Osiris/Dionysus/Horus/Tammuz/all that other good stuff

Newbie Joined: Jan 30, 2008 Posts: 11

This is all prompted by a cartoon I read recently:

http://www.offendedyet.com/2008/04/original.html

I have to rant for a little bit. Yes, Osiris was the son of a god . . . so was just about every other god in every other pantheon. His parents were Geb and Nut, and Nut was not a virgin. I have never heard of any pre-Christian source that states Osiris’s birth was prophesied, that he was born in a manger, or that he turned water into wine. He did die and return, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it was three days, but I’ve never seen a source on that.

Part of what gets me so upset about those that deny a historical Jesus existed is that they often appeal to Pagan parallels, and the research often done into these parallels is about as academic as Intelligent Design. I’ve even heard people claim that Horus born of a virgin and that Dionysus was crucified. I’ve put a lot of research into these topics, and never have I seen anyone back up these claims with pre-Christian sources.

Let me just take the basic Jesus story: prophesied, virgin birth, miracles (take your pick), crucified, dead for three days, resurrected, followers practice baptism and communion. Can anyone provide any Pagan parallel that follows this story line that they can back up with pre-Christian sources?

I’m not going to deny that there was pagan influence on Christianity. There obviously was. But I’ve seen a lot of atheists try to claim that the Jesus-story was some sort of commonly repeated one throughout the pagan world that Christianity just plugged Jesus into. If there is actual evidence for this, I’m willing to hear it. Thus far, however, every claim I’ve investigated seems to be intellectually dishonest. Am I missing something here?

Newbie Joined: Aug 05, 2008 Posts: 12

I don't think anyone is stating that any one "Pagan Parallel" will match up point by point with the Christ mythos. What they are saying is that the supernatural concepts often associated with Christ are not unique to him - that they were in existence prior to the commonly accepted date of Jesus's birth. So, really, all the parallels say is that the ideas weren't unique.

Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:21 am

Vic333 wrote:

I don't think anyone is stating that any one "Pagan Parallel" will match up point by point with the Christ mythos. What they are saying is that the supernatural concepts often associated with Christ are not unique to him - that they were in existence prior to the commonly accepted date of Jesus's birth. So, really, all the parallels say is that the ideas weren't unique.

Well said Vic Very Happy

Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:35 am

SocraticCoaster wrote:

Part of what gets me so upset about those that deny a historical Jesus existed is that they often appeal to Pagan parallels,

Aside from the obviously mythological parallels associated with nearly all religions and their gods, I still stand by my claim that there is no verifiable history for the Jesus of the bible. There may have been a man, or more likely many men and many myths, the story was founded upon. This doesn't mean it was at any point an intentional fabrication; it's more likely the story and the myth grew similar to the way urban legends grow. This seems to be the way all religious myth is formed.

There may be some factual accounts of things that happened in the bible surrounding the life of this myth, but there is no way (as of yet anyway) to verify they were actual historical happenings. History is a very elusive animal and when we're talking about ancient history, it is often very different from the bits and pieces that have survived for our examination.


Create an account	Home · Articles · Downloads · Video Library · Forums · Chat Room · aStore