cults) then do you believe it is possible for 13 people (12 disciples & St. Paul) to have created such an elaborate hoax? Or do you simply not believe that they existed? If you do not, then you should visit Madarai(formerly Madras) in India, where St. Thomas (doubting Thomas) is buried.

2.Is it not possible that, like the Old Testament, those Egyptian hyrogliphs(sp?) may have been fortelling the coming of Christ? After all, we don't truly know what those writings say. The Rosetta Stone has three languages, Greek, Egyptian Hyrogliphs, and another that has yet to be identified. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Greek writing come after Egyptian Hyrogliphs, and if so, the Rosetta stone would be one person's interpretation of what they believe the gliphs to mean.

3.In the Hindu devas (written 5000 years before Christ was born) it speaks of God sending us "the light of the world" to show us the way. Other than Jesus Christ, who else has in the history of the world has been called the light of the world.

4.Many cultures borrow from others. Shakespeare borrowed (stole) stories from Italians. The fact that early Christians borrowed stories, buildings etc. from other cultures does not dismiss that Christ existed.

5.The Bible (not just the New Testament) is full of contradictions. So what? Our existing laws had contradictions in them as well. ie. don't kill but we had the death penalty.
The Bible was put together after Christ had died & rose up to heaven. It was actually written after Christ had died & rose up to heaven. There may be some discrepancies with timelines, wordings etc. But you have to understand that it was written from certain person's point of view, and their recollection of the events of Jesus's life. They expected Jesus to return immediately, so why bother to write things down.

6.You say that there is no proof that Jesus existed. Well in two thousand years there will be no proof that Amelia Earhart existed, but we know that she did.

The fundamental mistake people make is taking the Bible too literally. The bigger mistake made here, is to deny the existence of Jesus Christ, based on assumptions formed by the existence of pictures that no one can clearly interpret.

Throughout history, the winners have always rewritten the story. It does not make the story or the characters within the story to be untrue. It just means that some literary license was taken to create a more appeasing story.

The story of Christ is not a fable passed from one generation to the next, from one culture to another. The story of Christ is based on true events passed from one person to the next. The story of how he was born, lived, died and rose again is true. His existence is true.

How else do you explain the story of St.Paul, a Roman who persecuted many early Christians? He heard Christ ask him,"Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?" Now I ask you why would a Roman soldier who persecuted Christians, make up a story like that, and turn around a spread the TRUTH so that all could believe?

Gord, of Calgary, has it right in "sitting firmly on the fence between atheism and theism". That is, he's an agnostic. Theism and atheism are two sides of the same coin: like love and marriage, you can't have one without the other. The only reasonable and honest position that of agnosticism: we simply don't, cannot, know. We can believe - but that isn't the same as knowing. The myriad abominations inflicted upon humankind over thousands of years have been perpetrated by those who knew they were right.

Whatever one wishes to believe concerning Jesus Christ, and in particular this so-called documentary, the fact remains that the management of a publicly-funded broadcaster made the very (very) poor decision to air this show during the Christmas season. Why would they want to offend a segment of their viewing public?

If CBC executives believed that such religious programming is needed, surely there are other months to broadcast these shows. How offensive to Christians living in Canada to see this show being aired during the celebration of the birth of Christ. Makes those cartoons of a certain prophet seen rather insignificant, doesn't it?

Personally I could only stomach a short segment of this program, having found so much falsehood from a man celebrated to be an amazing scholar. Be that as it may, he and any other person are certainly given the opportunity to reject Jesus Christ, but I do hold the executives at CBC accountable to demonstrate some prudence with my CBC, especially in deciding to broadcast a show so offensive to Christians during the Christmas season.

As mentioned by some others, I wonder how tolerate Canadians of other faiths would be on the attack of their prophets/gods, especially during their holidays? While I don't expect other Canadians to share my personal beliefs, I do expect some level of courtesy shown.

Anyway, I looked forward to upcoming religious programming from CBC that provides similar "insight" on other faiths, not to mention counter arguments to the issues raised by these so-called religious scholars.

This was an interesting program. If one reads Scripture in its entirety they will realize that the Old Testament portrays the coming of Jesus Christ, while the New Testament shows the life / death / resurection and the redeeming work of Jesus Christ. The Egyptian writtings do refer to an earlier saviour who is Joseph the son of Jacob. God through his providence allowed Joseph to save the known world through the years of famine. He became the second ruler in Egypt next to Pharaoh. The Pharaohs were revered as gods and thus it is logical that also Joseph, became to the people of Egypt and the known world as a god. It is also logical that such an important person be written about and that the people of the surrounding nations came down to Egypt and bowed down to Joseph. The parralism between Christ and Joseph is that the work of Joseph is a portrayal of the saving work of Christ.

John Mathew, to answer some of your questions at a glance,

1. The "hoax" as you claim is not from the disciples. Even the Gnostics mentioned Jesus Christ, but in allegorical stories. The "hoax" is that of a mythical Jesus vs literal Jesus. It was not until the time of Constantine that he turned into the "literal only" interpretation, and the basis for the religion going forward. Texts that supported this were kept and edited, and those that didn't were burned.

2. The ealier stories come from dozens and dozens of different cultures. If you want to believe they "foretold" the NT, so be it... but rational thought says otherwise.

3.Funny you should mention "light"... as there are countless comparissons of Jesus to the earlier dieties and gods of the sun.

4. Yes... they borrowed stories, hence the stories are not original. Jesus the man may have existed, but even you seem to believe the magical stories of him were borrowed.

5. Yes.. it's written from various people's points of view and currnt influences, i.e not the word of god. Nothing was written during the actual time Jesus was alive, all after the fact.

6. But, there will be ample documentation, records, eye witness accounts of her life WHILE SHE WAS ALIVE. Plus, people will have recorded and documented her activities, at the same time she performed them! Not decades to centuries after the fact.

Its funny you mention Paul/Saul too... one of the greatest figures in Gnostic history. Its amazing how the bible left out so much of Paul's actual writings on the mythical aspect of Jesus. The book "The Jesus Mysteries" has a great section on Paul, with hundreds of references, that show his true apparent belief system.

It's intriguing no doubt. I'm glad someone who is a scholar of the church is doing this. If all is true, did the Egyptians just dream this up?

I listened to the program while decorating for Christmas. I found it to be a program that caused me to think about why I believe in Jesus. I also remembered a verse Paul wrote (not the exact scripture verse) in which he said he would rather believe in Jesus, even if it were not true, than to not believe in the first place.
I found the research quite interesting but I was surprised that the commentator didn't know that the Books of the Gospels were not written by four disciples but by three apostles, and Luke was a companion of Paul.
Any program that is aired and causes thought is good. I certainly appreciate Christmas more, so I thank you.

The central premise of the book is that history was rewritten at the time of Constantine by Eusebius to create and enforce a literal Christ. It should be fairly self evident then, that there was no organized church with an organized body of beliefs until Constantine. It should also be fairly easy for historians to detect this tampering with the historical record.

But the fact is that it is not. There is a long list of Church Fathers who predate Constantine. They were literalists (I say this in the sense that they believe that Christ really existed, not in the sense that they were Biblical fundamentalists.)Here is a list of such men and women:

-Clement or Rome (c. 90 AD) who quotes from Luke, Mark, Matthew, Acts, and Paul's epistles. He does not quote from John because he predates John's Gosepl. He never quotes from a gnostic source.
-Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 65 to 150 AD) was said to have known John. He quotes extensively from Matthew, Luke, and Paul's epistles. He also quotes from John's epistles. He never quotes from a gnostic text.
-Irenaeus of Lyons (115 to 191) He wrote extensively against the Gnostics of his day.

A couple of points about the above.

First:if Clement of Rome and Polycarp of Smyrna are quoting from Matthew, Mark, and Luke, then that means these gospels predate them. Conclusion: they were not invented by Constantine.

Second: The gnostic gospels are all dated after the Christian gospels based on textual evidence. The battle against Gnosticism really didn't come into full force until the time of Irenaeus. If you read the books of Irenaeus against the Gnostics, you will see that they held such an esoteric theology that it is hard to know what they believed. It is clear to me, at least, that they are a corruption of the original Christianity, not the other way around.

All this, and I have not even mentioned all the other Christian writers who predate Constantine. We have Cyprian of Carthage, Hyppolitus of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, Perpetua, and Justin Martyr to name a few. None of these believe in an alegorical Christ, but a literal Christ.

Thanks,
Daniel

I Thought this film was well done. There is a film that compliments this film and adds more proof that Jesus was / is a fictional character . The documentary is titled "The God Who Wasn't There" There is not one shred of evidence that God or Jesus exists, and mounds and mounds of evidence for evolution. Clear, rational, logical thinking!

So much blood spilled over religious supremacy. But, if the objective was unification, it has failed. Great rifts exist even inside the mainstream of any modern religion. This is the product of human evolution, the stakes are high as God is used to further gains. The documentary demonstrates irreconcileable differences, no one can claim to hold evidence or truth in a vandalized record of history. Instead of asking who truly possesses the word of God, consider that creation is the universal expression of God. Here lies the inspirational value of mythology as hope and vision nurture humanity.

Myths are not real; they serve to bridge spiritual consciousness with the incomprehensible miracle of creation and life. The miracle is in and around us all and the pathway to it is through self-illumination. Myths offer meditative substance to congregations seeking answers to common questions. They have the potential to appear real when consistently imposed on the populace by authority.

Some myths have prevailed from ancient to modern times without authority. The role of the sun, seasons and the cosmic tapestry of personified star constellations have captured the imagination of many civilizations and inspired flourishing myths about God and creation. Just imagine past worlds thinking they were the centre of the universe, the spectacular nightly display of unfolding star movements, void of light pollution, provided evidence of God?s magnificient work conceivably fostering spiritual gatherings. Nobody argues such fundamental evidence. God?s creation is undisputable; humanity?s perspective is a different matter. Today, we?ve somewhat drifted away from the admiration of, and respect for, creation and are losses are substantial. To some extent, we've substituted the need to incorporate such existential significance and turned to scripture as a soul guide.

Going back to the stars and in accordance to the precession of the equinox, the Age of Pisces associated with Jesus is coming to an end after two milliniums. The Age of Aquarius is upon us and with it comes a transition to new spiritual inspirations that will slowly crystallize over the next centuries. Self-illumination is a personal adventure much like everything created by nature evolves with a unique identity. In this new age, if humanity can expend as much energy as they waste in conflicts and channel that to care for creation and the gift of life, including others, our ascent to a spiritual paradise would progress. Otherwise, perhaps God will redeem us all in consideration that maybe spending an extra day on creation would have helped man be kind.

As a Christian of seventy years I am now hoping to have published a work of 1999 entitled "He will not be judged -" (from John 5:24). It is a personal testamony and a radical critique of the Church. My present thinking is in line with Harpur's but with differences. I personally have little concern for a historical Jesus, but believe he did exist. What he taught, rather than the church's doctrine, is where I am today.

When I was borne, as a catholic not by my believe, only by
my parents being catholic! Growing up and told to go
regulary in to Church every Sunday, wich I did and listen to the cermony, I did start to think about all those stories in the Bible! Of course written by Poeple long time ago!
Every Night before going to Bed, I did pray : In the name of
the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost!
What is that, the Holy Ghost? Now I question several unexplained things! Wy there are so many Religionen?
No Women ever can give Birth without Sex! Maria did?
The Story with Adam an Eve are impossible, taking a Rip to create a Mann! Also the story with the Arc, totally impossible, to take all of the enemals on a Boat!
All the Food you need for those rainy Days, and so on.

I think religion is only business, nothing else!

Comming back to the CBC Story, I do like it very much
and it answer a lot of my question about all religion!
We living now in modern times, not in the past, with not to
much knowledge at all. This is a World of flying in to Space,
and learning every day, how the World is made of!
Don't forget, religion was made in a time, only a handfull
of poeple being educated, The majority follow the story of the Bible without thinking or question! Finely we do think first! Reinhold

The biggest problem I found with this show was the inclusion of those fundementalist "theologians" who made such rediculous claims like "the existance of Jesus is one of the most proven historical facts" historical maybe....

What has been proven time and time again is the evolution of Christianity from Pagan Religions... It's a visible evolution that is apparent to those who have actually studied archeology, anthropology, theology, or even art history.

I find it almost laughable that people in this day and age who can read actually believe the the old and new testaments are the inherent word of "God". If you take "The Bible" as a single work and say that it is the product of a "God" figure then that "God" figure would have to be a schizophrenic to create such a controdictory work such as "The Bible". The 4 "gospels" can even agree on the finer points of quite a few details. The "Gospel" of John was obviously written to counter Gnostisim and a much later work.
The Apocalypse of John if people understand history fully is quite appearent as a Zionist denouncement of Rome and Nero and was written after the burning of Rome and was not prophecy but a political diatribe.

In defense of The whole Pagan Christ theory... any one who can't see the similarities between Adonai (a Hebrew name for God) and Adonis is either ignorant or delusional or both.

What really gets me is that these spiritual writings that could have actually been used for positive growth with in a persons individual spirital evolution have been mixed up with ethnocentric works of intolerence and hatred and are still causing so much pain and suffering in the world.

If the world was free of religous fundementalism I really believe that we could bring the world back to being the Garden of Eden... I am speaking of course metaphorically. When people are lead around like dogs on a leash then we can evolve as a species. Good on CBC for airing this show....only next time leave the fundementalist rebutalls on the cutting room floor where they belong.

Ben wrote "Look up the stats on the Hitler and Stalin and how many people they killed/otherwise persecuted in the name of Communism and secular humanism (master race and all that), and compare it to all other events of the 20th century that could be considered religuosly motivated and you'll see that they do not even compare to those 2 tyrants. "

Well Hitler had a perverse obcession with something called The Spear of Destiny or Spear of Longinous which allegedly was the spear the pierced Jesus by Longinous to kill Jesus so that his bones would not be broken thus ruining the prophecy.

The Spear of Destiny like The Cup of Destiny "Holy Grail" became a powerful mystical symbol of power and Hitler pined over it.. So obviously Hitler wasn't really an atheist.. then there was that whole killing of the Jews thing and using the reference to them as "Christ Killers' umm yeah....

Stalin well yeah he was an Atheist..... but wait.... after the fall of Germany Stalin got his hands on The Spear of Destiny.. because Hitler had gotten what was considered to be The Spear of Destiny after he came to power from a museum that it was in in Austria... Oh yeah and Patton had it in his possesion for a time as well until Stalin threw a fit about wanting it. The Americans gave into the Russians about this worn piece of metal because they could care less about it. However, Stalin understood it's "mystical" value.

If you really know history then things aren't always so black and white. Statlin's personal beliefs very different than his proclaimed state beliefs and so were Hitler's .. So yeah in that sense Christianity also played a role in their madness and evil.

I have not seen the documentary yet but I have read the book. It was an incredibly liberating experience for me. The veil was lifted and that allowed my mind/spirit to soar into realms not available to me before. It was like an explosion that enabled me to grasp the entire cosmos as a seamless, boundless, borderless, ever evolving reality. "God" was inside, next to, above and beyond anything I had previously thought.

Thank you for opening the minds of Canadian viewers to a 21st century understanding of the origin of Christian religion.

In my first submission I assumed I was restricted to a paragraph. I had not yet read any others, many of which are lengthy.
We have an expected variety of responses.I liked Lacy's and many others.
I think many missed the point.
I have watched the presentation twice and will again. As a Christian of seventy years I was not at all upset with the content and
feel the CBC should be commended.
My assessment of the topic sees Harpur seeking a substantiation of his own faith. I have been doing the same for years.

To anyone who believes there is no God I ask, "Where did we come from - where did 'this' come from.
Everything in this universe is
"energy". 'Matter' is made up of energy and matter cannot be destroyed. One could invision God as 'energy'. Call Him or Her what you wish.

I believe sincerely that we came from God and will return to God.
I believe that the methodology reverts to all religions.
I personaly prefer and accept the way Jesus taught in his short ministry.
Read his response to the thief on the cross 'who had turned around'.
"Today you shall be with me in Paradise!"
It is so simple - so beautiful!

I await, with great anticipation, the next CBC infomercial ("documentary") which "proves" that the Koran is based on myths, and that Muhammed never existed. Preferably, this will be broadcast during Ramadan.

The amazing part of the whole discussion to me is, that if indeed God is so all powerful why doesn't he or she intervene to eluciate? Profound silence - is anyone there?

Doczone and the CBC is to be commended for attempting such a program. It is a pity, though, that the well-presented hypothesis of Harpur was subjected to blanket facile rejection by theologians with no apparent expertise in Egyptology. What started as a profound challenge to the literalist view of Christianity degenerated into a wishy-washy trivial dismissal. Surely, the producers could have carried the examination of Harpur's thinking through to a logical finish and not found it necessary to give in to the power of the conventional Church. ...or maybe that was the real message...

Let's suppose, just suppose, that everything the film claims is correct.
I must say that Tom Harpur's position regarding his Christian faith, in light of his own finding, to be very curious.
Suppose after many years of study you earn a highly publicized PhD through some scientific breakthrough. And suppose, many years later, you look into the work again, and found that your methodology was faulty. You perform a new test and come to the conclusion that your initial findings were wrong. Would you then claim that it's now ok to believe in you initial findings "allegorically" because it awakens a good feeling inside of you?

Let's not believe the nonsense that if Jesus never existed and did what he did, we can go on believing in the "allegorical" Christianity. If the Jesus of the bible is not the Jesus of history, then the only tenable position is to hang it up and go home. And then, we "eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die!."

"And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is FUTILE, you are still in your sins." 1 cor 15:17 (emphasis mine)

Love people, love is what matters.
If someone came and told me that my mother was a whore and try to prove so, I would not strike them, for she taught me to love, and show kindness no matter what; that should be the way to show my belief and love for her. Same goes for the "concept" of the Christ.
Also, when did the "holy season" begin so early...I imagine that the season extends its duration with the "shopping" season. How shameful; what's next, if it were shown in October of next year, will the season extend as well.
Even though I am not a Christian, I do believe in love and kindness as the ultimate truth, and that makes me love my Christian fellow human beings, and the Muslims, and Hindus, and the rest. Why not show a Muslims critique documentary...hmmm, perhaps because we are not a majority Muslim country.
Also it would be important to ask how many people on these posts actually "reads"...Semantics are nearly lost in this country of ours...

I'm surprised nobody's said anything about Steve Bedard's comments on his book "Unmasking the Pagan Christ". After reading Tom Harpur's numerous Toronto Star newspaper columns about the Pagan Christ (but unfortunately not his book), I then read Bedard's book. I've never in 35+ years of professional work seen such a devastating critique of a book's thesis and assumptions, i.e. of Harpur's book. Yes, there are some really intriguing speculations that Harpur raises, but every one of them is rigorously dealt with by a point-by-point refutation in Bedard's award-winning book. It's such a devastating critique that I asked Bedard's co-author why Harpur's book received such attention. Two answers - a profound lack of awareness of history in our culture, and Harpur's book never had to undergo professional peer review.

I was very appreciative of this broadcast; more needs to be disclosed about the origins of mass movements. One very good website which has much information about this is: JesusNeverExisted(dot)com.

I was a christian for 25 years. When I placed the beliefs which I was indoctrinated with under scrutiny, they fell like a house of cards. I am so glad to be free of christianity, and feel a thousand times healthier, clearer, happier, and more like an adult and less like an infant holding on to an imaginary father figure in the sky.

I enjoyed the film - although not necessarily for it's content - but because I can identify with Tom Harpur in many of his sentiments. Tom, like very many Christians in the western world, seems to have been brought up under the tyranny of the absolute authority of the Bible. In a noble attempt to slay this veritable dragon and thus minimize its power over his thinking, Tom has set out to debunk not only the authority of the Bible but the Christ of the Bible. However, if he considers himself still a Christian he may well live to regret that he "threw the baby out with the bath water."

I agree with Tom that the Christ within is the "real" Christ and that this real Christ dwells at the core of all human consciousness - but I fail to see the need to destroy the outward Christ in order to know the reality of the indwelling Christ.

The issue isn't whether we believe in an outward Christ as opposed to an inward Christ or visa versa but that we awaken to our true indentity - either by the witness of the outward Christ or the inward or, better yet, by the stereo witness of both - which is unquestionably the most powerful.

It is obvious enough that many need to shake off the trappings of a traditional Christianity which so often robs religeous folks of the experience of discovering who they really are. But it is also wise to exercise some constraints in debunking one's past religious experience.

When we are children we naturally think like children and when we grow up we percieve the world in a whole other light. Yet, wisdom doesn't teach us to trash our childhood experiences but rather to learn from them as we behold them in a more complete light. In the context of darkness the true nature of light is more readily recognized - enabling us to walk in light.

Discovering the reality of Christ living within doesn't obligate us to trash Jesus the man nor does it grant us any liscence to discredit the historical account of His life. The knowledge of His historical life can very well lead us to knowing Him as an indwelling reality - but too often knowledge about the person is substitued for knowing the person - hence the felt need to debunk His historical existance.

We are all moving through time, in the process of awakening to our destiny. There are many markers placed along our individual paths which are designed to awaken us from the dream which we are all born into. It serves us well to consider all such markers seriously - regardless of what religious camp we feel at home with. For we will not be exonerated by our efforts to debunk what we have experienced but by our attentiveness to the markers along the way.

Listening has always been the key to life. It is relatively easy to speak (or write) out of a considerable lack of knowing and in so doing fail to pay attention to the presence of Deity at the core of our consciousness.

The sooner we learn to be silent in our thinker the sooner we begin to know in our knower what is truth. All learning is profitable so long as we don't mistake our our accumulation of information for knowing the truth.

What I appreciate about Tom Harpur is that he is not intimidated by his past or his peers in his attempt to reach for the stars in coming to a knowing of the truth. All true seekers of Truth cannot be disappointed.

Great show. I sincerely hope it will be followed up with a similar story about the founder of Islam, Mohommed.

Robert Spencer would be an ideal academic to discuss the topic - Robert Spencer holds a Master's degree in the department of Religious Studies from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He has authored six books, including two bestsellers, on topics related to Islam and terrorism.

Oh, well done, CBC! Opening people's minds and offending in the name of the new religion of secular humanism.

Why, though, do you always seem to stop at Christianity? Why not an investigative report on the mysogeny of Mohammad, or the lack of documented proof that Buddah ever ascended into Heaven?

Attacking Christians is so last century. Why not have the guts to attack other people's core belief systems? Or, better yet, why not leave people alone?

The abuses of propaganda, ridicule and deliberate misinterpretation and disinformation committed in the past by the church are now being committed, complete with the belief of holding the moral high-ground, by the missionaries of the new religion of secular humanism. In spreading their intolerance for anything but their own worldview, these people are becoming exactly what they claim to be against.

I find it profoundly disapointing that the CBC would allow such preaching (for that is what it is) by any religion, but this one in particular, who stand for nothing, but against everything.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go worship at the altar of broken families, immediate gratification, and moral relativism.

This "mockumentary" is a perversion and an insult to those with thoughtful and traditional Christian beliefs. I notice a story commenting on Muslims suing MacLean's magazine. This occurs when a secular humanist and avowedly amoral media attempts to comment on those things for which it holds little understanding and great disdain.

In these many interesting posts, it seems those of the Christian faith are against the CBC for airing this documentary so close to Christmas. Could it be that their faith can be so easily disrupted ?
A question for Christians, Where in the Bible does it state that Jesus was born on December 25th.?
The closest would be the Zoastrian god Mythras or (Mithras) who was alledgedly born of a virgin on December 25th. This is the third reference to the similarity of virgin births in early history.
The early followers in Rome, of the new cult called Christianity,fearing persecution,
celebrated the birth ritual using for cover, the Roman holiday of Saturnalia. The worship of the God Saturn, the God of Harvests.

Of the several thousand deities, worldwide, Jesus is just another. In fact, had not Emperor Constantine converted Rome to this new cult, we might well be still worshiping the Roman gods of Saturn, Jupiter and Mars etc.
But then, the pagan Jesus would have been erased from memory.

The only question requiring an answer is... Why did the CBC choose to make and broadcast a very controversial program at the same time of a Christian high feast?

Where is repect for culture and tradition by the leading broadcaster of the nation? Isn't its original mandate a fair representation of the Canadian cultural mosaic?
Answer, obviously repect is a virue lost at the CBC.

A governmentally funded agency should express mutual respect for all three of the great religions as well as the non-religious. The 'Pagan Christ' fails to meet the agency's code of conduct terribly.

If I was registering a complaint on programming containing elements of anti-semitism whether that be towards followers of Judaism or Islam I'm 100 percent postive the programming in question would be pulled from the airways immediately nevermind moving it to another time slot.

Q. Why is the last allowable prejudice in North America anti-Christianity in general and anti-Catholicism in particular?

I'm in agreement with poster Mark, we are not amused shame on you CBC for a entire lack of better judgement. If CBC programming directors wish to present controversial topics try using some tact in future by not maligning the silent majority of the your viewing audience during a season of religious reflection.

The CBC has let us all down.

In reply to the discussion between Rob and John Matthews:

1. What proof do you (Rob) have that the "literal only" interpretation was only after Constantine and the Council of Nicea? In fact, it wasn't until 310 AD that Arianism was established. (According to Hutchinson Dictionary of World Religion Arianism is the "system of Christian theology that denies the complete divinity of Jesus")At the Council of Nicea in 325, Arianism was deemed heretical. Early church history, pre Council of Nicea, would suggest that people believed the complete divinity of Christ.

2.Who decides what rational thought is? It is relative to the individual and it is also associated with culture. God is the God of all culture, undiscriminitorily. If He chose to give different cultures clues about the coming Messiah- that's up to Him, I'm not saying necessarily that they are prophecies but they could be.

3. I do not believe that John Matthew means the metaphorical or physical Sun or Sun god. He means light, a concept that refers to illumination. The antithesis of darkness or sin. That said, the comment made by John Matthew about the devas has no historical accuracy. Written script in the Indus Valley that dates back to 2,500 BCE, however these seals have not been deciphered yet. Also devas are gods, not scripture, means "shinning ones" not "light of the world."

4. They did not borrow stories. These are not mere "stories," but often (most of the time) scholarly accepted as historical fact. There are cultural similarities. More importantly, they are prophesy fulfillments.

5. It is the Word of God. I completely believe this fact and makes the Bible infallible. It must be noted that if one looks at the apparent contradictions more closely, one would find that they are in fact elabortions on the narration. For example, in Mark 10:46 it says "As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city (Jericho), a blind man, Bartimaeus (that is, the Son of Timaeus), was sitting by the roadside begging." And in Luke 18:35 is says "As Jesus approached Jericho, a blind man was sitting by the roadside begging." Although it seems that there is a contradiction in the direction they were heading (either to Jericho or from Jericho) this can be explained quite easily. Recent archeoloical finds have discovered that there were in fact two Jerichos, one right beside the other and this explains the apparent contradiction as historical fact and elaborates, not detracts from the narratives. This trend of elaborations is common to the entire Bible.

6. I would like to point out that the Amelia Earhart example was not the greatest. I would like to remind you that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were all eyewitnesses and recorded their experiences with Jesus. Their gospels may have been writen later, however this does not nulify Jesus' existence. If a close loved-one passed away, I might chose to write a biography. This will not come out the day after this peron dies and in no way will it be finished during his/her life and could be decades after the death. I would also like to point out that the accounts written centuries later were discredited at the Council of Nicea because of their possible inaccuracy.

Remember, Paul/Saul was in fact a Pharisee although he did have Roman citisenship and was not a Roman soldier. That said, his conversion is still a miraculous one because he did persecute Christians. As to Paul being gnostic, it is disputable, however his canonized writings seem to suggest that he is not gnostic.

There is a lot still unknown about the writings of that time and much has been lost in cultural context. Yet the truth still remains that Jesus is the Son of God and it does, and will alway take faith.

I have read this book and watched the documentary twice. I think it presented a provocative topic in a well balanced presentation.

Whether Jesus is a mythological or an historical figure is not the point. The moral values that this Jesus figure represents are what's important. These are the same basic values that other religions have preached over the centuries whether through Mohammed,Buddha or others. Organized religion sometimes gets in the way of these values by preaching intolerance ,as evidenced by history and some of the un-christian comments from your viewers.

If more people practiced respect for others [viewpoints],tolerance,forgiveness and love,without the interference of organized religion,what a better place this world would be!

Congrats to CBC
...for getting the information and this discussion out there!
Congrats to people like Pat P
...for filling in more of the actual facts and logistical data!
There is a TON of it out there! If there is anything the documentary stated wrong was the suggestion that this information is new.
Organic religions tend to emerge indiginously from tribes as their own spiritual philosophies. These groups rarely try to "recruit" or push what they know to be their own truth. They don't need everyone to think the same. They are significantly different from the 'dogmas' that, instead of emerging indiginously from inner truths and cultural experience, are non-organic philosophies and need to be "sold" or aggressively promnoted to neighbours who are expected to "become" believers. Insecurity, or maybe something more drastic, makes groups go out to build their numbers.
The inspiring aboriginal myth of a Raven bringing mankind the healing powers of the Sun and the wisdom of the Stars has been so easily dismissed by the same Christian community that fails to see the potential healing power of its own myth has for some, even when it is shown them by spiritually (not just religiously) inclined individuals like Tom Harpur who have the intelligence to investigate the 'historical' (not 'biblical') facts that most non-Christians have always known and most universities in the world have taught at one time or other. It should be respected that these other cultures never 'pushed' the facts very hard; rather simply letting the christians live with the myth they created.
Harpur is a refreshing inspiration in the neighbourhood -- willing to think, understand and feel, rather than just believe.
It helps give me hope for the West.

Disappointing that the documentary didn't do much research on opposing sides to this issue. In our short research here are two links we found helpful on this topic:

http://nicksmusings.blogspot.com/2007/10/zeitgeist-movie-part-3-jesus-copycat.html
http://www.kingdavid8.com/Copycat/Home.html

We were quite unimpressed with the biassed attack on Christianity, particularily being so close to Christmas. In our opinion, in poor taste.

I just want to say, people should look at the timelime a little more, as well as the credentials of the so-called egyptologist that Tom Harpur chose to believe for historical evidence. And everyone have a wonderful, loving christmas. Peace on Earth.

Wow. People sure don't like their belief feathers ruffled. It's only a hypothesis folks. Are your beliefs so tenuous that listening to an alternative view is going to shatter your complete belief system? No dissent concerning Christianity is allowed in public anymore?

Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but New Testament Scholarship has been building a strong case for years that calls into question the historical authenticity of the New Testament works. Harpur's Horus hypothesis may be a little out there, but his questioning of Jesus' historicity is fairly mainstream in theological academia, though not amongst the evangelicals. A little bit of reading in theological academic literature (not the evangelical populist apologia) will confirm this to be true. The sad truth is that many people are aghast that skeptics like Harpur dare to question Christianity, when these people's own ministers and priests went through divinity schools learning the historical criticism that the skeptics are citing.

I read and re-read the Pagan Christ and I was satisfied that research into the Christ myth was done with the sensitivity it deserved. We can look at the teachings in the bible and the new testament and bring them into a humanist context. Christ, or God was a valuable way to describe and explain human kindness.

We now know that what is right or wrong is hard wired into our brains and most animals are empathetic to others. We no longer need to consider that a "supernatural" sky god made us in his image. What truly is freeing is that there is no afterlife or metaphysical world. As physical being, that is the beginning and the end of what we are. We need to be able to accept that there is no God or Jesus Christ to grow as a people.

Racism, Sexism, Specieism, environmental destruction and belief in a supernatural world (God, heaven, Jesus Christ) have all run their course. There are those who will not grow but remain in their small world. Let that be so, as long as they are not going to hold back or threaten those of us willing to be brave and move forward in our discovery of our wonderful mysterious world.

Christianity in its entirety can be summed up rather eloquently in many of these documentaries - it is based on fictional (allegorical) writing. The fact that you have a "major event" that nobody writes about until decades later until anybody who could collaborate the story is long dead, is most assuredly the most obvious point that people seem to miss. Saul or Tarsus is the originator of Jesus, and he copied every other story out there to get him. It seemed like a "prophetable" story after all.

Unfortunately, it seems that modern society will never let go of its security blanket. I wonder how many people think about how many people have died over the ages just because we argue over who's imaginary friend is the "real one."

I am 68 years old and have been a deeply spiritual Christian since I was 21. The joy unspeakable that the Apostle Paul talks about has been in my heart through every moment of a very difficult life for the last 47 years. I know Christ's love, his compassion, his peace and his joy, never for one second have I ever doubted my Christian belief. A little verse I learned back when I first believed has rang in my head ever since "I'm a new creation, I'm a brand new man. Old things are passed away, I'm born again. I'm more than conqueror, that's who I am. I'm a new creation, I'm a brand new man.

I have spent many years in the full gospel churches, but am currently worshipping in the Anglican Church.

Three years ago I read "The Pagan Christ", than attended a seminar Tom Harpur held through the Learning Annex. Since that time I have read, re-read, and re-read again every word he has written since this book. I have also been studying the works of the various writers he had quoted, especially the works of Alvin Boyd Kuhn.

Thank you Tom Harpur for having the courage to bring this work forward, and thank you to the CBC for airing this documentary.

For those of you who missed the whole point of what he is saying. Tom Harpur is not knocking Christianity. His is the clearest explanation of who Christ is and what it means to be a Christian that I have ever heard. He is just questioning where Jesus fits into the picture.

I am a Christian who believes in my heart of hearts that there never was a man named Jesus of Nazareth that walked this earth. And no, I am not going to go to hell when I say this. And this revelation has deeped my faith, and added a new dimension to my life.

To me Jesus is a drama cloaked in the hidden mysteries of the ancient religions, and is the story of you and me and our walk with God. It tells us about the Christ who lives within each of us. That Christ has many names, each religion gives this divine spark a different name. And is available to every person on this planet regardless of their religion, or lack of religion, and is not the exclusive property of the "Jesus" people.

I'm going to close with a quote that was written by St.Augustine, sometime between (354-430 AD)

The very thing which is now called the Christian religion existed amoung the ancients also, nor was it wanting from the inception of the human race until the coming of Christ in the flesh, at which point the true religion which was already in existence began to be called Christian.

Above Quoted from Harpur Book "The Pagan Christ".

Tom Harpur is an anti-Christian New Age guru who says we are all god. This is the first sin recorded in the Bible in Genesis 3 verses 4 and 5 ""You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."" Contrary to G Henry's assertion that religion is the cause of most of the worlds problems it is Tom Harpur's humanism, the concept that people are gods, that is at the heart of communism which was responsible for the murder of hundreds of millions of people.

CBC should be ashamed of itself for airing such a biased and unscholarly documentary with my tax money. I believe in free speech but when my government uses my tax money to falsely accuse my religion I'm not going to stand for it. I will work through my MP and the Minster of Heritage to have CBC TV defunded.

Sometimes truth is very hard to swallow, especially after years of deception.
Religion is an institution of political movement.Faith is truth with love and THOUGHT! Combine the two, and discuss with others, we can then and only then have truth with faith. Mr.Harpue as many other teachers helps people, not only Christains, in taking their faith one more step. For being WITHIN Thought clears the WITHOUT Thought! Thank you Mr. Harpur and CBC please continue shows that makes the viewers more within Thought.

Wonderful documentary.

The story of Jesus is also the story of many other messiah figures who came before, sometimes millenia before, in other traditions.

While this isn't new knowledge, the documentary was a wonderful expose into many of the details and history of the original invention and brutal dissemination of Christianity.

Well done CBC!

I missed the documentary (twice!) but have read Harpur's books over many years including The Pagan Christ. His voice & reason are a breath of fresh air after spending a childhood in the sunday schools of nonsense & superstition.

For belief to be alive it must be questioned & discussed for that is how it grows & becomes meaningful. We all have our own path back to God & however you choose to do that is up to the individual. It is so wrong to try to convert someone to your beliefs because then you are depriving them of their own sprirtual journey & growth.

The Muslim faith is much younger than Christianity. Interestingly they are at about the same stage we were during the bloody Crusades. Evolution doesn't just happen in the material world....it is how life moves on & ideas as well. This is Tom Harpur's contribution to inching forward. Thanks Tom.

Kristin, your probability argument is the ol' Pascal Wager that has been thourghly demolished. It makes no sense because it presents a false dichotomy. Humans have invented thousands of god concepts. The problem with the wager is which god to choose: Odin or Ahura Mazda or Allah or Ra or Vishnu or YWYH and on and on. The Muslims believe that if you don't choose Allah you'll suffer eternally. Thus, those proposing the wager are no better off.

It's the 21st century. Canadians don't need ancient, bronze age myths to hinder the advance of our society. One only needs to look at the attack on science by Christian fundementalists to see the problems. Canadian students were ranked 3rd in the World in science testing, whereas the US was ranked in the low 50's.

I support the showing of documentaries like the one CBC showed. Christianity, like all of religions is mythology.

For an alternative view, see "From Rebel to Rabbi: Reclaiming Jesus and the Making of Modern Jewish Culture," by Matthew Hoffman:

From Martin Buber to Geza Vermes and Samuel Sandmel, there have been Jewish thinkers, scholars, and rabbis who have continued to view Jesus in a positive light, as a Jew and a brother, whose teachings originate in the Judaism of his times, and who is still relevant to the contemporary Jew in some way or other.--p. 256

Somewhere in all of this someone asked whether those of us asking the CBC to do similiar explorations of other faith structures would be offended by a documentary on Moses or Mohammed or Buddha.

I can tell you that, for myself, I have always completely believed in a society that welcomes and nurtures diversity in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

My issue is that lately, I feel that this respect is not being paid to my own cultural traditions and my own faith. Friends who are atheists will loudly criticize christianity while being entirely sympathetic to those who practise eastern spiritual rituals. Schools will teach children about the religions of the various immigrant groups in the class (which is great!) and will not discuss the christian faith in any real way -Santa and shopping do not equal christianity.

It seems to have become trendy to insult and ostracize christians for their beliefs and to try to reduce our holy days to mere marketing initiatives.

This offends me. And, to answer your question - I would be deeply concerned and offended by any genuinely disrepectful act against any religious or cultural group in this country.

If the art project had been called "Piss Mohammed" I would have been furious! If the movie had been called "Moses the prophet - Vampire Killer" - I would not have been amused. If this documentary had been called "The Pagan Vishnu" - I would not have wanted it to be aired in the same month as a Hindu high holy day.

The subject of the documentary - at any time of year other than Christmas and Easter - is fine - not something I am going to watch - but whatever. The timing does seem to have been intentional to denegrade the christian faith when we are in the midst of one of our most sacred times.

And my earlier comments about making similar documentaries about other world religions are valid - explore everything - but schedule more wisely in the future.

And please, can we stop being so disrespectful of christianity? Many of us are tolerant, open-minded folk who embrace other cultures and enjoy living in a multi-faith country. We just want to be accorded the same respect that we give to others.

Finally - I would say that taking joy in this documentary, which is obviously causing many people pain (regardless of whether you agree with their belief system or not) is nasty and immature. I hope we can grow beyond such pettiness in the future.

As a Catholic, one with thought and eyes open,I have seen a great change in ones Faith, not religion, but Faith. For me Faith is Dear, Religion is UnDear. Thinking and asking solid questions, regarding the blindness of ones life with the teaching's.
Just proves we are all asking these question, especially those truly interested in the TRUTHS. Mr. Harpur and others who are the seekers to all those questions we have, are making this possible. Agree or Disagree, at least it is making us THINK! All Historical and Scientist edvidence dwells us into that place of mind, those in control, do not want us to go. As it has been said, there are no stupid questions, just uninformed answers! Therefore, lets realized that we can THINK and ASK QUESTIONS. Those who hide secrets and hold back thinkers are the negative amongst us. Thank You Mr. Harpur and the CBC, please continue to give us a chance to Think and Move Forward Deeper in our Faith.

I have stated my beliefs very clearly below. But in respect to those Christians who believe differently, and who have missed the message that Rev Harpur is giving; I do feel the timing was somewhat insensitive and perhaps would have had a more favourable reaction if it was aired at a different time.

Something for the CBC to be more in tune with for future documentaries of this nature.

It's incredible how many of these ancient heresies pop up from time to time (always cloaked as some new revelation based on new information).

This particular error was the seventh condemned by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors:

"7. The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in the Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testament there are contained mythical inventions, and Jesus Christ is Himself a myth."

None of this is new.

I find the comments posted here even more enlightening than the film itself. Obviously this topic hit a nerve in the corporate psyche of many Canadians - with the majority of responses falling in one of two categories.
On one side there is the sentiment expressed; "Yeah, alright, it's about time somebody put those fundamentalists Christians in their place." While on the other side there seems to be the hard line Christians who take great offense in having their beliefs discredited - especially at this time of year.

The fact that Paul Harpur's book has found so many listening ears makes one realize that there are a lot of "ex-christians" and don't-wanna-be-christians who have been waiting for someone to lead them on a freedom crusade - out from under the tyranny of Bible dogmatism.

Yet rather than take delight in seeing Christians squirm at their beliefs being called into question the nay sayers might realize more benefit in asking themselves why they are so allergic to things Christian in the first place.

And instead of retrenching and taking pot shots at the nay sayers, it might be more constructive for those who hold traditional views on Christianity to ask themselves what it is specifically those opposed to their beliefs are really reacting to.

It seems both sides could grow up a little by cultivating the ability to hear what is beyond their own personal opinion regarding the way things ought to be. Learning to listen attentively may hold more promise of truth than any of us have ever imagined.

Of course there are those who thumb their nose at the whole debate by saying, "who gives a rip about any of it." But such disaffectedness doesn't necessarily elevate these to any higher state of consciousness - since human experience teaches us that we all learn - not by only being involved - but by our mistakes.

Whether we believe in Christmas or not may not be as important as practicing a bit of love for those who think differently than we do - not only during this season but all year long - - unless of course we've come to not believe in Love either.

Although I do belive that Tom Harpur never intended to cause such turbulance, the very nature of the question basically states that all catholics are worshipping a religian that doesn't exist.

I would like to take this oppertunity to say that although you (CBC) have every right to feature this documentry I would strongly advise that you take into consideration the consiquences of featuring a program with such contraversial subject matter.

I have read the reviews for the documentry and have come to appreciate the arguments for and against this documentry. For the people who argue against the subject in question, I salute you. For those who argue for the subject in question I can not and will not agree with you. There is very little to no evidence to support these theories. Both Pagan Christ and the Da-Vinci code (and alot of other similar theories) base there ideas on evidence that is both circumstancial and inconlusave.

The Pagan Christ states that jesus christ is based on mytholagy from Egypt, however the very personalities of both horus and Jesus christ are very differant. Horus' actions was always acting out of vengence when Set killed his father Osiris wheres Jesus Christ always acted out of compation to redeem man kind from original sin when adam and eve ate from the tree of knowlage.

The New testament, written vagly does have a few technacalities like when jesus Christ was born and where the star was located and when but that doesn't really matter. What is clear in the new testament is that Jesus Christ came to show us the path to eternal salvation died on the cross and asended into heaven. All four gospals and several eye-witness accounts say that Jesus Christ existed. "How happy are those who belive without seeing me" John ch 20 vrs 29

Well done Paul. There are a couple of more from the syllabus of errors worthy of note:

3. Human reason, without any reference whatsoever to God, is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil; it is law to itself, and suffices, by its natural force, to secure the welfare of men and of nations. -- Ibid.

6. The faith of Christ is in opposition to human reason and divine revelation not only is not useful, but is even hurtful to the perfection of man. -- Ibid. (my personal favorite)

12. The decrees of the Apostolic See and of the Roman congregations impede the true progress of science. -- Ibid.

13. The method and principles by which the old scholastic doctors cultivated theology are no longer suitable to the demands of our times and to the progress of the sciences. -- Ibid.

23. Roman pontiffs and ecumenical councils have wandered outside the limits of their powers, have usurped the rights of princes, and have even erred in defining matters of faith and morals. -- Damnatio "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851.

40. The teaching of the Catholic Church is hostile to the well- being and interests of society. -- Encyclical "Qui pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846; Allocution "Quibus quantisque," April 20, 1849.

I can't improve on perfection and these gems were written well over 100 years ago!

Why does God put children on the Earth just so they can starve too death? Why do mothers who abort a child's life before it can breathe live a free life? Why is the Vatican's worth measured in the Billion's when they take a vow of poverty? If you were God would you banish someone to Hell for not worshipping you and not paying your way into heaven...Money+church=power...the power to enslave the meek.

Jesus Christ is Truth.
Jesus Christ is Love.
Jesus Christ is Eternity.
Jesus Christ is Faith.
Jesus Christ is God.

Call me a fundamentalist, but I'm not. I have just seen and experienced the workings of my Savior, and have felt the love He demonstrates to the world.

I love that people are challenging Biblical teaching. That is the only way to learn; as a University student, I can assert this. But at the same time, there is a great level of sensitivity and poise that needs to be held.

With the release of such a film as this around the Christian holy days, what is CBC trying to say? That they themselves are afraid of the power and the holiness of the holiday?

By presenting a film that challenges Christ's very existance around the time when Christians mourn and praise His true love for them... says to me that it is trying to either stir up trouble, or keep people from taking the time to reflect and just be thankful.

Why are the Muslim holy days untinterrupted in our democratic nation? What about the Jewish ones? Why are Buddhists never questioned for their belief in the self?

The problem that I'm finding is just the one that the Bible warns against.. people just love to love themselves. Why can't we put our faith in something bigger, just for once?
It hurts me that Christianity is considered "suffering". It has had bad representation by political leaders. It has had bad representation from people in the Church.

But that's just it. We can't put our faith in the people of it... we have to put our faith in the teachings of Christ the Lord. And once we start to embrace that, start to live out the love of Him - that's when truth begins to happen.

It is not irrelevent whether or not Jesus lived. It is completely relevant, because the entire realm of Biblical scripture is pointed to Him! The old testament praises God's faithfulness, and waits for the coming of the saviour. The new testament rejoices in His teachings and in His love and in the MOVEMENT created by Jesus' (the saviour's) very life and death.

I don't understand how anybody could refuse to believe that His existance ever was.

Look closely at scripture; however you want to interpret it, there was a massive change in so many peoples' lives after they were touched by His. Peter and Saul/Paul are prime examples of this. The disciples. The women affected by it.

How could such intricate and beautiful stories come about, from the conception of the prophet John to the birth of his cousin Jesus?

Further, how could such challenges about the style of his life (ex. the Davinci Code) come about, without Him?

We're all spending too much time searching within ourselves.
Just look outside. God is real. Jesus lives.

Typical CBC.

Let's make sure that the Christian faith is again attacked and questioned for the sake of the all powerful desire that we MAKE Canada into a culture of "we really don't know who we are and what we stand for"

Good job CBC, By the looks of the way Canada is quickly losing it's identity that it once proudly had, I think it's working.

If Jesus did not exist,how do we reconcile historical evidences about his existence?

I suggest Mr. Tom Harpur should spare a little time and read about the eyewitness accounts of Flavius Josephus or will he doubt the existence of Josephus?

Tom basis for his conclusion is even questionable.
It seems debates concerning Jesus is the easiest way to draw attention to oneself this days. Others will accept Jesus existence but would like to attract attention to themselves by saying he married Mary Magdelene and that he had an agreement with Judas to betray him.

What this people should be doing if they are frustrated is to seek ways to find the truth about Jesus.

They should not judge his existence merely on the conduct of professed christians.

Our attitude and what we say about Jesus may even determine our future!

This controversy exists because the real Christianity has been twisted many times over. Real Christianity is not what people generally believe it is. It is not what the Catholics or protestants believe. Christianity has been hijacked by the Romans and changed most of its foundations. Jesus really existed. History has proved this,just look on the right places, not in the documents of the Roman religion. The church that Jesus established followed the ten commandments - including that of keeping the Sabbath holy - and are trying to live the way Jesus lived when He was still on earth, like following the festivals listed in Leviticus.

If you study the "The Church Jesus Built" you will be enlightened. You can request for a copy of this booklet and similar references at www.ucg.org, www.pcog.org, www.beyondtoday.tv or www.wnponline.org. All questions arising from confusions can be answered, if you reach out.

So i posted a comment on here the first time this was aired (one which i never seemed to get a response to my questions from anyone). so i thought i'd pose another question.

Now that its been played in February and not in December (or during a month of christian religious significance), is it now any less insulting. Because it seemed to me that was one of the largest complaints from when it was last aired, "how dare the CBC play it around Christmas." and now it hasn't, so i'm wondering if its any different then before in that respect.

Also, if anyone wants to responed to my previous questions i'd still look forward to your answers. (just hit ctrl+f to find it)

Thank you,
-Marc

Please read Lee Strobel's new book "The case of the Real Jesus" to find out the truth that Christianity was not copied from Pagan religons.

[QUOTE]ed

The amazing part of the whole discussion to me is, that if indeed God is so all powerful why doesn't he or she intervene to eluciate? Profound silence - is anyone there?

Posted December 8, 2007 11:22 AM[QUOTE]

1. This would Violate Your Freewill. Therefore a "no go" on that one.

2. You Incarnated here to experience this Life and others. Fixing things for You would only produce an attitude where You continually sought to be saved, thereby not gaining anything in the way of true Adultness and Maturity. Again, a "no go" again.

3. True Love is Unselfish Love. This means that even though You're headed for trouble - It must be trouble You've sought. That said as You're a child of God - The Father will let His children learn as they seem to desire It.

We have done this by choosing nothing other than what We have manifested already - That being Materialism and Realization of Self...

4. Would God love You so little that He would not give You the tools to save Yourself ?

Look at Your world around You and understand this. As long as Mankind looks to others to save Them and protect Them - They'll always remain as Children. If We grow up and truly mature to an attitude where We all govern Our own actions - How long do You think it would truly take to revert back to the basic ten laws We first started out with...

I see the airing of this show as a momentus thing. Finally the Gnostics are getting the credit they deserve for being the true Spiritualists they always were...

The Church (Constantine and His Council) sought to bring all of the Gospels into one so the Christians could be controlled. This has been achieved, but now the time has come for the "reaping" after the "sowing". This is why this knowledge is being revealed in this time.

Jesus did indeed live, walk, and minister to the Peoples He was among. He was also crucified due to the Truth He espoused which threatened the Roman seat of Power embodied in the Emperor. It was the Nicean Council under Constantine's orders that has thrown Jesus into the group of all the other Iconclastic figures that they had knowledge of at that time.

That His time of birth, the nature of It and His Ministry were obscurred and in most cases lost, is on purpose. Confusion is what was thought of and sought in that time, and looking at It's relevant confusion now - It was and has been delivered to some extent...

This was always the aim of the Deceiver. Search harder folks, He IS there (God that is) and has thus, always been. That We are indeed close to Godhood is also true, but only in so much that You walk the Spiritual Path in Unconditional Love as did Jesus, Who did so in the effort of showing Us all, how to return home...

Peace, Light and Love to You all...

Mercuriel

When I saw this docomentary I thought that this might be interesting to find out. I myself am a very curious person and always want to find out more about the world around us. This topic is very conterversal to the Christian community and I understand why some people would be offended by this. But we half to learn to keep an open mind towards things, especially religion. In my opinion Christianity really became corrupted when it became fueled by money(because of the people encharge) and many of the things in the Christian religion are lies generated by the chruch. Such as the actual birthdate of Christ which actually is not Dec. 25 as many people think. But that's a different subect.

If you actually watched and listened to this docomentary, a lot of the facts, realisticly seem to point to the non exisistence of Christ. I'm not saying these things to shut other Christains down. The Point that I'm really trying to get out is the if you have Faith in a God and lead a good life as all religions teach. Even if were wrong, isn't that all that really matters? To live a good and happy life.

Anyway that's just how I feel on this topic and on religion. Noone HAS to listen.

Religion. Spirituality. Faith. Words that bring to mind deep introspect. The answer to our existential questions for many lie within their chosen belief system, be it Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, etc. I only caught a few minutes of the documentary on Tom Harpur's book but I've certainly read similar discussions on Christian history.

Now I'm no expert on history, theology, science or the "cosmos" nor am I deeply spiritual, in fact, I'm likely the opposite. I consider myself an agnostic and not an atheist. I believe myself to be well read and open minded about most things. My particular situation gives me a very interesting perspective of Christianity and religion. I was born of parents who were not church goers nor all that God fearing. I did go to a Baptist Sunday school as a young man and took what was taught very seriously (for a 14 year old) but I suffered no daily "indoctrination" growing up.

Fast-forward 20+ years and now I'm married into a family that is made up of mostly church-going, God-fearing people. Good and well-meaning folks I may add. Thankfully, for me, my wife is not piously religious but I do attend church with her and my in-laws from time to time. My children also attend this church as well.

I've heard many sermons. I've read the Bible. I've prayed at different times in my life. I love and respect many people that are genuine Christians. But I don't prescribe to the belief in Christianity nor have I seen anything that I would deem as "divine" in my life experience.

The "Pagan Christ" along with many other recent literary works (Richard Dawkins "The God Delusion" and the books by Lawrence Gardner along with the recent popular film "the Davinci Code") have brought the debate about the origins of Christianity to the general conscience. Add this to the wondrous world of modern science and technological knowledge- it is no wonder we question the Bible and all religious faiths.

I'm not even sure where to begin in this vast debate. Did Christ really exist? Perhaps. But likely not as the Bible has taught us over the last 2000 years.

I agree with many of the comments here in regards to how much many so-called Christians think they know about their own faith. I prescribe to the belief that people believe whatever it is they choose to believe in. Whether that belief has any basis in fact or truth is irrelevant to many of these types of people.

Getting back to those "existential" questions (as they are truly why any religion was ever conceived)- "Where did we come from?" "Why am I here?" "What happens after we die?" These unanswered questions could drive a human being into a state of dismal despair because, if left unanswered, leave us to believe that our often miserable lives have no meaning, no higher purpose. Then comes spirituality- the nectar of our souls. That which bridges us to our "cosmic" surroundings. Our struggle for "Transcendence" and "Transformation" is the endgame of our spirituality. Transformation into what? Give me a break. Sometimes our ability to reason has us "reasoning" a little too much. Indeed, we all contemplate life and the universe but it doesn't mean we need to believe in "mysticism" or prescribe to ancient, superstitious myths. I believe in 3 simple truths: we're born, we live, we die. Our mission is very simple- to survive the best way we know how and to strive for some fleeting moments of happiness/contentment. If we study nature- these are the simple truths of all living organisms.

The final question I pose to all- how is it that we, the human race, should evolve? Do we strive for a path of global peace and enlightenment? Should we not strive to understand and truly appreciate our fellow man no matter what religion, race, creed, sexual orientation, gender, age, what-have-you? We only have to look at what's going on between East and West, Muslims and Christians to realize- that is not the direction we are going. In many cases, religion is the great divider.

My final statement to the fundamental Christians who have commented on this documentary film. If any given religion is the "truth" it should certainly be able to weather some close examination (whether by believers or non-believers). If it can not, then its true irrelevance will eventually be realized.

Tom Harpur began his career as an (evangelical) Anglican priest and professor of New Testament at Wycliffe College, Toronto. Just over 30 years ago, he moved from academia into journalism. Today, he is perhaps the leading religion writer in Canada.

"The Pagan Christ" is the story of his discovery of the writings of one Alvin Boyd Kuhn (1880-1963) and two earlier writers (Godfrey Higgins [1771-1834] and Gerald Massey [1828-1907]), who argued that all of the essential ideas of both Judaism and Christianity came primarily from Egyptian religion.

Toward the end of the third Christian century, the leaders of the church began to misinterpret the Bible. Prior to this, no one ever understood the Bible to be literally true. Earlier, in keeping with all other religions, the narrative material of the Hebrew and Greek Bible was interpreted as myth or symbol, read as allegory and metaphor rather than as history.

According to Harpur, there is no evidence that Jesus of Nazareth ever lived. He claims that virtually all of the details of the life and teachings of Jesus have their counterpart in Egyptian religious ideas. He does not quote any contemporary Egyptologist or recognized academic authority on world religions nor appeal to any of the standard reference books in Egyptology or to any primary sources. Rather, he is entirely dependent on the work of Kuhn (and Higgins & Massey).

Who is Alvin Boyd Kuhn? He is given the title `Egyptologist' and is regarded by Harpur as "one of the single greatest geniuses of the twentieth century" [who] "towers above all others of recent memory in intellect and his understanding of the world's religious."

As it turns out, Kuhn was a high school language teacher who was an enthusiastic proponent of Theosophy, a prodigious author and lecturer, who self-published most of his books.

Not being myself an expert in Egyptian religion, I consulted those who are about their views of contribution that Kuhn, Higgins and Massey have made to Egyptology and whether they thought some of the key ideas of "The Pagan Christ" well grounded. So I sent an email to twenty of the leading Egyptologists - in Canada, USA, UK, Australia, Germany, and Austria.

I noted as a sample the following claims put forth by Kuhn (and hence Harpur):

That the name of Jesus was derived from the Egyptian "Iusa," which means "the coming divine Son who heals or saves".

That the god Horus is "an Egyptian Christos, or Christ.... He and his mother, Isis, were the forerunners of the Christian Madonna and Child, and together they constituted a leading image in Egyptian religion for millennia prior to the Gospels."

That Horus also "had a virgin birth, and that in one of his roles, he was 'a fisher of men with twelve followers.'"

That "the letters KRST appear on Egyptian mummy coffins many centuries BCE, and ... this word, when the vowels are filled in., is really Karast or Krist, signifying Christ."

That the doctrine of the incarnation "is in fact the oldest, most universal mythos known to religion. It was current in the Osirian religion in Egypt at least four thousand years BCE"

Only one of the ten experts who responded to my questions had ever heard of Kuhn, Higgins or Massey!

Professor Kenneth A. Kitchen of the University of Liverpool pointed out that not one of these men is mentioned in M. L. Bierbrier's "Who Was Who in Egyptology" (3rd ed, 1995), nor is any of their works listed in Ida B. Pratt's very extensive bibliography on Ancient Egypt (1925/1942).

Another distinguished Egyptologist wrote: "Egyptology has the unenviable distinction of being one of those disciplines that almost anyone can lay claim to, and the unfortunate distinction of being probably the one most beleaguered by false prophets. He goes on to refer to Kuhn's "fringe nonsense."

The responding scholars were unanimous in dismissing the suggested etymologies for Jesus and Christ.

Ron Leprohan, Professor of Egyptology at the University of Toronto, pointed out that while "sa" means "son" in ancient Egyptian and "iu" means `to come," but Kuhn/Harpur have the syntax all wrong. In any event, the name `Iusa' simply does not exist in Egyptian.

The name `Jesus' is Greek from a universally recognized west Semitic name ("Jeshu'a"), born not merely by the central figure in the New Testament but also by many other people in the first century.

While all recognize that the image of the baby Horus and Isis has influenced the Christian iconography of Madonna and Child, this is where the similarity stops. There is no evidence for the idea that Horus was virgin born.

There is no evidence for the idea that Horus was `a fisher of men' or that his followers (the King's officials were called `Followers of Horus") were ever twelve in number.

KRST is the word for "burial" ("coffin" is written "KRSW"), but there is no evidence whatsoever to link this with the Greek title "Christos" or Hebrew "Mashiah".

There is no mention of Osiris in Egyptian texts until about 2350 BC, so Harpur's reference to the origins of Osirian religion is off by more than a millennium and a half. (Elsewhere Harpur refers to "Jesus in Egyptian lore as early as 18,000 BCE" and he quotes Kuhn as claiming that "the Jesus who stands as the founder of Christianity was at least 10,000 years of age." In fact, the earliest extant writing that we have dates from about 3200 BCE.)

Kuhn/Harper's redefinition of "incarnation" and rooting this in Egyptian religion is regarded as bogus by all of the Egyptologists with whom I have consulted. According to one: "Only the pharaoh was believed to have a divine aspect, the divine power of kingship, incarnated in the human being currently serving as the king. No other Egyptians ever believed they possessed even `a little bit of the divine'."

Virtually none of the alleged evidence for the views put forward in "The Pagan Christ" is documented by reference to original sources. The notes refer mainly to Kuhn, Higgins, Massey, or some other long-out-of-date work.

Furthermore, Harpur's notes abound with errors and omissions. If you look for supporting evidence for a particular point made by the author, it is not there. Many quotations are taken out of context and interpreted in a very different sense from what their author originally meant (especially the early church fathers).

In short, "The Pagan Christ" tells us more about Tom Harpur's spiritual pilgrimage than about the origins of Christianity.

Considering the wholesale slaughter that has gone on over the centuries over religion in its various forms, it appears that the basis for any religion has not only faded, but been drowned in its own blood. A concept that was meant to unify has done everything but, and no matter what your faith is someone is going to hate you for it. This is a sad legacy.

Also, since the basic idea behind any religion is a belief in something greater than yourself and powers at play in the universe that you can't know orfully understand, does it matter where that belief originated? Is it really any less plausible to belive in the allegory as in the literal?

hello,

Historical Jesus

Articles on Jesus of Nazareth as a historical figure, focusing on the historicity of his resurrection from the dead. By Dr. Craig

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer?pagename=scholarly_articles_historical_Jesus

has anyone seen the movie zeitgeist. the first part goes beyond what is in this documentry, it can be found at www.zeitgeistmovie.com, with more argurements wht Jesus didn't exist.

Umm, did I get this right? Tom Harper is pointing out the injustice of Christianity (and the Church) getting the facts wrong and manipulating the facts to suit their own ends?
C'mon, does no one see the hypocrisy here? Tom Harper is no disinterested, benevolent saint.

The point is not that one is offended at Christianity being scrutinized, but rather that it is being slammed in such a sensational, smug, and un-researched fashion. What's worse, viewers devour this would-be intellectual candy and prance around like they've locked up the latest bit of hidden truth; they can now stick it to us ignorant Christians.
If we are to have open debate, lets have the facts on the table.
BTW, atheist ideologues have killed more people throughout history than the "religious" ever did. Using religion as a scapegoat only blinds us to our own propensity to evil.

It is very frustrating to see that even the CBC has a seat on the "TV Jesus" bandwagon.

Every single one of these "specials" is always around the Christmas and Easter season. It's like it's in the rule book: Christians are going to celebrate their great feasts, we have to go and treat them like garbage. It's like pointing at the faults of any other faith during their high holidays. It's not fair, it's not right, it's downright dispicable that persons of faith are treated like this. If you want to actually make an amazing documentary - as CBC usually does, I might add - add the other side to the conversation! Why not ask for theologians that do support that Jesus Christ was an historical figure to attend the program? Why always the "theologians" that tend to associate rationalism with something that believers would see as something divine? If you're going to be fair to your viewers, have both sides. if you're going to be respectful, please don't attack something so holy during the holiest days of the year.

Also, if I might add, during your tirade on the Nicene Creed, you quoted the entire Creed. The "Nicene Creed" only went up to the phrase "And I believe in the Holy Spirit" at the First Ecumenical Council in 325 AD. Yet, your documentary quoted the whole thing. It's important to state taht the First Council was confirmed by the Second Ecumenical Council in 381 AD, held in Constantinople. In that Council, the beliefs of the First Council were confirmed... after the Church grappled with this issue for the years between 325 and 381.

The Gnostics didn't win, because they were just making up falsehoods. I can't go and start making up lies about your family... why can't the Christians say "hey, don't make up falsehoods about my God like that!"?

Please, CBC, a bit more understanding next time...and maybe have a documentary about the Real Jesus next time, instead of just the "TV" version.

So if this theory is more valid than anything else, the stories of the gospel would essentially mean that Judaism got it wrong as well, since the Gospel's story of the nativity relates directly to the Books of Samuel and Issiah, because the story of Jesus would have come before the Israelites ruled under King David.

Also, if lets say the writers of the Gospels (and St. Paul) DID just plagiarize some hieroglyphics they found after a wild road trip from Egypt, how does one explain the story of the Exodus? Since this theory is saying that one of the Egyptian gods was one and the same as the god of Moses, (and it very could be!) why would the same god who protected the Egyptian civilization for thousands of years all of a sudden inflict mass killing upon them (to protect Moses) even though a few years before that their god supposedly told them to love one another as I have loved?

Yes, Tom Harpur is free to believe Jesus never existed, if he so chooses. Parrallels between Jesus' story and the stories of others can easily be imagined and sold at good profit to the CBC and a host of others who wish to run away from Christian belief for any reasons they choose. Such imaginations do not constitute responsible scholarship.

To show convincingly that Jesus never existed requires more than raising questions or imagining parallels; it requires omniscience, something not even Tom Harpur claims.

We have more extant historical artifacts concerning Jesus than we have concerning any human in history prior to the 10th century CE.

Sure many lies have been told about Jesus. Most can be fairly readily identified as such, often by their bases in conjecture and imagined conspiracies (e.g., Dan Brown's DaVinci Code).

Responsible historians test the credibility of old stories by many means such as the independence of the claimed eyewitness to events, the consistency of the core factual claims, the agreement of friend and foe (or lack thereof), do the reporters invariably portray themselves positively, etc. On all such tests the first century historical records we have concerning Jesus consistently are shown to be at least decent history, if nothing else (Tom Harpur, Dan Brown and Richard Dawkins notwithstanding).

One of those eyewitnesses of Jesus' three years of public ministry very candidly refutes latter day conspiracy theorists when he writes:

"We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty." (2 Peter 1:16).

For Jewish men in the first century CE to describe the 12 disciples as foolish as the 4 gospels describe them, for them to tell how women were the first to visit Jesus' empty tomb, for them to report that some of them still doubted Jesus' authenticity 40 days after Jesus' resurrection -- and all this a fabrication! Well, I must say, this theory demands more blind faith than what I can muster. I'm sorry, Tom Harpur and the CBC, this is simply not responsible scholarship.

All imaginations of historical records to support such theories having been destroyed by early Christians desparate to save their preferred view, are simply that: imaginations. This is not responsible scholarship.

Tom Harpur, Dan Brown, Richard Dawkins and their readers may be perfectly sincere. That does not make them right. Their theories rank with hallocaust-deniers in the dust-bin of special pleaders. They may have many good reasons to be angry at a long litany of stupid things that Christians have done, and continue to do today. That does not varify their views of "the Jesus myth."

It is simply not helpful to disparage beliefs you don't like by inventing new myths. These contemporary myths deserve some serious critique, such as we need not expect to be broadcast by the CBC, especially not on "Doc Zone." Such critiques would surely be too radical for the producers and programers who control what is aired here -- right?

I hope that viewers will be intelligent enough to realize that just because someone says something on television during a “documentary”, that there is no guarantee that they are presenting the full un-biassed truth.

When we see a car break through a stone wall undamaged in a commercial, we know advertisers are trying to mislead us with an exaggeration about their product. Why not be just as critical of documentary film makes, who after all could be selling us something as well, such as Mr. Harpur's book?

As for all those who have jumped on the "religion is the root of all evil' bandwagon, consider that the world has already seen a few atheistic states and I suppose that we can all remember how well that worked out. The history of atheism is no less bloody than the history of any other religion, nor has it been any less harsh in its persecution of competing faiths.

I have to call atheism a religion since it appears to be a belief system much like any other religion. It even has some of the same structures with living saints like Richard Dawkins who write and re-write the atheist gospels. Though I disagree with them, I have to give the atheists credit for being true to their world view.

I think what drives many real Christians (and probably Muslims and Buddhists too) nuts, is that we have so many people who say they belong to our faiths but don’t actually believe the core teachings of our faiths. It is often these people who give our faiths a bad name. Many a political leaders through history and even today have expropriated one faith our another to increase their power. Hitler was by no means a Christian, but he understood that to get power he had to appear to be someone that those who called themselves Christians could accept, which isn’t too difficult when you have people in churches who think that the Bible is a nice collection of myths most of which are irrelevant.

Tolerance is another bandwagon that has come and gone. I’m tired of being told that I’m intolerant if I believe that my faith is correct and everyone else’s is wrong, and therefore I shouldn’t share my faith. What about freedom of speech or expression? What about freedom of thought? When ever has political leadership not imposed its’ morality (or lack of morality) on people? So why shouldn’t Christians or members of other faiths have a moral voice?

Back to Tom Harpur; I hope that he reconsiders his affiliation with Christianity. You can’t pick and choose what you want to believe from here there and everywhere and still call it Christianity. It’s sort of like hanging a spare tire on a motorboat and calling it a car. There is a lot of hard stuff in Christianity, which is why it is called the narrow way. To become a Christian means that you’re going to have to change your life. If you like your life the way it is, then you’re probably not going to want to become a Christian, but if you’re tired of living your life the way you have, then it’s something that you should consider.

Having just watched this documentary a second time I thought I'd come here and see if there was some sort of good discussion on what is actually known about both Egyptian mythology and the history of Christianity and whether there is any merit to the information presented.

I can't say the arguments both for and against the existence of Jesus that are presented here are very impressive but from my years of intensely studying everything I can get my hands on about Egyptian history and mythology I want to commend Uche on posting what Egyptologists say. In my own readings, I have seen very few parallels between what Egyptians believe (and what they believe seems to have been extremely complicated) and the message of the early Christian church.

Over the summer I also read Thomas Cahill's Book: "Desire of the Everlasting Hills - the World Before and After Jesus" and it seems beyond incredible that a group of people could have made up the existence of this Jewish teacher and then stuck to that story even while being executed for espousing it. I understood there is independent evidence that both Apostle Peter and Paul (Saul) were executed - both by Emperor Nero between 64 to 68 AD. Apparently the oldest gospel of Mark is based on Peter's memoirs. Paul met and interacted with men who had known Jesus (and often disagreed with how they were running the offshoot "Jesus groups") and I hardly think he went through the incredible deprivations, impisonment and ultimate beheading based on a fairy story or an ancient Egyptian myth. he was Roman after all, an educated, literate and skeptical man.

Something major happened around 30 AD that made a huge impression on a large group of people - and it was enough to convince thousands who hadn't actually heard Jesus teach.

The nonsense Harpur, Freke and company are peddling simply doesn't stand up to the things that are known about the early followers of Jesus and about everything we know about Egyptian religion.

BTW, I don't call the earliest followers of Jesus, Christians as they didn't call themselves this until much later.

I hope you are aware that someone (presumably some Christian zealot) has sabotaged the last 5 minutes of the excellent "The Pagan Christ" when it was shown on CBC. I rechecked this from two independent sources and hope you can get it fixed and, hopefully, get that interferring individual dismissed.

MODERATER: YES, CBC NEWSWORLD WAS HAVING SOME AUDIO PROBLEMS. THIS WAS NOT INTENTIONAL AND THE PROGRAM CAN BE VIEWED IN IT'S ENTIRETY ON OUR WEBSITE.

Every Christmas and Easter the CBC puts out another documentary questioning and or ridiculing the beliefs of Christianity. If you do a search of the CBC archives on Christianity and documentaries you get about 8,000 hits. Most of them ridicule Christians and their beliefs. If you do one on Islam and documentaries you get about 700. Most of those stories are on how Muslims are discriminated against. Sikhism gets you about 140 hits. If you do a search on Judiasm and documentaries you get about one hit. CBC needs to be either far more balanced in its coverage of Christianity or it needs to do more documentaries tearing apart and "examining" the basic beliefs of other faiths, too.
Why is it every Christian Holiday season must be accompanied by a CBC program saying Christ was a made up story, or Mary was an invention, or how Catholicism is oppressing us all? Why are there no similar programs about Mohamed during Ramadan? Why are there no documentaries debunking Moses or Judiasm during Passover?
CBC coverage is so blatantly biased in its coverage of Christian subjects I can only assume it to be because of systemic prejudice.

Two presenters in this film, Tim Freke and Peter Gandy, wrote 'The Laughing Jesus' in which they divide Christianity into 'the baby' and 'the bathwater': or human sprituality vs religious literalism. Once you have gotten through their case for the non-existence of an historical Jesus, you are left with the original spiritual movement which inspired Christianity, what they call Gnostic Christianity. As a person who was raised a Christian and turned away from it disillusioned, their book actually gave me a new, fresh appreciation of Christianity, once it had been washed clean of all the nonsense piled on it over the years. For me, realizing that there was no human Christ in no way takes away from the true spiritual messages of Christianity.

If anyone was actulay paying attention to the documentry, the mention of Horus around 3000 BC (which is a similar story as jesus), was around 2000 years before the first mention of christ. Attis of greece origin 1200 BC aslo has the same Jesus story, Krishna india origin 900 BC also has the same Jesus story, another named Doinysus also Greece origin 500 BC also had the same Jesus story, then we have Mithra Origin Persia 1200 BC can you guess? the same story as Jesus. and last but not least you got Jesus being the last one which the same story look at the timeline, and you will find Jesus wasn't the first with these attributes.

Tom Harper forgets a few things that practicing Christians know. There is a multi dimension to the Christian experience, not just focused on narrow arguements related to historonics and attempts at rewriting history in the image of Tom's ideas. God is NOT a myth. Tom likes to entangle you with his own personal mythology. It's called "intellectualism based on hypothesis thinking". What if we change a few facts? What if we leave out certain information?

There are many, many people who have experienced God's presence, in one way or another. Just because a man is "arguementative" doesn't make him "accurate" in his opinions. For instance, God answers prayers. He heals. Born again and Christians who are close to God receive an noticable annointing. There is physical evidence of the Christ's cruxifiction and prophecy has been fulfilled and is being fulfilled. Then there's the witness of the Bible, where similar events occurred as they do today. (healing, answer to prayer, annointing, dreams and visions, etc.). The only issue is whether people seek God for whom He is, or if they want to rebell against the idea of God, like Tom. (FYI, rebellion, is a prophecy of our times in the Bible...so its not really surprising that this has occurred.).