Osiris is based on the observance of Day and Night- the rising and setting sun. Not the theological idea that people are stained with a sin due to the disobedience of man and thus the sacrifice of God's son will redeem mankind.
Reincarnation is nothing new though you are correct- though its not just God's or their sons who are reincarnated- it is millions of people and things.
So the fact that Jesus rose from the dead and there were stories of people rising from the dead before him is next to irrelevant. After all, it is hardly a concept difficult to imagine, think of Zombies and Vampires etc.
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Hit me with some evidence 🙂
You never heard the Mythology where Osiris was torn to pieces and died and Isis put him back together,resurrected.
You will have to do some research yourself. I read books not Internet so i have no links to give you and the time and effort it would take to go through my Books would be too much . Im sorry Gav, believe it or not or research it. Im done.
Originally posted by Lycanthrope
You never heard the Mythology where Osiris was torn to pieces and died and Isis put him back together,resurrected.You will have to do some research yourself. I read books not Internet so i have no links to give you and the time and effort it would take to go through my Books would be too much . Im sorry Gav, believe it or not or research it. Im done.
lol
how disappointing.
Gav, I think you're thinking of Ra (or Amon) with the rise-setting sun thing. Osiris was killed by his bro Seth then put back together and became lord of the dead.
Dionysus is more interesting as his killing in Orphic sects gave humans their divine, pure aspect which faith in the religion and training could bring out, which isn't exactly like Christianity but is pretty close theme-wise.
Originally posted by Lycanthrope
Osiris, Dionysis and Mithra were all Sacrificed for the worlds sins, the offspring of "GOD the Father" and Resurrected. This is all from Archaeological findings and fact. These story's existed. The Story of Osiris is 2,500 years older than Christianity.
Greek-mythology is not a strong point, of mine, to discuss. However, I am not completely lost in the dark (to note that Lycanthrope's views are wholly invalid, to say the least).
Osiris: Chopped into fourteen pieces and then reassembled -- minus one part -- after his sister Isis found the dismembered "god" at the bottom of the Nile! Further more, Osiris was not a historical figure.
Dionysis: No virgin birth either! As the story goes, Zeus disguised as a human, fell in love with princess Semele, the daughter of Cadmus, and she became pregnant. Hera, who was Zeus's queen, arranged to have her burned to a crisp, but Zues rescued the fetus and "sewed" him into this own thigh. And, no textual evidence of the death and/or resurrection of Dionysis exists. Also, not a historical figure.
Mithras: Born from a rock, fully formed (naked), holding a dagger and torch, and textual evidence of the death of Mithras does not exist -- hence no resurrection. Mithras never sacrificed himself, but killed a bull. Also, not a historical figure.
Yes, Greek-mythology (and their characters) pre-date Christianity, but Greek-mythology evolved. It wasn't until approximately 2 centuries after the death and resurrection of Jesus did such stories form, including so-called "virgin-births," but all have absolutely no parallels with Christianity.
Lycanthrope... your opinion is rather pathetic. I'm sorry, bro.
Originally posted by ushomefree
Dionysis: No virgin birth either! As the story goes, Zeus disguised as a human, fell in love with princess Semele, the daughter of Cadmus, and she became pregnant. Hera, who was Zeus's queen, arranged to have her burned to a crisp, but Zues rescued the fetus and "sewed" him into this own thigh. And, no textual evidence of the death and/or resurrection of Dionysis exists. Also, not a historical figure.
I have the Geneva Bible with notes. I have reformer notes. I have the whole Catholic cannon history including meetings. I have the original KJV,which is cool BTW. I have the Gnostic gospels and I have the works of Josephus.
I used to be a Christan but have now changed my mind. I also have an interest in ancient studies, especially ancient religions.
I have found that what Christians believe today are only older versions of the same story and some cohersiveness with the councils for politics.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
yes it is a copy of old religion with just a little twist..
the story may change a bit and the characters may have a different name but the motif is still the same
Easy to say that but where's the proof? If we're going to say it is a copy of old religions where's the proof? Did these old religions share the same principles? Moral teachings?
What about those old religions did Christianity borrow from? I've done some fact finding on similarities of the resurrection and there's no conclusive proof that there was anything exactly like Jesus resurrection in previous religions in fact in many instances there are more dissimilarities not to mention the contemporary writings of those old religions don't support their being any resurrection similarities at all.
Besides the resurrection what similarities does Christianity have with these older religions?
Originally posted by Allankles
Easy to say that but where's the proof? If we're going to say it is a copy of old religions where's the proof? Did these old religions share the same principles? Moral teachings?What about those old religions did Christianity borrow from? I've done some fact finding on similarities of the resurrection and there's no conclusive proof that there was anything exactly like Jesus resurrection in previous religions in fact in many instances there are more dissimilarities not to mention the contemporary writings of those old religions don't support their being any resurrection similarities at all.
Besides the resurrection what similarities does Christianity have with these older religions?
The motif of resurrection shows up constantly in religion. I believe the point is that the differences are less important than the core concept. The story is not a direct copy and, given the success of Christianity not "just" a copy either, but it is not an original idea.
More to the point, in my infinitely humble opinion, who cares if it's similar to older stories? (besides people that research the stuff for a living)
Originally posted by ushomefree
Greek-mythology is not a strong point, of mine, to discuss. However, I am not completely lost in the dark (to note that Lycanthrope's views are wholly invalid, to say the least).Osiris: Chopped into fourteen pieces and then reassembled -- minus one part -- after his sister Isis found the dismembered "god" at the bottom of the Nile! Further more, Osiris was not a historical figure.
Dionysis: No virgin birth either! As the story goes, Zeus disguised as a human, fell in love with princess Semele, the daughter of Cadmus, and she became pregnant. Hera, who was Zeus's queen, arranged to have her burned to a crisp, but Zues rescued the fetus and "sewed" him into this own thigh. And, no textual evidence of the death and/or resurrection of Dionysis exists. Also, not a historical figure.
Mithras: Born from a rock, fully formed (naked), holding a dagger and torch, and textual evidence of the death of Mithras does not exist -- hence no resurrection. Mithras never sacrificed himself, but killed a bull. Also, not a historical figure.
Yes, Greek-mythology (and their characters) pre-date Christianity, but Greek-mythology evolved. It wasn't until approximately 2 centuries after the death and resurrection of Jesus did such stories form, including so-called "virgin-births," but all have absolutely no parallels with Christianity.
Lycanthrope... your opinion is rather pathetic. I'm sorry, bro.
👆
Ha Ha.
I don't post in the religion forum for over 2 years and people are still discussing right were I left off. 🍺
I'll just stick like a fly on the wall for now and just sit back and enjoy the debate.
I see the curse only worked for song long that me and debby jo placed on jesusisalive.
I will have to recite the ancient text by myself this time.
Originally posted by ushomefree
Greek-mythology is not a strong point, of mine, to discuss. However, I am not completely lost in the dark (to note that Lycanthrope's views are wholly invalid, to say the least).Osiris: Chopped into fourteen pieces and then reassembled -- minus one part -- after his sister Isis found the dismembered "god" at the bottom of the Nile! Further more, Osiris was not a historical figure.
Dionysis: No virgin birth either! As the story goes, Zeus disguised as a human, fell in love with princess Semele, the daughter of Cadmus, and she became pregnant. Hera, who was Zeus's queen, arranged to have her burned to a crisp, but Zues rescued the fetus and "sewed" him into this own thigh. And, no textual evidence of the death and/or resurrection of Dionysis exists. Also, not a historical figure.
Mithras: Born from a rock, fully formed (naked), holding a dagger and torch, and textual evidence of the death of Mithras does not exist -- hence no resurrection. Mithras never sacrificed himself, but killed a bull. Also, not a historical figure.
Yes, Greek-mythology (and their characters) pre-date Christianity, but Greek-mythology evolved. It wasn't until approximately 2 centuries after the death and resurrection of Jesus did such stories form, including so-called "virgin-births," but all have absolutely no parallels with Christianity.
Lycanthrope... your opinion is rather pathetic. I'm sorry, bro.
All of that is true. The concept of sacrifice is not new or unique to Christianity, but what is, is that Christianity asserts that "no good works" can bring man to God's level; that it's literally impossible to do it on your own, and that he literally had to condescend himself to man's level (Jesus). The main reason Christianity was so attractive to the Aztecs was that it was a radical idea to them that a god would ever sacrifice himself to humanity, as opposed to the opposite which they were used to.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
a little more science give or take a few decades... and religion will die out.
Science will never kill off religion forever. Because religion backs up science.
The minute people stop believing in a God and forget about the whole Theist V Atheist issue, people will start questioning atheism and atheistic science instead.
Afterall, atheistic science teaches that there is no governing creator/sustainer, without wondering what the "laws of physics" actually are by religious standards, acting asif they must be 2 seperate things.
Aslong as there is archeaology, people will look back towards the Bible or any religious book and think "Maybe it's true".