similarity between jesus and krishna

material which provide no original religious sources to validate their claims. However, if you search the religious texts of the figures in question 
you will be presented with straightforward information that reveals the claim that the story of Jesus was stolen from pagan myths to be utterly 
false. For the reader's convenience, I supply links throughout this discussion to the original religious texts so you can see for yourself that the 
"Pagan Copycat Theory" has been completely fabricated.
Skeptic Interjection: But these figures existed before the alleged life of Jesus. Chronology alone makes this entire discussion pointless.Answer: An important fact to keep in mind while reading this section is the approximate 300 detailed Messianic prophecies regarding the life, 
death, and ministry of Jesus in the Old Testament. The prophecies span approximately 450 to 1,500 years before His birth. The accusation of 
Christians plagiarizing the accounts of other figures in the first century ignores the fact that concepts such as the virgin birth, the resurrection, 
and a Father-Son, relationship precede most figures in this article.

Also, many of the religious texts containing the figures and the alleged similarities claimed by critics postdate the completion of the Christian 
Bible. Most religious texts concerning these figures were added to over the centuries, with aspects of their lives becoming more spectacular 
and suspiciously similar to Christianity. An important difference between Jesus and the other figures in this article is the existence of verifiable 
facts surrounding Jesus' life: we know the approximate year of His birth and death, numerous records exist which verify His existence, 
accurate historical events that occurred around His lifetime are mentioned in the Christian texts, and we can trace the origins of the 
Judeo-Christian beliefs. Most other figures in question have no documented point of origin and mention no dates or approximate dates as to 
when the alleged events occurred.
Regardless, since we will show the copycat claims to be false, the argument of who came first shows itself to be irrelevant.

Skeptic Interjection: How does the mention of historical events prove the accuracy of the Bible? Many authors of fiction incorporate real 
people or places into their works to give the plot a feeling of reality. How is the Bible different?Answer: Historical accuracy alone is not proof of the Bible's inerrancy but it does attest to it's reliability. If the Bible only mentioned 
spurious locations and people like many of the pagan texts do, it would certainly detract from it's authenticity.

I want you to keep the following things in mind the next time you are presented with the pagan copycat theory. Ask yourself the following 
logic-based questions and you will see that most claims instantly crumble.
TERMINOLOGY One thing to look out for when presented with copycat claims is the use of Judeo-Christian terminology. There have been 
many religions throughout history whose members participated in ritual baths but it was not baptism. Political and religious groups may have 
celebrated a communal meal but it was not a Eucharist. Followers may consider their god a savior of some sort but they are not called Messiah. Religions may speak of an afterlife but they do not consist of places known as Heaven and Hell. Critics may use such terms to make 
their connections seem stronger but this is a misuse of terminology as these words are usually of Judeo-Christian origins.
TIMING When presented with comparative evidence, ask yourself:
1) Did the figure precede the Old Testament Messianic Prophecies? (most do not)
2) Does the timing of the evidence precede Christianity? (many religious texts and reliefs post-date Christianity)
3) Does the figure precede the life of Jesus? (figures like Apollonius of Tyana do not)
LOCATION If critics claim a figure from South America, for example, (like Quetzalcoatl) influenced Christianity, this is an obvious false claim if 
we can believe the Americas had not yet been discovered.
SYMBOLISM Ask yourself what the symbolism is behind such parallels. Like most religious and political groups of antiquity, a sect might have 
celebrated a communal meal but it did not hold the same significance of the Christian Eucharist. Members might consider their deity a savior 
but they did not consider the figure a savior from sin and damnation, etc.
SOURCES See whether or not the claims actually come from the sacred texts of the religion in question (most hardly ever do). Most 
references simply quote secondary sources by authors of the same ilk. When they do cite a religious source, most critics will not the specify 
the book, volume, or verse number yet they readily quote exactly where the "copy" can be found in the Christian Bible. Ask for specific 
references as to where the evidence can be found in the actual religious texts. Lastly, as we will see throughout this discussion, most
religious texts do not have an official cannon like the Christian Bible. Their texts have been admittedly altered and added to over the centuries. 
When critics cite a source from another text, ask yourself whether or not this evidence is found in a text that predates Christianity (most do 
not).

In Hinduism, Krishna is believed to be the eighth avatar of Vishnu, the second aspect of the Hindu trinity. Almost every correlation between 
Krishna and Jesus can be traced to Kersey Graves, a 19th century author who believed Christianity was created from pagan myths. Though his 
works have been proven by scholars to be false and poorly researched (Source), many still ignorantly refer to his arguments not knowing they 
are easily disproved by simply comparing the Bible to the Hindu texts.
THE DEFINITION OF KRISHNA Although many critics allege Krishna means Christ, Krishna in Sanskrit actually translates as Black (One) as 
Krishna was believed to have blackish-blue skin. The word Christ literally translates as Anointed One. When skeptics, in turn, spell Krishna as 
Chrishna or Christna, this is a blatant attempt to spread more misinformation and reinforce their erroneous theories.
A VIRGIN BIRTH A virgin birth is never attributed to Krishna as his parents bore seven previous children. Furthermore, the virgin birth was 
not a new concept invented by Christians. The book of Isaiah (written about 700 B.C.) spoke of a Messiah who would be born of a virgin. This 
prophecy was in circulation 700 years before Jesus and at least 100 years before Krishna. (Isaiah 7:14) Critics claim Krishna was born to the 
virgin Maia but according to Hindu texts, he was the eighth son of Princess Devaki and her husband Vasudeva: "You have been born of the 
divine Devaki and Vasudeva for the protection of Brahma on earth." Mahabharata Bk 12, XLVIII
INFANT MASSACRE Critics claim a tyrannical ruler issued a decree to kill all infant males prior to Krishna's birth but the Hindu legend states 
Devaki's six previous children were murdered by her cousin, King Kamsa, due to a prophecy foretelling his death at the hands of one of her 
children. Unlike Herod who issued a decree to slaughter all the males under two years old, the Hindu version tells us Kamsa only targeted 
Devaki's sons. He never issued a decree to indiscriminately kill male infants: "Thus the six sons were born to Devaki and Kamsa, too, killed 
those six sons consecutively as they were born." Bhagavata, Bk 4, XXII:7
PARENTS FLEE Critics claim while Krishna's parents fled to Mathura to avoid Kamsa, Jesus' parents fled to Muturea to avoid Herod. But the 
Bible tells us Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt- not to some unknown place called Muturea. Furthermore, the Hindu texts tell us Krishna's parents 
never had a chance to flee- they were imprisoned by Kamsa so he could kill Krishna once he was born: What faults had [Vasudeva] and his 
wife Devaki committed? Why did Kamsa kill the six infant sons of Devaki? And for what reason did [Vishnu] incarnate Himself as the son of 
Vasudeva in the prison house of Kamsa? Bhagavata, Bk 4, I:4-5 and Source
SHEPHERDS, WISEMEN, A STAR, AND A MANGER No mention of shepherds or wisemen appear at Krishna's birth. Krishna was born in a prison (not a stable as critics suggest) where his parents bore him in secret. It is unlikely such visitors would arrive only to alert Kamsa to 
Krishna's presence!
CARPENTER FATHERS Like Jesus' earthly father, Krishna's father was also said to be a carpenter. Yet nowhere in the Hindu texts does it say 
Vasudeva was a carpenter. In fact, we are told he was a nobleman in the courts of Mathura as he was married to Princess Devaki. When 
Krishna fled the wrath of Kamsa with his foster parents, we are told his foster-father Nanda was a cow-herd: "Thou art the most beloved of 
Nanda, the Cow-herd" Bhagavata, Bk 8, I, pg 743
THE CRUCIFIXION Though critics claim Krishna was crucified, this is mentioned nowhere within the Hindu texts. Instead, we are told exactly 
how he dies: Krishna is mediating in the woods when he is accidentally shot in the foot by a hunter's arrow. Skeptics really try to streeetch 
this one by claiming the arrow that shot Krishna impaled him to a tree, thus crucifying him. They also point out the similarity between his 
wound being in the foot and Jesus' pierced hands and feet. However, if I was carving my initials into a tree and accidentally impaled my wrist, 
the idea of saying I was crucified would be absurd. This story relates more to the death of Greek mythology's Achilles than anything else: "A 
fierce hunter of the name of Jara then came there, desirous of deer. The hunter, mistaking [Krishna], who was stretched on the earth in high 
Yoga, for a deer, pierced him at the heel with a shaft and quickly came to that spot for capturing his prey." Mahabharata, Book 16, 4
THE RESURRECTION Although critics claim Krishna descended into the grave for three days and appeared to many witnesses, no evidence of 
this exists whatsoever. Instead, the actual account says Krishna immediately returns to life and speaks only to the hunter by forgiving him of 
his actions: "He [the hunter] touched the feet of [Krishna]. The high-souled one comforted him and then ascended upwards, filling the entire 
welkin with splendour... [Krishna] reached his own inconceivable region." Mahabharata, Book 16, 4 Some obvious differences between the 
resurrections of Jesus and Krishna are as follows:

• Jesus' resurrection defeated the power of sin and death. Krishna's resurrection had no real affect on mankind.
  
• Jesus appeared to approximately 500 eye witnesses in the New Testament. Krishna appeared only to the hunter.
  
• Jesus rose from the dead three days later. Krishna immediately returned to life.
  
• Jesus did not ascend into Heaven until after the Great Commission. Krishna immediately "ascended" into the afterlife.
  
• Jesus was aware of what was to take place. Krishna had no foreknowledge concerning his death.
  
• Jesus ascended into a physical realm (Heaven). Krishna transcended into a mental state (or inconceivable region). The concepts between Heaven (Christianity) and Nirvana (Hinduism) differ greatly.
  

THE LAST SUPPER Krishna is said to have celebrated a last supper but two reasons offer evidence this event never occurred:

1. There is no mention of Krishna having a last supper celebration in any of the Hindu texts.
   
2. Because Krishna had no foreknowledge of his death, there is no reason he would have celebrated such an event!
   

DEPICTED AS BRUISING THE SERPENT'S HEAD Genesis 3:15 is a metaphorical Messianic prophecy which refers to Jesus' spiritual 
battle with Satan. Though critics claim Krishna was also referred to as the seed of the woman bruising the serpent's head, this phrase is never 
used as a reference to Krishna. The only thing that occurs is a literal battle Krishna encounters with actual serpents. Mahabharata, Bk 7, 
LXXXI and Mahabharata Book 8, XC
MISCELLANEOUS POSSIBLE REFERENCES

• Krishna was the human incarnation of Vishnu. This appears to be somewhat accurate but the actual Hindu triad consists of Vishnu, Shiva, and Brahma. Not Vishnu, Krishna, and a spirit deity.
  
• Krishna was of royal birth. (While Krishna was directly born into the noble court of Mathura, Jesus was from the royal Davidian line but born into poverty under the parentage of Mary and Joseph.)
  
• Krishna was seen as a Savior. (While Jesus was an eternal-spiritual savior who saved His people from damnation, Krishna was an earthly-warrior savior who freed his people from the tyrannical reign of Kamsa).
  
• Krishna often fasted in the wilderness. The only possible reference I could find to any such thing was that he often retreated into the forest to meditate.
  

MISCELLANEOUS ERRONEOUS REFERENCES

• Krishna was born in a cave. Actually, neither Jesus nor Krishna were born in caves. Krishna was born in a prison cell and the only reference to Jesus being born in a cave is in noncanonical writings.
  
• Krishna lived a sinless life. Whereas the Bible makes it clear Jesus committed no sin during His lifetime, The Hindu texts admit to Krishna's promiscuity and numerous sexual affairs.
  
• Krishna was born on December 25th. Actually, Krishna's birthday celebration, known as the Krishna Janmaashtami, is celebrated in the Hindu month of Bhadrapadha which corresponds to the month of August. Furthermore, it is unlikely Jesus was born on this date. Christmas is only celebrated on this date due to tradition.
  
• Krishna moved a small mountain to protect a village from disaster. Jesus states if you had faith as a mustard seed you would say to the mountain uproot yourself and be cast into the ocean. Other than the concept of moving mountains, anyone can see that these two statements have nothing essential in common. One describes a physical feat while the other uses moving a mountain as a metaphor to the power of faith.
  

CONCLUSION The Hindu texts have admittedly been altered and added to over the centuries. Many comparisons of the newer and older texts 
regarding the story of Krishna reveal many tales being added in later texts known as the Puranas (400-1000 A.D.), Bhagavata (400-1000 A.
D.), and the Harivamsa, (100-1000 A.D.). These texts have been proven by scholars to have been written after the life of Jesus.
Skeptical Interjection: According to Hindu tradition, the Bhagavata Purana is believed to have been written by Vyasa in about 3100 BC. It 
mentions the Vedic Sarasvati River about 30 times which was believed to be dried up around 2000 B.C.Answer: This is often cited as an argument for an earlier date of the Bhagavata. However it does not hold up for many reasons. The fact that 
the Bhagavata Purana mentions the non-extant Vedic Sarasvati River is no more proof of an early date of authorship than it would prove an 
ancient date of authorship if I were to write a novel centering around the Hanging Gardens of Babylon. The mention of the ancient river proves 
nothing more than the knowledge of its historical existence. There is also no record of any of these texts existing prior to the first century A.D. 
Even when the older Hindu texts were in circulation, the books regarding many details about Krishna's life were not included. Finally, the 
language and grammar of the Bhagavata Purana is not consistent with the more ancient languages of India.

Gautama is believed to have lived between 563 - 483 B.C. Gautama was born into the warrior class under the caste system of India and later 
achieved enlightenment to become the Buddha (or enlightened one) and founder of Buddhism. Like Zoroaster (below), very little was written 
about him during his lifetime, with the accounts becoming more incredible over time.
VIRGIN BIRTH Gautama was born to Suddhodana and his wife of twenty years, Maya. Though critics claim Maya was a virgin, we must 
assume she was not as she was the king's favorite wife. Also, The Acts of the Buddha acknowledges Maya and Suddhodana as having sexual 
relations (the two tasted of love's delight...), though I feel it is fair to point out most English translations do not contain this statement. A 
detailed account of Gautama's birth may be found here. Though Maya is portrayed as being virtuous and pure-minded, a virgin conception is 
never mentioned regarding the birth of the Buddha. At the very most, it was a womb transference as in the story of Krishna:
The most Excellent of all Bodhisattvas fell directly from his place among the residents of Tushita heaven, and streaking through the three 
worlds, suddenly took the form of a huge six-tusked elephant as white as Himalaya, and entered Maya's womb. Buddha Karita 1:18
Skeptic Interjection: Does the resemblance between the names Maya and Mary hold any significance?Answer: Though similar in their English translations, their original forms and translations are completely different. Maya, from Sanskrit, means Illusion whereas Mary (Maryam) translates from Hebrew as Bitter.
WISEMEN I could find no mention of wisemen in any Buddhist text but I did find the following in Post-Chrisitan writings:
Version 1: An ascetic (not wisemen) visits the king to relay the information he received from the gods that his child will become a great 
religious leader. After hearing this, Brahmans (not wisemen) decide to dedicate their sons depending on the outcome of the prophecy.
"A son has been born in the family of Suddhodana the king. Thirty-five years from now he will become a Buddha...Whether the young prince 
become a Buddha or a king, we will each one give a son: so that if he become a Buddha, he shall be followed and surrounded by monks of the 
warrior caste; and if he become a king, by nobles of the warrior caste." Jataka I:55,57
Version 2: At Gautama's birth, a seer (not wisemen) tells Suddhodana that Gautama will become a great religious leader:
"The great seer came to the palace of the king. 'Thy son has been born for the sake of supreme knowledge. Having forsaken his kingdom, 
indifferent to all worldly objects, he will shine forth as a sun of knowledge to destroy the darkness in the world.'" Buddha-Karita 1:54,62,74
PRESENTED WITH GOLD, FRANKINCENSE, AND MYRRH Again, I find no mention of such an occurrence except for a far-fetched 
correlation in a Post-Christian writing. We are told the gods (not wisemen) presented Gautama with sandalwood, rain, water lilies, and lotus 
flowers (Buddhist symbols). This should come as no surprise as royal births are often celebrated with festivals and gifts!
"As soon as he was born the thousand-eyed one took him gently, bright like a golden pillar. Two pure streams of water fell from heaven upon 
his head with piles of Mandara flowers. The yaksha-lords stood round guarding him with golden lotuses in their hands. The great dragons 
gazed with eyes of intent devotion, and fanned him and strewed Mandara flowers over him. And from a cloudless sky there fell a shower full of 
lotuses and water-lilies, and perfumed with sandalwood." Buddha Karita 1:27,36,38,40
GUIDED BY A STAR There is no mention of a celestial sign but I did find far-fetched similarities in Post-Christian texts:
Version 1: The Brahmans look for signs of the Buddha on Gautama to determine if he will be a king or religious leader. The signs do not imply 
celestial omens but physical markings a Buddha would have:
"They asked [the Brahmans] to observe the marks and characteristics of the Future Buddha's person, and to prophesy his fortune. If a man 
possessing such marks and characteristics continue in the household life, he becomes a Universal Monarch. If he retire from the world, he 
becomes a Buddha." Jataka 1:56
Version 2: Though the gods sent miraculous signs through nature, the appearance of a star is never said to have guided the prophet. 
However, we are told precisely what the signs are:
"Two streams of water bursting from heaven, bright as the moon's rays, having the power of heat and cold, fell down upon that peerless one's 
benign head to give refreshment to his body... The gods held up a white umbrella in the sky and muttered the highest blessings on his 
supreme wisdom... Then having learned by signs and through the power of his penances this birth of him who was to destroy all birth, the 
great seer Asita came to the palace of the king. Thus the great seer beheld the king's son with wonder, his foot marked with a wheel, his 
fingers and toes webbed, with a circle of hair between his eyebrows, and signs of vigour like an elephant." Buddha Karita 1:35,37,5465
DECEMBER 25TH Gautama's birth is actually celebrated in the spring month of Vesak by his followers (though we have already shown this 
date to be insignificant for Jesus).
ATTEMPT ON HIS LIFE BY AN EVIL KING There is no mention of an attempt on Gautama's life. The only thing we are told is his kingly father 
tries to persuade him away from a life of religious servitude by attempting to entice him with royal privileges. When the prophet tells the king 
his son will see four signs leading to his religious calling, the king orders guards to surround the child to prevent such an event. Source
"Then said the king, 'What shall my son see to make him retire from the world?' 'The four signs.' 'What four?' 'A decrepit old man, a diseased 
man, a dead man, and a monk.' 'From this time forth,' said the king, 'let no such persons be allowed to come near my son. It will never do for 
my son to become a Buddha. What I would wish to see is my son exercising sovereign rule and authority...' And when he had so spoken he 
placed guards for a distance of a quarter of a league in each of the four directions, in order that none of these four kinds of men might come 
within sight of his son." Jataka 1:57
ROYAL LINEAGE Like Krishna, Gautama was an immediate royal descendant born into privilege. Jesus was a distant descendant of King 
David born into poverty
MILESTONE AGES Contrary to Jesus who taught in the temple at the age of 12, began his ministry at 30, and died at 33, Gautama's milestone 
ages differ from what the critics claim. He finished his education at 15, married at 16, became a monk at 29, reached enlightenment at 35, and 
died at 80. Source
CRUCIFIXION Though critics claim some vague accounts mention Gautama being crucified, I can find no mention of this in any Buddhist 
source. In fact, we are told Gautama dies of natural causes at the age of 80. His followers accompany him to a river and provide him with a 
couch.
"'Be so good as to spread me a couch... I am weary and wish to lie down...' Then the [Buddha] fell into a deep meditation, and having passed 
through the four jhanas, entered Nirvana." Source
RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION After his death, Gautama's body was cremated. Source
"And they burned the remains of the Blessed One as they would do to the body of a king of kings." Source Gautama was said to transcend all 
meditation levels upon his deathbed before reaching Nirvana. But according to Buddhism, Nirvana is not a physical place, but a mental state. 
Like we mention with Krishna, the concept of Buddha transcending into Nirvana differs greatly from the Christian Heaven.
ERRONEOUS SIMILARITIES CLAIMED BY CRITICS:

1. He fed a multitude with a basket of cakes. There is no mention of this in any Buddhist text.
   
2. Transfiguration on a Mount. Though Gautama reached spiritual enlightenment, he did not experience a physical transfiguration. Nor did this occur on a mount- Buddha obtained his enlightenment beneath the Bodhi tree.
   
3. Crushing the Serpent's Head. Like Krishna, Buddha is never referred to by this title but a tale does surface in a later text which mentions him literally slaying a serpent. But as stated, this was a metaphorical title of Jesus.
   
4. Poverty Vows. Though some Christians may take vows of poverty, this was never taught by Jesus. He only warned how the love of earthly possession could turn our focus away from eternal things. Matthew 6:19-24
   
5. Similar titles: Good Shepherd, Carpenter, Alpha and Omega, Sin Bearer, God of Gods, Master, Light of the World, Redeemer, Everlasting to Everlasting, etc. But Gautama never claimed to be a deity, rendering these titles obviously false. The only titles he shared with Jesus that I could find mentioned in Buddhist texts were Lord, Teacher and Holy One.
   

IN CONCLUSION Because Buddhism shares many concepts with Hinduism (and originated in the approximate vicinity), there are actually 
more similarities between the stories of Buddha and Krishna than Buddha and Jesus.

According to Egyptian mythology, Horus was originally believed to be the son of Ra and Hathor and the husband/brother of Isis. Later he 
was seen as the son of Osiris and Isis once Hathor and Isis were merged into one being. Horus was considered the sky, sun, and moon god 
represented by a man with the head of falcon.
VIRGIN BIRTH There are two separate birth accounts in regards to Horus (neither depict a virgin birth):Version 1: Hathor, the motherly personification of the milky way, is said to have conceived Horus but we are told her husband, Ra, was an 
Egyptian sun god. Hathor (a sky goddess) was represented by the cow whose milk brought forth the milky way. By the will of her husband Ra, 
she gave birth to Horus:
"I, Hathor of Thebes, mistress of the goddesses, to grant to him a coming forth into the presence [of the god]... Hathor of Thebes, who was 
incarnate in the form of a cow and a woman." Source and Source
Version 2: When we examine Isis as Horus' mother, we are told Isis was not a virgin, but the widow of Osiris. Isis practices magic to raise 
Osiris from the dead so she can bear a son that would avenge his death. Isis then becomes pregnant from the sperm of her deceased husband. Again, no virgin birth occurs:
"[Isis] made to rise up the helpless members [penis] of him whose heart was at rest, she drew from him his essence [sperm], and she made 
therefrom an heir [Horus]." Source and Source
THE FATHER AND SON UNITY Critics suggest the Christian trinity was adapted from the notion of Osiris, Ra, and Horus being one god in 
essence. Because Horus was born after the death of Osiris, it came to be believed he was the resurrection, or reincarnation, of Osiris:
"He avengeth thee in his name of 'Horus, the son who avenged his father." Source
Throughout the centuries, the Egyptians eventually considered Osiris and Horus as one and the same. However, this son-as-the-father 
comparison more closely resembles the metamorphosis of Hathor into Isis than it does the Christian trinity. We see Horus first as the son of 
Ra, then being the equivalent of Ra, then Ra finally becoming just as aspect of Horus. Similar to Hathor and Isis, we simply see a merger of 
one being into another. In Egyptian mythology, each god had a distinct beginning by being conceived from other gods. In Christian 
theology, God and Jesus always existed as one and the same, neither having a beginning or an end. Jesus' birth did not represent His creation- only His advent in human from. Furthermore, the father-son concept was not created by first-century Christians. Prophecies in the 
Old Testament referred to the future Messiah as the Son of God up to 1,000 years before the birth of Christ. I Chronicles 17:13-14
CRUCIFIXION AND RESURRECTION Horus is never said to have been crucified, nevertheless to have died. The only connection we can 
make to Horus being resurrected is if we consider the eventual merger of Horus and Osiris. But such a theory results in an catch 22, 
apparently noticed by the Egyptians as they later altered their beliefs to fix the contradictions. In the Egyptian tale, Osiris is either 
dismembered by Set in battle or sealed in a chest and drowned in the Nile. Isis then pieces Osiris' body back together and resurrects Osiris to 
conceive an heir that will avenge Osiris' death (although technically Osiris is never actually resurrected as he is forbidden to return to the world 
of the living). Source and Source
"[Set] brought a shapely and decorated chest, which he had caused to be made according to the measurements of the king's body... Set 
proclaimed that he would gift the chest unto him whose body fitted its proportions with exactness... Then Osiris came forward. He lay down 
within the chest, and he filled it in every part. But dearly was his triumph won in that dark hour which was his doom. Ere he could raise his 
body, the evil followers of Set sprang suddenly forward and shut down the lid, which they nailed fast and soldered with lead. So the richly 
decorated chest became the coffin of the good king Osiris, from whom departed the breath of life." Source
BORN ON THE 25TH OF DECEMBER Horus' birth was actually celebrated during the month of Khoiak, (October/November). Though some 
critics claim Horus was born during the winter solstice, this shows more of a relationship to other pagan religions which considered the solstices 
sacred.
TWELVE DISCIPLES Superficially this similarity seems accurate until we see Horus' "disciples" were not disciples at all- they were the twelve signs of the zodiac which became associated with Horus, a sky god. However Jesus' disciples were actual men who lived and died, whose 
writings exist to this day, and whose lives are recorded by historians. Because Horus' "disciples" were merely signs of the zodiac, they never 
taught his philosophy or spread his teachings. The fact that there are twelve signs of the zodiac (twelve months) as compared to Jesus' twelve 
apostles is an insignificant coincidence.
MOUNTAINTOP ENCOUNTER Critics point out the similarity of both Jesus and Horus having an encounter on a mountaintop with their 
enemies. Instead of dissecting this piece by piece, I will simply give each version of events and let the reader observe the (obvious) 
differences:Jesus: After Jesus completes His fast in the wilderness, Satan tries to tempt Jesus by offering Him all the kingdoms of the world if Jesus 
agrees to worship him, but Jesus refuses. Matthew 4:1-11Horus: During battle, Horus rips off one of Set's testicles while Set (sometimes called Seth) gorges out Horus' eye. Set later tries to prove his 
dominance by initiating intercourse with Horus. Horus catches Set's semen in his hand and throws it into a nearby river. Horus later 
masturbates and spreads his semen over lettuce which Set consumes. Both Set and Horus stand before the gods to proclaim their right to rule 
Egypt. When Set claims dominance over Horus, his semen is found in the river. When Horus' dominance is considered, his semen is found 
within Set so Horus is granted rule over Egypt:
"O that castrated one! O this man! O he who hurries him who hurries, among you two! These- this first corporation of the company of the 
justified... Was born before the eye of Horus was plucked out, before the testicles of Set were torn away." Source "It is the day on which Horus 
fought with Set, who cast filth in the face of Horus, and when Horus destroyed the powers of Set." Source "Then [Set] appeared before the 
divine council and claimed the throne. But the gods gave judgment that Horus was the rightful king, and he established his power in the land of 
Egypt, and became a wise and strong ruler like to his father Osiris." Source
Skeptic Interjection: Does the similarity between the names Set and Satan hold any significance?Answer: Set's variant names include Seth, Sutekh, Setesh, and Seteh. The root Set is usually considered to translate into dazzler or stable 
pillar. The different suffixes of his name add the meanings majestic, supreme, and desert. The name Satan comes from the Semitic root Stn which represents opposition. Before his fall, Satan's original name was Lucifer, or angel of light. The term Satan represents a general 
adversary, hence his accepted identity. Though both names consist of an S and a T, their meanings have nothing in common. The spellings are 
only a result of the original root words which represent their character. Source and Source
SIMILAR TITLES Critics allege Horus held similar titles used to identify Jesus such as Messiah, Savior, Son of Man, Good Shepherd, Lamb of 
God, The Way, the Truth, the Light, and Living Word. However I can find no evidence of any of these names ever being used in reference to 
Horus. I am especially suspicious of the word Messiah since it is Hebrew in origin.
IN CONCLUSION We can see the differences between Jesus and Horus far outweigh any superficial correlations.

According to Egyptian mythology, Horus was originally believed to be the son of Ra and Hathor and the husband/brother of Isis. Later he 
was seen as the son of Osiris and Isis once Hathor and Isis were merged into one being. Horus was considered the sky, sun, and moon god 
represented by a man with the head of falcon.
Zoroaster was an Iranian prophet and founder of Zoroastrianism. Though the dating of his life is heatedly debated, he is believed to be a 
contemporary of King Hystaspes, making a 6th century B.C. dating most likely. Evidence is shown throughout the Avesta which mentions 
personal conversations between the two. One example is as follows:
"'I am a pious man, who speaks words of blessing,' thus said Zarathushtra to the young king Vishtaspa 'O young king Vishtaspa! [I bless 
thee]" Vishtasp Yasht, 1
VIRGIN BIRTH There is no mention of a virgin birth in any Zoroastrian text nor do the events of Zoroaster's birth seem to have any relation 
to Jesus. The actual accounts regarding his birth are given below:
Version 1: Zoroaster's parents (Dukdaub and Pourushasp) were a normal married couple who conceive a son through natural means. 
Zoroaster is described as laughing when he is born as well as having a visible, glowing aura about him:
"[Zoroaster] had come into the posterity...who are Pourushasp, his father, and Dukdaub who is his mother. And also while he is being born and 
for the duration of life, he produced a radiance, glow, and brilliance from the place of his own abode..." Denkard, Bk 5 2:1-2
Version 2: In a later text, an embellishment is added by Zoroastrian followers. We are told Ahura Mazda (the main deity of Zoroastrianism) 
implants the soul of Zoroaster into the sacred Haoma plant and through the plant's milk Zoroaster is born.
TEMPTED IN THE WILDERNESS Zoroaster is also said to have been tempted by an evil spirit to renounce his faith with the promise of 
receiving power over the nations. However, this story is found in the Vendidad, the Zoroastrian text which lists the laws regarding demons, 
penned sometime between 250 - 650 A.D. (centuries after the life of Jesus):
"Again to him said the Maker of the evil world, Angra Mainyu: 'Do not destroy my creatures, O holy Zarathushtra... Renounce the good Religion 
of the worshippers of Mazda, and thou shalt gain such a boon as...the ruler of the nations.'" Vendidad Fargad 19:6
SEED OF A WOMAN The Christian Old Testament refers to the savior of mankind being born of a woman. Critics claim this concept was stolen 
from Zoroaster whose name means seed of the woman. Apparently no one investigated this claim because the name is an ancient Iranian 
compound of zareta (old, feeble) and ustra (camel). His original Persian name Zarathushtra (Zoroaster is the Greek/English translation) 
literally translates as owner of old feeble camels. Source and Source Zoroaster was also allegedly called The Word Made Flesh and The Living 
Word but no such references exist.
MINISTRY BEGAN AT 30 Like Jesus, Zoroaster was believed to begin his teachings at the age of 30. Though Zoroaster technically came out 
of seclusion at the age of 30 to begin his teachings, he was shunned and ignored for 12 years until his religion was accepted by King Vishtaspa. 
Jesus, on the other hand, attracted followers instantly. Zoroaster was believed to be killed around the age of 77 while Jesus was killed at the 
age of 33. Furthermore this fact about Zoroaster is not mentioned until later texts dated around 225 A.D. (almost 200 years after Christianity 
had already been in circulation).
EUCHARIST Though critics claim the concept of a bread-wine communion originated with Zoroaster, no such celebration exists. Though priests 
accepted sacrifices of meat, flowers, milk, bread, fruit, and sacred water, there was no symbolic communion performed by Zoroastrian 
followers other than drinking the juice from the sacred Haoma plant (but this did not hold the body-blood significance of the Christian 
Eucharist). Source
RELIGIOUS TEACHINGS Critics point out the similarities between the basic belief structure of Zoroastrianism and Christianity. Superficially, 
there are many correlations between the two until they are further examined:

1. Both teach a spiritual battle between good and evil. True, but this is true for almost all religions. The chief god of Zoroastrianism is Ahura Mazda while the chief God of the Judeo-Christian belief is Yahweh. The arch enemy of Zoroastrianism is Angra Mainyu whereas in Christianity he is known as Satan. Zoroastrianism also teaches the dualism of both figures whereas Christianity teaches the subordination of Satan to God.
   
2. Salvation. Zoroastrianism teaches all men will be judged according to their works at the final judgment. Christianity teaches men are judged according to their acceptance of Christ.
   
3. Judgment. Zoroastrianism teaches all men are eventually saved. Christianity teaches the fate of the sinful is eternal.
   
4. Monotheism. Zoroaster originally taught the concept of one god but Zoroastrian priests, in order to make the religion more enticing, later added several other deities.
   
5. Resurrection of all men. Zoroastrian teaches the eventual resurrection of all humans at the end of the age. Christianity also teaches this, but this for the judgment of souls and the reign of the righteous in the millennial kingdom.
   

HE WAS SLAIN FOR MANKIND'S SINS It is believed Zoroaster was killed at the age of 77 after being slaughtered on one of his temple altars 
by Turanian invaders (although this is debated). Regardless, his death was never believed to atone for sin or to hold any other spiritual 
purpose.
IN CONCLUSION Most Zoroastrian texts were written centuries after the Christian texts. The accounts of Zoroaster's life that existed before 
the time of Jesus (the Gathas) consist mainly of vague poetic writings which say very little about his life. The incredible acts later associated 
with him were added by Zoroastrian priests wishing to make the religion more appealing.

Mithras, not to be confused with Mitra (the warrior angel of ancient Persia), was the head deity of Mithraism. 
Trying to piece together the actual legends relating to Mithras is difficult as the earliest evidence relating to him is 
only found in artistic reliefs- the original texts regarding Mithraism have long since been lost, leaving behind only 
fragments. For this discussion, we will focus on Roman Mithraism as this is the Mithras the critics claim as being 
the inspiration for Jesus (although this allegation could easily be dismissed by showing most texts containing the 
alleged connections postdate the Christian texts). Furthermore, Roman Mithraism surfaced centuries after the 
existence of the Hebrew Messianic prophecies.
Note: The original authority on Mithraism was Franz Cumont who believed the Mitra of ancient Persian and the 
Mithras of Mithraism were one and the same. Most of his research was compiled in the 1800's and, because he 
was the first known scholar to explore the dead religion of Mithraism, his research went undisputed for quite 
awhile. If you look through early 20th century publications, one can see Cumont's findings were accepted without 
debate. It was only upon later investigation by differing historians and archaeologists that many of Cumont's 
theories were disproved. To see what I am referring to, read this article from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica 
which is based on Cumont's theories as compared to more modern research.
CAVE BIRTH As stated previously, there is no mention of Jesus being born in a cave anywhere in the canonical 
Scriptures. As for Mithras, he also was not born in a cave but from solid rock.
DECEMBER BIRTH Many religious festivals were consolidated into one holiday to coincide with the winter solstice. 
Christmas is only celebrated on December 25th due to this tradition. This argument already proves to be 
insignificant as there is nothing in the Scriptures which mentions this date.
ATTENDED BY SHEPHERDS The earliest existing account of Mithras' birth is found in a relief depicting him 
emerging from a rock with the assistance of men who certainly appear to be shepherds (which is interesting 
considering his birth was supposed to have preceded the creation of humans!). But this little tidbit was added 
later, apparently by those who didn't notice the contradiction. Furthermore, this relief dates to 4th century A.D.!
VIRGIN BIRTH There is no mention of a virgin birth in Mithraism. The earliest reliefs depict a fully-mature Mithras 
emerging from a rock (as shown in three illustrations to the left).
TWELVE DISCIPLES Mithras did not have twelve disciples, but I can relate a far-fetched similarity to this 
allegation. In two of the reliefs to the left, Mithras is surrounded by the twelve signs of the zodiac. Claiming 
Mithras had twelve disciples because there are twelve signs of the zodiac is the connection critics try to make. The 
critics simply see twelve beings and claim the figures are disciples. Some go as far to defend their position by 
mimicking Franz Cumont's theory, claiming the figures were actually Mithras' twelve disciples dressed up in zodiac costumes! How they can make this connection is unknown as no inscriptions accompany the original reliefs.
GREAT TEACHER I can find no mention in any text or relief showing Mithras to be a traveling teacher. 
Regardless, it would hardly seem significant as many legends speak of mankind receiving wisdom from their gods.
ATONEMENT OF SIN The claim regarding Mithras atoning for sin leads me to as the question, how? There is no 
mention of this in any record. Mithras does sacrifice a sacred bull to create life but I see no reference to the 
atoning of sin, the atoning of sin through blood, or Mithras atoning for sin. Some try to merge the bull and Mithras 
into one being but this concept is unanimously rejected by Mithras scholars.
LAST SUPPER There are two reliefs which show Mithras celebrating a banquet. The first relief shows Mithras and 
Helios dining together after the sacrifice of the bull. The other depicts Mithras dining with the sun before ascending 
into paradise with the other gods. But for some reason the tale becomes distorted with Mithras saying to his 
(imaginary) disciples, "He who shall not eat of my body nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and 
I with him, shall not be saved." Yet this quote was added centuries later during the middle ages and is not even 
attributed to Mithras!

CRUCIFIXION Though critics claim Mithras was crucified, there is no mention of this in the reliefs or texts. In fact no death is associated with 
Mithras, nevertheless crucifixion. We are told he completes his earthly mission then is taken to paradise in a chariot- alive and well.
SUNDAY AS A HOLY DAY This appears to be correct, at least for Roman Mithraism. But considering almost every religion used Saturday or 
Sunday as a holy day, there was a 50/50 chance of this hitting the target- or at least a 1/7 chance for the number of days in a week. 
Christians selected Sunday as their holy day only because it was the day of Christ's resurrection.
SIMILAR TITLES I did find some similarities but the claims critics make seem to be manipulated from their original form- there were no exact 
matches to the names critics list. I also listed other titles that are often cited but prove to be incorrect:

• Savior, Redeemer, Messiah. Mithras is never referred to any of these. Why would he be since he never served such a purpose? Messiah is also a Hebrew word which makes one wonder what the source is for this allegation.
  
• Lamb of God, Good Shepherd. Skeptics try to use the depiction of Mithras holding the sacrificed bull over his shoulders as evidence but this is absurd as the bull is slaughtered! Furthermore, the Old Testament references lambs and shepherds long before Mithraism ever surfaced.
  
• Son of God. I didn't technically find this but I'll give it as a freebie if you consider Mithras as the son of Ahura Mazda.
  
• The Way Truth and Light, Light of the World. Though the names are not an exact match I did find warrior angel of light but this is associated with the Iranian Mithras- not the Roman Mithras of Mithraism.
  
• Lion. Again, not an exact match but I did find an association to sky/celestial lion, referring to the sign of Leo. But like the reference to lambs, the Old Testament mentions the Lion of Judah long before Mithraism ever originated.
  
• The Living Word. Mithras is sometimes called logos which means word but never as the living word.
  
• Mediator. Mithras was the mediator between good and evil whereas Jesus is the mediator between God and man.
  

THEOLOGICAL COMPARISONS I consolidated the similarities that come standard in most religions into one section. For lack of a better title, 
we'll call this our stating the obvious list:

1. Mithraism had a strong sense of community among its members (only men were allowed to be members, by the way)
   
2. Mithraism taught the immortality of the human soul (so did Judaism which preceded Mithraism)
   
3. Mithraism placed emphasis on living an ethical and moral life (so did Judaism which preceded Mithraism)
   
4. Mithraism believed in the concept of good verses evil (so did Judaism which preceded Mithraism)
   
5. Mithraism taught all life sprouted from god(s) (so did Judaism which preceded Mithraism)
   
6. Mithras performed miraculous deeds
   
7. Mithraism taught the eventual destruction of the earth
   

ERRONEOUS SIMILARITIES The following miscellaneous similarities exist neither in the ancient reliefs of Mithras or in any version of the 
surviving texts:

1. Mithras began his ministry at the age of 30 (no reference to any age is mentioned).
   
2. Mithras was buried in a tomb (Alive, I suppose?). The only reference I could find to this was every year during the winter solstice, he was supposedly reborn out of a rock (but this tale was added later).
   
3. A Holy Trinity (Even with all sorts of new gods becoming associated with Mithraism over time, I can find no mention of any gods forming a specific trinity).
   

CONCLUSION Once again, the alleged similarities are either superficial, completely fabricated, or stretched to make a match.

Attis was worshipped as a deity in what is known today as modern Turkey, with his cult later spreading throughout the Roman Empire. Most of 
the alleged similarities between Attis and Jesus appear to either be manipulated or completely fabricated. After reading this section, I am sure 
you will agree that the Jesus-Attis allegations are the most absurd of all.
DECEMBER 25TH We've already shown the insignificance of this argument as it relates to Christianity. Furthermore, there is no mention of 
this date having any relation to Attis- he is associated with the annual return of spring.
VIRGIN BIRTH According to the legend, Agdistis, a hermaphroditic monster, arises from the earth as a descendant of Zeus. Agdistis gives 
birth to the Sangarius river which brings forth the nymph, Nana, who either holds an almond to her breast and becomes impregnated by the 
almond or sits beneath a tree where an almond falls into her lap and impregnates her. Nana later abandons the child who is raised by a goat. 
We are left to assume Attis was conceived from an almond seed which fell from a tree as a result of Zeus' spilled semen.
CRUCIFIXION This similarity is completely false. Attis castrates himself beneath a pine tree after he is made to go insane before his wedding 
by Agdistis when the he-she becomes enamoured with him. His blood flows onto the ground from his severed organ and brings forth a patch of 
violets. Critics try to associate Attis' death beneath a tree with Jesus' death on a "tree." They also try to connect Jesus' blood pouring from 
his wounds with Attis' blood flow caused by his auto-castration.
RESURRECTION In one version, Agdistis is overcome with remorse for her actions and requests Zeus to preserve the beautiful corpse of Attis 
so it never decomposes. No resurrection occurs for Attis. In another account, Agdistis and The Great Mother (or Cybele) carry the pine tree 
back to a cave where they both mourn the death of Attis. Again, no resurrection. The resurrection story doesn't surface until much later when 
Attis is transformed into a pine tree.
ATONING FOR SIN Critics claim Attis was slain for the salvation of mankind but there is no evidence of this. We are told Attis was originally a 
tree spirit representing a god of vegetation. His death and transformation into a pine tree represented plant life which dies in the winter only to 
bloom again in the spring. The first mention of Attis in relation to being a savior doesn't appear until 6th century A.D.- way too late to be 
considered an inspiration to Christianity.
TOMB BURIAL The only reference regarding a tomb burial is when Attis (as a pine tree) is carried to the cave of The Great Mother. But the 
cave is her home- not a burial tomb.
FATHER-SON UNITY Again, no such relationship exists. The only far-fetched connection we can make is the belief Attis was the grandson of 
Zeus. We can conclude from what we already know about Attis that this is a stretch. Never was it believed that Zeus and Attis were believed to 
be one and the same, nevertheless on an equal level.
EUCHARIST Critics claim the followers of Attis celebrated the god with a wine-bread communion. The only mention of such an activity is when 
they would eat a sanctified meal out of sacred tambourines and cymbals, though it is never mentioned what they eat. Critics speculate it was 
bread and wine but this is unlikely considering wine was restricted during the Attis festivals.
CONCLUSION The only things we really see going on with poor Attis is a whole lot of genitalia-mutilation, pine tree resurrections, and river 
descendants bearing children from nuts... Nuts certainly comes to mind regarding whoever put these two figures together.

Dionysus is mostly known as the patron god of wine, though he was considered the Greek and Roman patron of many titles. This allows 
critics to make the illogical connection between Dionysus being the god of wine and Jesus drinking wine.
DECEMBER 25 BIRTH There is no record of this date being significant for Dionysus. Like Attis, Dionysus is associated with the annual return of 
spring.
VIRGIN BIRTH There are two birth accounts concerning Dionysus (neither implies a virgin birth):

1. Zeus impregnates a mortal woman, Semele, much to the jealously of Hera. Hera convinces Semele to ask Zeus to reveal his glory to her but because no mortal can look upon the gods and live, Semele is instantly incinerated. Zeus then takes the fetal Dionysus and sews him into his own thigh until his birth. Source
   
2. Dionysus is the product of Zeus and Persephone. Hera becomes insanely jealous and tries to destroy the infant by sending the Titans to kill him. Zeus comes to the rescue but it's too late- the Titans had eaten everything but Dionysus' heart. Zeus then takes the heart and implants it into the womb of Semele. As we can see, no virgin birth takes place but this is how Dionysus is said to have become a rebirth deity as he is twice born in the womb. Source
   

TRAVELING TEACHER Dionysus was said to have traveled far and wide (whereas Jesus concentrated His ministry in Judea) to teach men "the 
secrets of the vine" (how to make wine) and to spread his religious rites. He was never believed to be a spiritual teacher like Jesus.
EUCHARIST To celebrate Dionysus' rebirth after being devoured by the Titans, cult members would take either a live human or animal, tear 
the victim apart limb by limb, and eat the flesh raw. The sacrifice would be eaten in a cannibalistic manner so the followers could pay homage 
to their god. However this story relates more to the myths surrounding Tantalus than the Christian communion.
TRIUMPHANT ENTRY Critics claim Dionysus is often pictured as riding a donkey amid crowds waving branches of ivy. However, this is only a 
description of his regular entourage who traveled with him (not a specific pre-passion entry). These individuals were maenads and satyrs who 
would follow Dionysus with branches entwined with ivy and grapes- cult symbols representative of the wine god. Jesus on the other hand had 
a specific triumphant entry upon entering Jerusalem while human crowds waved palm branches (Jewish symbols). I also found a messianic 
prophecy in Genesis 49:11 (written in approximately 1400 B.C.- way before Dionysus) which foretells Jesus (literally) tethering his donkey 
with a vine and (symbolically) washing his robes in wine (a reference to His death). Not that I am accusing the Greeks/Romans of creating a 
deity around a single Bible passage, but if we want to get technical, the Bible groups these three objects together long before Dionysus was a 
twinkle in the eyes of mythology.
WATER INTO WINE Dionysus was the god of mythology who gave King Midas the power to turn whatever he touched into gold. Likewise, he 
gave the daughters of King Anius the power to turn whatever they touched into wine, corn, or oil. Considering Dionysus was the god of wine, 
this should come as no surprise. Regardless, though there are tales where Dionysus supernaturally fills empty vessels with wine, the act of 
turning water into wine does not occur.
RESURRECTION The "resurrection" account of Dionysus stems from the tale of him being reborn after his attack by the Titans. As we can see, 
this has nothing to do with the resurrection story of Jesus. Furthermore, we are told after Dionysus completes teaching his followers his 
religious rites, he ascends to Mount Olympus to be with the other deities- alive and well. His infant rebirth, like Attis, is symbolic of the 
vegetation cycle- not the atoning of sin.
SIMILAR TITLES The following is a list of alleged titles Dionysus is claimed to share with Jesus. Though in the past we have been able to show 
some obscure similarities, this list is an obvious fabrication:

• King of Kings. Dionysus was only a semi-deity. Zeus was the head god according to the mythology.
  
• Only Begotten Son. Zeus had many relationships with women where he fathered several other children.
  
• Alpha and Omega. Dionysus had a distinct beginning to his existence.
  
• Lamb of God. Dionysus is associated with a bull, serpent, wine, and ivy, but never as a lamb.
  

The titles I did find for Dionysus are The Bull, The Goat Shooter, The Torch, Dionysus of the Knoll, Meat-Eater, Dionysus of the Vine, and 
Savior (though the term savior was attributed later to Dionysus for promising carnal pleasure in the afterlife. The only person he saved from 
Hades was his mother, Semele.).
IN CONCLUSION It is absurd to consider Dionysus as an inspiration for Jesus. Even if the Jews were aware of the fables surrounding 
Dionysus, it is unlikely they used this lore to create the character for their Messiah.

We will now examine a list of alleged deities which skeptics claim were also crucified. Again, these accusations come to us from 
Kersey Graves in his proven-erroneous work, The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors.
OSIRIS: As we explain above, Osiris was said to have died after being tricked by Set. He was sealed into a chest then dumped into the Nile. 
Also, by everything I can find, the Osiris legend existed long before crucifixion was even invented!
QUETZALCOATL: This allegation is somewhat humorous to me as Quetzalcoatl was an ancient god of South America. How on earth critics 
claim him as being an inspiration for Christ is beyond me as the Americas had not yet been discovered! Nevertheless, Quetzalcoatl is never 
said to have been crucified. One legend states he burned himself alive out of remorse for sleeping with a celibate priestess while another tells 
us he was consumed by fire sent by the gods.
KRISHNA: Again, we have already shown how Krishna was said to have died: He was killed after accidentally being struck by a hunter's arrow while meditating.
TAMMUZ/DUMUZID: Tammuz was supposedly killed by demons sent by Ishtar after she found him on her throne. Again, the myths 
surrounding Tammuz seem to exist before the practice of crucifixion.
ALCESTIS: According to the legend, Alcestis agrees to die for her husband after he strikes a deal with the gods. When the time comes, 
Alcestis is described as being in bed. The gods are touched by her devotion, take pity on her, and reunite her with her husband.
ATTIS: As we have already shown, Attis was said to have bled to death after emasculating himself.
ESUS/HESUS: The only thing I could find regarding Esus (Not to be confused with the English translation Jesus) was that his followers would 
participate in human sacrifices by hanging a victim from a tree (not crucifixion) after disembowelment. I could find no mention of Esus 
(sometimes associated with the gods Mercury and Mars) suffering death.
DIONYSUS: The death account we have already discussed concerning Dionysus shows him being eaten alive by the Titans during his infancy.
INDRA: In one account, Indra is swallowed alive by the serpent, Vritra, who later spits him out at the command of the other gods. Because 
he is eventually saved, there really is no death account concerning Indra (nevertheless by crucifixion).
PROMETHEUS: Prometheus was punished by Zeus by being chained to a mountain where an eagle would come and eat his liver on a daily 
basis. Later, Prometheus would be freed from his torment by Hercules.
MITHRAS: As already stated in this article, Mithras was never said to have experienced death but to have been carried to heaven in a chariot, 
alive and well.
QUIRINUS: I can find no mention of Quirinus experiencing death. Even when associated with Romulus there is no death account as Romulus is 
said to have been taken up into the heavens while still alive. To explain his disappearance, many accused the senate of his death. Regardless, 
no crucifixion is said to have occurred.
BEL: Often associated with Zeus, I could find no mention of the Babylonian Bel experiencing death.
BALI (MAHABALI): Bali is said to have been forced down (bodily) into the underworld after being deceived by Vamana, an avatar of Vishnu. 
In some accounts, Bali is said to have been released and granted kingship. Either way, no crucifixion occurs.
ORPHEUS: Orpheus is said to have been killed by Dionysus' frenzied maenads after refusing to worship any god but Apollo.
IAO & WITTOBA: I can find no information regarding the deaths of these two figures in any original, published source so I will refrain from 
commenting at this time in order to prevent hearsay. If any of my readers can refer me to the actual religious or first-hand texts 
containing these two figures, I will happily look into it. Until then, I will hold off on posting online links until I can verify the information.

Though other authors go to great lengths investigating the claims listed in this discussion, my mission was to provide a brief 
synopsis that would help the reader distinguish between fact and fiction. Once the reader gets to the actual sources they will 
wonder how such claims even originated. If any of the critics cared to look into the facts for themselves before contributing to the 
propaganda, they would have been able to dismiss such claims immediately.

Certain coincidences between Jesus and other figures can only be expected due to sheer probability. As a modern example, let's 
look at some of the coincidences between Kennedy and Lincoln as taken from here:

1. Lincoln was elected to congress in 1846. Kennedy was elected to congress 1946 (Whereas Kennedy had instant success in legislative and executive politics, Lincoln suffered many defeats).
   
2. Lincoln was elected president in 1860. Kennedy was elected president in 1960. (Considering presidential elections were held every four years, this only brings the odds to 1 in 20).
   
3. The names Lincoln and Kennedy both contain seven letters (Until we consider their first names which destroys this parallel).
   
4. Both were presidents during times of major changes in civil rights (So were their successors and several other presidents).
   
5. Both presidents were killed by an assassin's bullet on a Friday (This holds only a one is seven chance).
   
6. Both assassins were known by three names consisting of 15 letters (Each man was not always referred to by three names. This mainly surfaced after they gained notoriety following the assassinations).
   
7. Both assassins were killed before their trials (Booth was killed when captured. Oswald was killed days after his arrest).
   
8. Both men were succeeded by men with the surname of Johnson (Considering the popularity of the surname Johnson among white males, it would be no more of a coincidence by comparing two Muslim men who share the name Mohammed.)
   

These coincidences may seem startling at first but really aren't that impressive once dissected. But in 2000 years, will future civilizations look 
back on the "ancient Americans" and accuse Kennedy of being a figment of our imaginations? Will it seem we were so intrigued with Abraham 
Lincoln that we invented a character to mirror a great American hero? The intelligent mind who is willing to do the research and look for the 
truth behind such propaganda can easily find it.