The Nativity Scene in the Temple of Luxor

In an online article, Infidel.org's Richard Carrier discusses and disputes elements of a paraphrase of mine concerning an engraving in the Temple of Luxor in Thebes, Egypt. Carrier's analysis of this one paragraph on the Luxor image needs to be addressed, because it is being bandied about and seized upon by individuals who wish to use it to dismiss my entire body of work.

The paragraph in question is originally found in my book The Christ Conspiracy at pp. 115-116:

Furthermore, inscribed about 3,500 years ago on the walls of the Temple at Luxor were images of the Annunciation, Immaculate Conception, Birth and Adoration of Horus, with Thoth announcing to the Virgin Isis that she will conceive Horus; with Kneph, the "Holy Ghost," impregnating the virgin; and with the infant being attended by three kings, or magi, bearing gifts.

This paragraph appears on my website along with a drawing of the engraving reproduced from The Historical Jesus and the Mythical Christ by Gerald Massey, an English mythologist and lay Egyptologist of the 19th century. However, Massey himself studied the work of many top scholars of the day and, in this particular instance, adopted the data from noted Egyptologist Samuel Sharpe.

Born in abject poverty, Gerald Massey was almost entirely self-taught; yet, he was able to write and lecture about several subjects with tremendous erudition and authority. In his works, Massey utilized numerous ancient texts, including Judeo-Christian writings such as the Bible, as well as those of early Church fathers such as Clement of Alexandria, Epiphanius, Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Eusebius and Jerome. Massey also cited non-Christian, Jewish and Gnostic writers such as Herodotus, Pausanias, Philo and Valentinus, and writings such as the Talmud and the Hindu Puranas. Despite his lack of formal education, Massey was able to read several languages, including not only English but also French, Latin, Greek and evidently some Hebrew and Egyptian.

In his detailed description of the Egyptian religion, Massey also utilized the works of Champollion, Birch, Petrie, Renan, Renouf, Maspero, Lundy, Lefebure, Sayce, Sharpe and Budge, among other sources. Massey extensively cited not only the Egyptian Book of the Dead, which Champollion called "The Ritual," but also several other ancient Egyptian sources, such as the Turin Papyrus and the Pyramid Texts of Pepi I, as well as assorted other funeral texts and stele. Massey quite evidently understood the Egyptian spirituality and was able to present it in a highly sound and scientific manner.

From the first page of his writing, it is clear that Massey's erudition concerning the Egyptian religion is enormous and profound, and that he is a respectable authority, an important fact in interpreting ancient Egyptian engravings and hieroglyphs. As my own knowledge of the subject matter is not as great as his in certain areas, I will defer to Massey's expertise in significant part, although, as noted and as we shall see, Massey himself was careful to rely on the work of highly credentialed individuals such as Egyptologists Dr. Samuel Birch and Samuel Sharpe, to whose authority I likewise defer in this regard.  In his analysis of the Luxor image, Richard Carrier says he "did not have time to make a translation," by which remark I assume that he reads Egyptian hieroglyphics fluently enough to make such a translation. Richard is thus relying on the translation of his chosen expert. I will not be addressing every detail of Richard Carrier's analysis, but I will state that in the end what this discussion boils down to is whose experts on the Egyptian religion one chooses to believe.

In my opinion, Gerald Massey was one person in the English-speaking world who understood thoroughly the Egyptian religion, in all its myriad forms. Massey was not lettered; he did not possess impressive degrees. In fact, he did not finish the first grade; yet, his intuition and innate understanding of the matters of religion and spirituality are remarkable. Gerald Massey was also quite clear in his declarations that the Christian religion was largely - if not entirely - based upon the Egyptian religion and that the latter possessed every bit of the concepts found within Christianity. Although I am unwilling to exclude many other influences upon the Christian religion, I am in concurrence that there is practically nothing there that cannot be found within the Egyptian religion. My understanding of the Egyptian religion is that it was extremely spiritual and encompassed virtually every spiritual and religious concept mankind has ever come up with. These points are important when it comes to the interpretation of Egyptian hieroglyphics and images.

Concerning the Luxor engraving, in The Historical Jesus and the Mythical Christ, pp. 32-33, Massey writes:

We shall find that the gospel history was "written before" from beginning to end. The story of the divine Annunciation, the miraculous Conception (or incarnation), the Birth, and the Adoration of the Messianic child, had already been engraved in hieroglyphics and represented in four consecutive scenes upon the innermost walls of the holy of holies in the temple of Luxor which was built by Amenhept III., a Pharaoh of the eighteenth dynasty [1600-1700 BCE]. In these the maiden queen Mut-em-Ua, the mother of Amenhept, her future child, impersonates the virgin mother who bore without the fatherhood, the mother as the solar boat, the mother of the Only One...

The first scene on the left hand shows the god Taht [Thoth], the lunary Mercury, the divine Word or Logos, in the act of hailing the virgin queen, announcing to her that she is to give birth to the coming son. In the next scene the god Kneph (in conjunction with Hathor) gives life to her. This is the Holy Ghost or Spirit that causes conception; Kneph being the spirit. Impregnation and conception are made apparent in the virgin's fuller form. Next the mother is seated on the midwife's stool, and the child is supported in the hands of one of the nurses. The fourth scene is that of the adoration. Here the child is enthroned, receiving homage from the gods and gifts from men. Behind the deity Kneph, on the right three men are kneeling and offering gifts with the right hand and life with the left. The child thus announced, incarnated, born, and worshipped was the Pharaonic representative of the Aten sun, the Adon of Syria, and Hebrew Adonai, the child-Christ of the Aten cult, the miraculous conception of the ever-virgin mother personated by Mut-em-Ua.

In another book, Gerald Massey's Lectures, pp. 4-5, appears a slightly different but consistent version:

The mythical Messiah was always born of a Virgin Mother--a factor unknown in natural phenomena, and one that cannot be historical, one that can only be explained by means of the Mythos, and those conditions of primitive sociology which are mirrored in mythology and preserved in theology.  The virgin mother has been represented in Egypt by the maiden Queen, Mut-em-ua, the future mother of Amenhept III some 16 centuries B.C., who impersonated the eternal virgin that produced the eternal child.

Four consecutive scenes reproduced in my book are found portrayed upon the innermost walls of the Holy of Holies in the Temple of Luxor, which was built by Amenhept III., a Pharaoh of the 17th dynasty. The first scene on the left hand shows the God Taht, the Lunar Mercury, the Annunciator of the Gods, in the act of hailing the Virgin Queen, and announcing to her that she is to give birth to the coming Son. In the next scene the God Kneph (in conjunction with Hathor) gives the new life. This is the Holy Ghost or Spirit that causes the Immaculate Conception, Kneph being the spirit by name in Egyptian. The natural effects are made apparent in the virgin's swelling form.

Next the mother is seated on the mid-wife's stool, and the newborn child is supported in the hands of one of the nurses. The fourth scene is that of the Adoration. Here the child is enthroned, receiving homage from the Gods and gifts from men. Behind the deity Kneph, on the right, three spirits--the Three Magi, or Kings of the Legend, are kneeling and offering presents with their right hand, and life with their left. The child thus announced, incarnated, born, and worshipped, was the Pharaonic representative of the Aten Sun in Egypt, the God Adon of Syria, and Hebrew Adonai; the child-Christ of the Aten Cult; the miraculous conception of the ever-virgin mother, personated by Mut-em-ua, as mother of the "only one," and representative of the divine mother of the youthful Sun-God.

These scenes, which were mythical in Egypt, have been copied or reproduced as historical in the Canonical Gospels, where they stand like four corner-stones to the Historic Structure, and prove that the foundations are mythical.

In my brief paragraph I have paraphrased the germane aspects of Massey's pronouncements concerning the Luxor image. I have also followed the example of John Jackson in Christianity Before Christ in associating the god king with the god Horus and his mother with the goddess Isis. This association is not without merit and precedent.

In fact, because of the complexity of the Egyptian religion, taking a paragraph such as mine out of context may have little value, as there is much leading up to the conclusions therein, including the fact that Egyptian kings and pharaohs were considered gods on Earth and their wives equally the proxies of the goddesses. In this regard, the images discussed here are said to represent not only a king and queen but also a god and goddess. Hence, when we begin discussing "immaculate conceptions" or anything else relevant, we must keep in mind that were are addressing mythology, not biography or history. Moreover, the living king was traditionally considered to be Horus, as state by Egyptologist Dr. Henri Frankfort states, "Each king, at death, become Osiris..., just as each king, in life, appears "on the throne of Horus"; each king is Horus..." (Frankfort, Henri, Kingship and the Gods, University of Chicago Press, 1978, p. 32)

In addition, Egyptologist and director of the Grand Hypostyle Hall project at Luxor, Dr. William J. Murnane, who translated the hieroglyphs of the birth narrative of Amenhotep III, relates that Horus is "the primary divine identity of the pharaoh."  (Murnane, William J., Texts from the Amarna Period in Egypt, Scholars Press, Atlanta, 1995, p. 280) Thus, identifying the king in the birth narratives either as or with Horus is not erroneous--and it well may have been in the mind of any imitators of this archetypical divine birth scenes that they were discussing a god on Earth who essentially served as the proxy for Horus.

Carrier's declaration that the phrase "immaculate conception" refers only to the Christian Virgin Mary is a matter of debate, since what Massey, I and many others are claiming is that the concept occurs in the Egyptian religion as well and that the Virgin Mary is the goddess Isis-Meri, who was depicted as a virgin, despite the fact that she is represented in some traditions - but not all - as having been fecundated with Osiris's phallus.

On his website "Paganizing Yeshua," Craig Lyons, who possesses a Master of Divinity degree, writes:

John G. Jackson, in Christianity Before Christ, 1985, pp. 43-46, cites Gerald Massey in Ancient Egypt: Light of the World, Vol. II, p. 757 [London, T. Fisher Unwin, 1907], as providing information concerning the mythical elements of an annunciation, an immaculate conception, a virgin birth, and an adoration as presented as consecutive engravings on the inner walls of Temple of Luxor, in Luxor, Egypt, from the time of King Amenhotep III (1538-1501 B.C.)....

The engravings of the Temple walls of Luxor are presented as four scenes in consecutive order describing the birth of the Egyptian god, Horus, the son of Osiris.

John Jackson, in presenting Gerald Massey's account from Ancient Egypt: Light of the World, Vol. II, p. 757, states that we have basically 4 scenes depicted on the wall of the Temple of Luxor:

• The Annunciation: We find the god Thoth announces to a virgin, Isis, the impending birth of her son, Horus.
• The Immaculate Conception: We find that the god Kneph (Holy Ghost) and the goddess Hathor hold crosses, sign of life, to the head and nostrils of Isis and mystically impregnate her.
• The Birth of the Child God: We find that the mother, Isis, sits on a midwife's stool, and the newly born infant, Horus, is held by attendants.
• The Adoration: We find that the infant Horus receives homage from gods and Three Kings, the Magi, who offer him gifts.

Moreover, this depiction of the Luxor scene apparently emanates not from Massey but from respected Egyptologist Samuel Sharpe, who in Egyptian Mythology and Egyptian Christianity, 1879, p. 19, presents the image and then makes a series of stunning remarks:

In this picture we have the Anunciation, the Conception, the Birth, and the Adoration, as described in the First and Second Chapters of Luke's Gospel; and as we have historical assurance that the chapters in Matthew's Gospel which contain the Miraculous Birth of Jesus are an after addition not in the earliest manuscripts, it seems probable that these two poetical chapters in Luke may also be unhistorical, and be borrowed from the Egyptian accounts of the miraculous birth of their kings.

Obviously, I am not the only one to use the term "immaculate conception" and to make these assertions regarding the Temple of Luxor. Nor am I the first one to suggest that the gospel account is based on the Egyptian scene. Indeed, Samuel Sharpe was one of the preeminent Egyptologists of his era, known as an expert in Egyptian hieroglyphics, for one. Sharpe was also a translator of the New Testament, based on the work of famed biblical scholar Griesbach. Hence, Sharpe was erudite enough to know what he was looking at in the Egyptian hieroglyphics and images.  Moreover, Sharpe preceded Gerald Massey and was one of his sources. Thus, we can be sure that these declarations regarding the Nativity Scene at Luxor were not fabricated by Massey.

In any event, what is relevant here is that the Luxor inscription depicts a miraculous conception and birth, as Sharpe also asserts. Carrier himself states that the "inscription relates the royal myth of the Birth of the God King, which represents a cycle repeated with every new Pharaoh." We are claiming indeed that it is the birth of the God King being represented, and that it is a cyclical event, widely depicted in the Egyptian religion. The God king represented one of the gods, in this case Osiris/Horus, who are frequently interchangeable within Egyptian religion, because mythology often depicts cyclical, not linear, events that cannot be understood without a background of natural processes, such as the annual "death" and "resurrection" of the sun. (For more on the subject of the astrotheological origin of religion, please see my book Suns of God.)

Carrier further asserts that the idea of a "sin-free conception" is "a bizarre idea that entails a view of sin, history, and human nature utterly alien to Egyptian religion." Yet, it is widely known from sources such as Pseudo-Eratosthenes and Macrobius, dating back many centuries, that the Egyptian goddess Isis was considered a virgin who nevertheless gave birth to the god Horus. Was this not a "sin-free conception?" How could this concept of the virgin birth be "utterly alien to Egyptian religion," when it is found around the Mediterranean? Was the very ancient Egyptian priesthood completely oblivious to it? Were their holy gods and rulers really "born in sin?"

Carrier next remarks:

The Luxor inscription also does not depict impregnation by a spirit, but involves very real sex (indeed, the narrative borders on soft-core porn), and the woman involved is the mythical Queen of Egypt in an archetypal sense, not Isis per se. Acharya also gets the story fairly garbled, as I shall make clear shortly.

What appears garbled to me is what Carrier himself is saying. "Very real sex?" If a comic book depicts its characters engaging in sex, does that make it "very real?" We are talking about mythology here, not history. According to Greek mythology, the sky-god father-figure Zeus Pateras - God the Father - engaged in some "very real sex" with Hercules's mother - does that make the story any more real and any less spiritual? Does the impregnation of the Buddha's mother by a white elephant mean that she had a "real sex" with the elephant, a disparagement of Buddhism used by some apologists? Buddha's mother was considered very pure when she gave birth to the holy man. I will grant that the word "immaculate" may connote something less overtly sexual than what is depicted at Luxor; however, to suggest that the Egyptian king was "born in sin" appears blasphemous according to the Egyptian religion. Moreover, the point is not whether or not the scene is accompanied by titillating speech but that within mythology there were stories of women - often virgins - being impregnated miraculously by gods or spirits, a fact that makes the Christian fable unoriginal and as incredible as any other myth.

In his Egyptian Book of the Dead (35), in which he goes into great detail as to what the texts are describing, Massey states:

The Ka has been called the double of the dead... But it is not merely a phantom of the living or personal image of the departed. It serves also for the apparition or revenant; it is a type rather than a portrait. It is a type that was pre-natal. It images a soul which came into existence with the child, a soul which is food and sustenance to the body all through life, a soul of existence here and of duration for the life hereafter. Hence it is absorbed at last in the perfected personality. It is depicted in Temple of Luxor, where the birth of Amenhetep III. is portrayed as coming from the hand of god. The Ka of the royal infant is shown in the pictures being formed by Khnum the moulder on the potters' wheel.

According to Massey's very traditional interpretation of the scene at Luxor, the birth of Amenhetep, the God King, is "portrayed as coming from the hand of god," his soul being formed supernaturally and spiritually. Here we must emphasize the spiritual and not literal nature of the Egyptian religion. The conception of the God King portrayed in the Luxor image is not being depicted as having come through a vulgar sex act by mere mortals, as, again, such a notion would appear to be blasphemous of the Egyptian religion and spirituality.

Concerning the descent of the king (Amenhotep) from the god (Amun), so typical in the mythical genealogies of the royalty of not only Egypt but also many other places, there is an ancient statue of Amenhotep III with an inscription that reads:

This bronze statuette of Amenhotep III portrays the king as the god Amun-Min. The pedestal is inscribed with the following hieroglyphic proclamation: "I am the son of Min in the house of my mother Isis", referring to the myth of the divine birth of the King Amenhotep III. Countless figures of the god Amun-Min are depicted on the walls of Luxor temple built by Amenhotep III.

Amenhotep's mother - who represented Isis - was impregnated by a god, not a mortal. Therefore, unless we are believers in the Egyptian religion, we must chalk this incident up to mythology. The comparison with the Christian virgin birth, therefore, remains as apt in this scenario as does the comparison with the birth of Hercules through the womb of a mortal woman fecundated by Zeus Pateras or God the Father.

Moreover, in examining the book Carrier utilized in his analysis, Hellmut Brunner's Die Geburt Des Gottkönigs (Otto Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, 1964), it is difficult to see to what he is referring when he talks about "very real sex" and "soft-core porn." In describing the image (die Darstellung) of the fourth scene of the Luxor birth narrative - the one in which Amun fecundates the queen - Brunner's German merely reflects what we can see: Amun and the queen are sitting on a "bed," a platform being held by two goddesses:

Die Darstellung zeigt unten ein Bett...mit zwei Löwenköpfen, auf dem zwei Göttinnen sitzen. (Brunner, p. 35)

Describing this scene as "the god Amun jumping into bed with the human Queen" seems to be unnecessarily sexual, and I personally could not find this sort of sexy description in Brunner, although I did not read the entire book, as I understand nor did Carrier, who says he "skimmed the relevant sections."

For the inscription of this scene, Carrier refers us to page 42, et seq., of Brunner, upon which we find two main paragraphs in German relating the words spoken by Amun and the queen as reflected in the hieroglyphs surrounding the image. Apparently Carrier claims this is where the "very real sex" and "soft-core porn" come in, but I could not find it in the German. In the first paragraph we find the words of Amun, followed by a description of the initial part of the scene:

Sie fanden sie, wie sie ruhte im Innersten ihres Palastes. Sie erwachte wegen des Gottesduftes, sie lachte Seiner Majestät entgegen. Er ging sogleich zu ihr, er entbrannte in Liebe zu ihr; er gab sein Herz zu ihr hin, er ließ sie ihn sehen in seiner Gottesgestalt, nachdem er vor sie gekommen war, so daß sie jubelte beim Anblick seiner Vollkommenheit; seine Liebe, sie ging ein in ihren Leib. [Der Palast war überflutet mit Gottesduft, und] alle seine [Wohlgerüche] waren (solche) aus Punt. (Brunner, p. 42-43)

My translation of this paragraph is as follows:

He found her, as she rested in the interior of her palace. She awoke because of the god's scent, and she laughted at His Majesty. He went immediately to her, he was passionately in love with her; he gave his heart back to her, he let her see him in his Godliness, after he had come in front of her, so that she rejoiced at the sight of his perfection; his love she received in her body. [The palace was flooded with God-scent, and] all his [aromas] were (such) out of Punt!

This passage in Brunner is apparently from the Hatshepsut temple, rather than that at Luxor, if Dr. Murnane's translation of the same scene at Luxor is any indication:

It was resting in the interior of the palace that he found her. At the god's scent she awoke, and she laughed in front of his Person. He went to her at once, for he lusted after her. He caused her to see him in his godly shape after he had come right up to her, so that she rejoiced at seeing his beauty. Love of him coursed through her limbs, and the palace was flooded <with> the god's scent: all his smells were those of Punt! (Murnane, 23)

As we can see, the sentence "he gave his heart back to her" is missing in Murnane's rendition, possibly because it was also not present in the Luxor narrative. Moreover, what Brunner renders "he was passionately in love with her," Murnane translates as "he lusted after her." In this regard, Brunner's interpretation is actually less sexy than Murnane's. Again, if there is anything "sexy" about Brunner's translation, I could not find it either in the actual translation or in the pertinent notes and surrounding text.

Also, presumably when Carrier is relating the words of the queen, he is referring to the paragraph describing section IVDb of the hieroglyphs, in which the relevant part in Brunner's German is:

,Mein Herr, wie groß sind doch deine Bas! Herrlich is es, dein Antlitz zu sehen. Du hast meine Majestät mit deinem Glanz unfangen, dein Duft ist in allen meinem Gliedern'... (Brunner, p. 43)

In the first place, this inscription also appears to be describing the birth scene of Queen Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahari, which is quite similar but not exactly the same as that of Luxor. The text, in fact, is apparently different, including this particular part, which Carrier has described as being both from the Amenhotep narrative and "quite risque." My very literal translations of this texts is as follows:

 My sir, how great indeed are your Bas! Magnificent is it, your face to see. You have embraced my majesty. Your scent is in all my limbs.

The Egyptian term Bas is the plural of ba, which is generally translated as "soul" and which in this case apparently refers to the souls of the kings, as defined by Dr. Murnane: "The Bas of a locality are assumed to be the divinized ancient kings of those places." (Murnane, 278) Dr. Murnane's translation of the same birth scene - this time in actuality from the Luxor temple, rather than Hatshepsut's temple - is as follows:

How great, indeed, is your power! How beautiful is [everything] which you have [done]. How hidden are the plans which you have made. How satisfied is your heart at my Person! Your fragrance is throughout all my body.

I can find nothing overtly sexual in this description or any other of the Luxor inscription or in the image itself, other than Murnane's word "lusted" in the first paragraph of the inscription. If this is the same paragraph read by Carrier, it is evident that the queen is not "begging to be embraced," nor is there any kissing going on. In the image we do not see "Amun's buddy Thoth" nearby as a voyeur, as Carrier suggests. There is no suggestion of an "organ of love" that the queen is exclaiming over - unless, of course, the Bas are to be erroneously interpreted as such.

So far I have only been able to peruse the first edition of Brunner's book - perhaps the second edition reflects a more racy attitude or has some extra notations that clarify the previous language as being too tame? For my forthcoming book Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection, however, I have done an extensive survey of all of the data in the English language that I could find, as well as this German study, and I could find no other instance of an interpretation of "very real sex," other than a slightly "risque" perception by Sir Frazer when he uses the term "carnal union." In The Golden Bough, Sir Frazer's summarizes the Luxor scene as follows:

...according to the Egyptians, their monarchs were actually begotten by the god Ammon, who assumed for the time being the form of the reigning king, and in that disguise had intercourse with the queen. The divine procreation is carved and painted in great detail on the walls of two of the oldest temples in Egypt, those of Deir el Bahari and Luxor; and the inscriptions attached to the paintings leave no doubt as to the meaning of the scenes. The pictures at Deir el Bahari, which represent the begetting and birth of Queen Hatshopsitou [Hatshepsut], are the most ancient, and have been reproduced with but little change at Luxor, where they represent the begetting and birth of King Amenophis III. The nativity is depicted in about fifteen scenes, which may be grouped in three acts: first, the carnal union of the god with the queen; second, the birth; and third, the recognition of the infant by the gods. The marriage of Ammon with the queen is announced by a prologue in heaven; Ammon summons his accessors, the gods of Heliopolis, reveals to them the future birth of a new Pharaoh, the royal princess, and requests them to make ready the fluid of life and strength, of which they are masters. Then the god is seen approaching the queen's bedchamber; in front of him marches Thoth, with a roll of papyrus in his hand, who, to prevent mistakes, recites the official names of the queen, the spouse of the reigning kind (Thothmes I. at Deir el Bahari, Thothmes IV. at Luxor), the fairest of women. Then Thoth withdraws behind Ammon, lifting his arm behind the god in order to renew his vital fluid at this critical moment. Next, according to the inscription, the mystery of incarnation takes place. Ammon lays aside his godhead and becomes flesh in the likeness of the king, the human spouse of the queen. The consummation of the divine union follows immediately. On a bed of state the god and the queen appear seated opposite each other, with their legs crossed. The queen receives from her husband the symbols of life and strength, while two goddesses, Neit [Neith] and Selkit, the patronesses of matrimony, support the feet of the couple and guard them from harm. The text which encloses the scene sets forth clearly the reality of this mystic union of the human with the divine....  (Frazer, Golden Bough, II, 131-132)

At this point, Sir Frazer recounts a translation of the text here, in which the queen wakes up and smells the fragrance of the god, and so on. Although he calls it a "carnal union" of the god with the queen, he also labels it a "mystic union," and there is no mention of any truly sexy bits, nothing about a phallus penetrating her. Frazer does recount that the "royal mother" cries out, among other things, "Thy dew impregnates all my limbs." Without becoming crude, we would wager that this impregnation of the queen's limbs is meant spiritually, rather than physically, thus demonstrating the allegorical nature of the scene in the first place. Another part of the inscription is translated as, "Then, when the majesty of the god had accomplished all his desire with her..." If this depiction is really as erotic as we are led to believe by Brunner/Carrier, is "the majesty" referring to the male organ?  Again, in none of the other accounts is there the slightest indication of the "soft porn" that we find in Carrier's translation of Brunner.  We are left with the notion either that these earlier scholars could not bear to reproduce such a sexual scenario or that they were expressing a more spiritual interpretation that would in fact fit in line with not only the concept of a god impregnating a mortal woman but also the high spirituality of the Egyptian religion.

In addition, Carrier says that the "Annunciation" in the Luxor image was made by Amun himself, rather than a third party such as in the biblical tale, in this case Thoth. Jim Dunn, writer for TourEgypt.net, evidently agrees with our interpretation:

Amenhotep III's birth is splendidly depicted in a series of reliefs inside a room on the east side of the temple of Luxor. Built by Amenhotep III, the room was dedicated to Amun. However, it portrays the creator god, Khnum of Elephantine (at modern Aswan) with his ram head, fashioning the child and his ka on a potter's wheel under the supervision of the goddess Isis. The god Amun is then led to Amenhotep III's mother by Thoth, god of wisdom, after which Amun is shown in the presence of the goddesses Hathor and Mut while they nurse the future king.

The rest of the analysis comprises details of less import in our quest to demonstrate the Egyptian origins of much of Christianity. Carrier ends his analysis by stating:

Granted, the key narrative signposts are present at Luxor: there is a divine conception, a divine annunciation, a birth of a Son of God, then a divine adoration and confirmation (all leading eventually to a coronation). The inversion of conception and annunciation is necessary because of Egyptian moral standards--whereas the Jewish version could turn them around, because a Jewish audience would not countenance sex with God anyway, so there was (unlike in Egypt) no impropriety in the fact that Mary learned of it before it happened (and that fits more with the Jewish cultural tradition of prophecy, and, more importantly, the legend of Sarah). But, again, the parallels to Hellenistic kingship-theology are the same here, and yet chronologically and culturally closer to Christianity. And yet the Christian narratives are, like most myths, very much original creations (that's why the two versions--in Matthew and Luke--are so radically different from each other). Understanding their background and cultural and historical context is certainly helpful, and necessary, but it doesn't lead to any plagiaristic scandal of the sort Acharya S wants there to be. She may still be right that what we are told is actually a myth about Jesus, not historical fact, but that is a conclusion that requires a lot more evidence than what we find at Luxor.

Firstly, Carrier is essentially stating what I have been contending in the first place: "there is a divine conception, a divine annunciation, a birth of a Son of God, then a divine adoration and confirmation (all leading eventually to a coronation)." Secondly, the Christian narratives appear to be "very much original creations" if you do not know the depth of the Egyptian religion as well as the numerous other religions that permeated the Roman Empire and beyond. Christianity is "different" only in that it synthesized Judaism and Paganism so thoroughly - a fact exceedingly obvious to Gerald Massey and many others, including me. Yet, such a synthesis had taken place many times prior to the creation of Christianity, which a study of comparative religion and mythology readily reveals. One need only look at the works of Philo, for example, to see this type of synthesis.

Furthermore, when one studies the detailed examination of the Egyptian religion provided by Massey, any "radical" differences found in the canonical gospels and elsewhere regarding the gospel tale are easily explainable in terms of the Egyptian religion - our very point indeed.

As concerns whether or not the concepts within Christianity were deliberately plagiarized - not necessarily a "scandal," since such "borrowing" of religious ideas is widely known to have happened all the time in the pre-Christian world - it would be helpful to actually read my books, which clearly demonstrate the priestly pattern of intentionally reworking whatever religious concepts were to be found. The idea that the Christian religion just "happened" without deliberate incorporation by the priesthood of these numerous elements from a variety of preceding religions that were widely and passionately adhered to seems to be an even more incredible scenario of supernatural genesis than that posited by orthodox Christianity! It would frankly require a highly credulous and naive mind to believe that there was no deliberate "borrowing" of ideas.

It is amusing that apologists so gleefully wave about this review, as in the end Carrier throws doubt upon the very reason they assail my work: To wit, the historicity of Jesus Christ. In any event, I and the many others whose works I studied have provided much more evidence than "what we find at Luxor." That paragraph constitutes but one in a 400-page book, followed by a 600-page book, building on the countless volumes written by other mythicists. It is rather disingenuous to dismiss this entire body of work based on this analysis or to require "a lot more evidence" when it is already in front of us.

Richard Carrier's Article