Dying Gods

[flitzerbiest]

The following deities* also died and were resurrected, according to the sacred texts associated with their religions:

Aesclepius
Adonis
Baldr
Dionysus
Mithras
Orpheus
Osiris
Persephone

Question for Christians: Do you believe these resurrection stories? Why or why not? Please note that their basis of support (i.e. sacred texts) is identical to that for Jesus.



* = partial list

[Lux]

Moderator Warning

I can't imagine me getting on the web and posting "why Islam is -", even tho I think that -- why bother?

I edited this post. Profanity is not allowed by the rules, and neither is using such words to refer to other people's beliefs. That is very disrespectful, and it won't be tolerated here.

Dodge noted. It's a standard troll tactic to try and get the other person to run around.

[...]

Yes, we know what you hate. You were asked to justify your own position. Like nearly all atheists, you couldn't.

'Nuff said, I think.

The tone of this post is clearly uncivil and inappropriate. Make your points without name-calling other users.

I suggest you review the Forum rules.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Eusebius does not agree that testimony should be ignored, and, since he held a copy of Papias in his hands, he made use of what he had to say.

"Eusebius held Papias in low esteem, perhaps because of his work's influence in perpetuating, through Irenaeus and others, belief in a millennial reign of Christ upon earth, that would soon usher in a new Golden Age. Eusebius calls Papias 'a man of small mental capacity who mistook the figurative language of apostolic traditions'. Whether this was so to any degree is difficult to judge without the text available." (Wikipedia; Papias).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papias_of_Hierapolis

Tired of the Nonsense wrote:
100% of the Gospels were written anonymously. NONE of the authors of the canonic Gospels identify themselves.

roger_pearce wrote:
Reiteration noted. Claim rejected, then. The evidence is otherwise. If the claim is that all works that don't include the name of the author in them are anonymous, nearly all works ever written are "anonymous."

Hardly true. Most authors signed their works in some manner. The letters of Paul for example. And the Gospel of Thomas begins: "These are the secret sayings that the living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas recorded." Pliny the Elder's great work, "The Natural History," begins "C. PLINIUS SECUNDUS TO HIS FRIEND TITUS VESPASIAN." Flavius Josephus refers to himself in the third person throughout his works. For example "1. NOW as Josephus was thus engaged in the administration of the affairs of Galilee, there arose a treacherous person, a man of Gischala, the son of Levi, "whose name was John." (War of the Jews, Chap.. 21, by Flavius Josephus). And then there are the Epistles of John. But more on that to follow.

I notice that you seem unable to deal with any reply, any query as to evidence, and just repeat your belief. I suspect you're just parroting stuff, therefore. Why not think about it? Think about what evidence there is, for and against, these absurd claims?

I have in fact dealt in detail in my replies, and have not simply produced one line blanket rejections. Making such a claim with evidence to the contrary for all to see makes little sense on your part. As for "parroting stuff," I admit that I was not present to personally witness what occurred 2,000 years ago and as such I am forced to rely on information gleaned from other sources. And exactly where do you get your information? Were you not raised Christian and indoctrinated into the Christian belief system from an early age? What are you "parroting?" As for "absurd claims," I was responding, at the beginning of this thread, to the statement by pkruns that: "There were eye witnesses that claim Jesus appeared to them after his resurrection." Allow me to point out to both of you that the very FIRST recorded mention of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead EVER occurs in the First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, written circa 55 AD. Jesus was executed, according to the time frame established by the Gospels, circa 30 AD. In other words, there is no record of any claims for the resurrected Jesus, eyewitness or otherwise, until approximately a quarter of a century after the event was supposed to have occurred. No one disputes this fact. Nor was Paul himself an eyewitness to any resurrection. According to the Gospels, written forty to seventy years or so after the fact, not only was the corpse of Jesus resurrected from the dead, but whole hordes of dead people became resurrected, came up out of their graves, and wandered the streets of Jerusalem. (Matt 27:52-53). And ultimately the reanimated corpse of Jesus flew away up into the sky. (Acts 1:9-10). What exactly is your definition of an "absurd claim?"

Tired of the Nonsense wrote:
Do you dispute that the canonical "Epistles of John" found in the NT were written by the same individual who wrote Gospel John?

roger_pearce wrote:
You're making the claim. You produce ancient evidence for it.

Have you ever actually read the NT? Do you own a Bible? If so pick up your copy and turn to 2 John. Notice that the author identifies himself in the very first line. Now turn to 3 John and notice the very same thing. Is the evidence contained in your own Bible sufficient for you? Christian tradition ascribes the author of these letters to the apostle John in exactly the same way Christian tradition ascribes The Gospel of John to the apostle John. Are you suggesting that 2,000 years of Christian tradition and assumption isn't necessarily accurate?

Tired of the Nonsense wrote:
Please refer to Posts #9 and #14 in this thread.

roger_pearce wrote:
Dodge noted. It's a standard troll tactic to try and get the other person to run around.

Does moving and making a couple of click on your mouse fatigue you? If so, perhaps a nap is in order. I responded to your statements in another post. Nothing was dodged.

Tired of the Nonsense wrote:
That I am an atheist is right there listed in my Usergroups. It's not a secret.

roger_pearce wrote:
My, you seem sensitive. All you had to say was "yes, I'm an atheist"!

To be an atheist literally means to be a-theos, or without theology. The term accurately describes my position. I have considered myself to be a-theos since the age of twelve. I am now sixty two. If I were sensitive about it I probably would not have joined the atheist usergroup.

Yes, we know what you hate. You were asked to justify your own position. Like nearly all atheists, you couldn't.

Hate is a strong term, especially coming from someone who has already referred to another religion as "$hit," (without the $).

[SteveC]

The odds were in favor of one myth surviving. The jesus myth had good writers and humans in high places who could crush all other myths. Since when does a god need swords to spread his "word"?