The Resurrection, Something Borrowed, Something New, But Certainly not True

[calamity]

Christians think they have a unique event...Christ Rising from the dead. But, of course, that myth has been around for ages. Long before the sandal wearing hippie ever walked the dunes between Jerusalem and Galilee, rode an ass in Damascus or faced his fate on a cross planted atop a hill, mythical characters were rising from the dead.

Tryggve Mettinger argues in his recent book that the category of rise and return to life is significant for the following deities: Ugaritic Baal, Melqart, Adonis, Eshmun, Osiris and Dumuzi.

In ancient Greek religion a number of men and women were made physically immortal as they were resurrected from the dead. Asclepius was killed by Zeus, only to be resurrected and transformed into a major deity. Achilles, after being killed, was snatched from his funeral pyre by his divine mother Thetis and resurrected, brought to an immortal existence in either Leuce, Elysian plains or the Islands of the Blessed. Memnon, who was killed by Achilles, seems to have received a similar fate. Alcmene, Castor, Heracles, and Melicertes, were also among the figures sometimes considered to have been resurrected to physical immortality. According to Herodotus's Histories, the seventh century BC sage Aristeas of Proconnesus was first found dead, after which his body disappeared from a locked room. Later he found not only to have been resurrected but to have gained immortality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection

So, really, what we have here is myth sharing. Clearly, since Jesus came after all these other resurrected characters from what amount to fairy tales, reason dictates the Jesus myth too is a fairy tale.

Now, of course, Christians will say those other resurrections are myths but the resurrection of Jesus was real. Of course, we know better. Fact remains, Jesus myth is just as contrived as the Osirus and Achilles myths. Is there any doubt?

 

[zyzygy]

Christians think they have a unique event...Christ Rising from the dead. But, of course, that myth has been around for ages. Long before the sandal wearing hippie ever walked the dunes between Jerusalem and Galilee, rode an ass in Damascus or faced his fate on a cross planted atop a hill, mythical characters were rising from the dead.



So, really, what we have here is myth sharing. Clearly, since Jesus came after all these other resurrected characters from what amount to fairy tales, reason dictates the Jesus myth too is a fairy tale.

Now, of course, Christians will say those other resurrections are myths but the resurrection of Jesus was real. Of course, we know better. Fact remains, Jesus myth is just as contrived as the Osirus and Achilles myths. Is there any doubt?

But...but...the Bible!?

 

[Tigerace117]

Christians think they have a unique event...Christ Rising from the dead. But, of course, that myth has been around for ages. Long before the sandal wearing hippie ever walked the dunes between Jerusalem and Galilee, rode an ass in Damascus or faced his fate on a cross planted atop a hill, mythical characters were rising from the dead.



So, really, what we have here is myth sharing. Clearly, since Jesus came after all these other resurrected characters from what amount to fairy tales, reason dictates the Jesus myth too is a fairy tale.

Now, of course, Christians will say those other resurrections are myths but the resurrection of Jesus was real. Of course, we know better. Fact remains, Jesus myth is just as contrived as the Osirus and Achilles myths. Is there any doubt?

Your opinion is noted, but the fact remains that it is just that--- your opinion. There is no actual evidence that Jesus was "contrived".

 

[calamity]

Your opinion is noted, but the fact remains that it is just that--- your opinion. There is no actual evidence that Jesus was "contrived".

lol...what there is no evidence of is that Jesus was not contrived. Evidence, instead, clearly shows, that the resurrection of Jesus is a stolen concept.

 

[roguenuke]

Your opinion is noted, but the fact remains that it is just that--- your opinion. There is no actual evidence that Jesus was "contrived".

There is no real evidence that Jesus was anything more than a man with some really good ideas and a lot of charisma.

 

[Tigerace117]

lol...what there is no evidence of is that Jesus was not contrived. Evidence, instead, clearly shows, that the resurrection of Jesus is a stolen concept.

Except there's actually quite a bit of evidence. Which is why, of course, your fantasy that "Jesus was contrived" is a fringe theory only held by radicals.

All you've "proven" is that there are other stories of resurrection in the ancient world. It proves nothing about Christianity.

 

[Tigerace117]

There is no real evidence that Jesus was anything more than a man with some really good ideas and a lot of charisma.

Considering that this all happened thousands of years ago, and there's only so much "evidence" to go around, it's not too surprising that there isn't too much "hard" evidence.

Which is an entirely different debate that claiming Jesus was "contrived".

 

[roguenuke]

Considering that this all happened thousands of years ago, and there's only so much "evidence" to go around, it's not too surprising that there isn't too much "hard" evidence.

Which is an entirely different debate that claiming Jesus was "contrived".

There is evidence for several figures in "history" who are claimed to have done some pretty miraculous things but that still likely didn't do those things. They likely existed, at least to some degree, but as humans we tend to embellish things. And stories get passed with those embellishments. Voila, we have a religion or a Savior or a Prophet.

There isn't even really soft evidence to Jesus being a God or the Son of God or having been resurrected.

Oh and the OP was not saying that Jesus as a person was completely contrived, only that the myth of Jesus, which would be the Resurrection as well as other purported miracles and that he was "the Son of God" was contrived.

 

[calamity]

There is no real evidence that Jesus was anything more than a man with some really good ideas and a lot of charisma.

Even when shown that 90% of the Jesus myth is based on myths which came before he supposedly existed, they deny that it's just a myth. Amazing.

 

[Tigerace117]

There is evidence for several figures in "history" who are claimed to have done some pretty miraculous things but that still likely didn't do those things. They likely existed, at least to some degree, but as humans we tend to embellish things. And stories get passed with those embellishments. Voila, we have a religion or a Savior or a Prophet.

There isn't even really soft evidence to Jesus being a God or the Son of God or having been resurrected.

"Likely" isn't the same thing as evidence. It's really a matter of opinion, frankly, despite the fact that some feel that their opinion makes them intellectually superior.

Unless, of course, you believe what the New Testament states; I do believe that would count as soft evidence at the least. There is little chance people will allow themselves to be tortured to death for a lie.

 

[Tigerace117]

Even when shown that 90% of the Jesus myth is based on myths which came before he supposedly existed, they deny that it's just a myth. Amazing.

No, the only thing you have shown is that more than one culture has resurrection stories. You do realize that doesn't actually mean anything.....right? It really is amazing that you can't grasp the point.

 

[calamity]

Considering that this all happened thousands of years ago, and there's only so much "evidence" to go around, it's not too surprising that there isn't too much "hard" evidence.

Which is an entirely different debate that claiming Jesus was "contrived".

The resurrection myth is contrived. No one said Jesus as a man was contrived. He probably was one hell of a carpenter.

 

[Tigerace117]

The resurrection myth is contrived. No one said Jesus as a man was contrived. He probably was one hell of a carpenter.

Except you haven't proven anything about that either. All you've "proven" is that resurrection myths are common to more than one culture.

 

[calamity]

No, the only thing you have shown is that more than one culture has resurrection stories. You do realize that doesn't actually mean anything.....right? It really is amazing that you can't grasp the point.

lol..yeah, more than one culture has resurrections myths. Exactly. Smart people would take that for what it is--proof that their resurrection myth is no more or no less contrived than all the others.

 

[calamity]

Except you haven't proven anything about that either. All you've "proven" is that resurrection myths are common to more than one culture.

Which means, by definition, that your resurrection myth is not unique. Correct?

 

[Tigerace117]

lol..yeah, more than one culture has resurrections myths. Exactly. Smart people would take that for what it is--proof that their resurrection myth is no more or no less contrived than all the others.

"Smart people" would know better than to come to conclusions based on.....well.....no evidence. You haven't actually provided any. You've made an assumption and are now pretending that makes your intelligent

 

[Tigerace117]

Which means, by definition, that your resurrection myth is not unique. Correct?

More than one culture having stories of something, as I've stated, proves nothing.

 

[calamity]

More than one culture having stories of something, as I've stated, proves nothing.

So, are you willing to accept that the Jesus myth is really describing something that happened 3000 years earlier than AD 35, and happened in maybe in China, India or ancient Egypt instead of Jerusalem? Or, are you saying that lots of Jesuses have existed and were resurrected? Pick one.

 

[laska]

You assume the religion of Christ began with His mortal life but that is not what the Bible implies. It implies that the religion began with Adam. If Adam and Eve were taught of Christ, and LDS scriptures teach just that, and they taught their offspring about Christ, then knowledge of Christ and His resurrection was basically known from the very beginning . Then there is a really simple reason why many religions the pre-date Christ's mortal ministry have elements of resurrection, virgin birth, etc. It Is simply because they are corruptions from a more ancient, pure original.

 

[tosca1]

Christians think they have a unique event...Christ Rising from the dead. But, of course, that myth has been around for ages. Long before the sandal wearing hippie ever walked the dunes between Jerusalem and Galilee, rode an ass in Damascus or faced his fate on a cross planted atop a hill, mythical characters were rising from the dead.



So, really, what we have here is myth sharing. Clearly, since Jesus came after all these other resurrected characters from what amount to fairy tales, reason dictates the Jesus myth too is a fairy tale.

Now, of course, Christians will say those other resurrections are myths but the resurrection of Jesus was real. Of course, we know better. Fact remains, Jesus myth is just as contrived as the Osirus and Achilles myths. Is there any doubt?

:roll:

Nope. Mettinger had not said anything about your so-called, "myth-sharing," by Christanity.

Here's what your author actually said in his book:

In fact, most scholars have come to doubt whether, properly speaking, there really were any myths of dying and rising gods at all!
In the Osiris myth, one of the best known symbolic seasonal myths, Osiris does not really come back to life but simply continues to exist in the nether realm of the departed.

In a recent review of the evidence, T. N. D. Mettinger reports: "From the 1930s. . . a consensus has developed to the effect that the 'dying and rising gods' died but did not return or rise to live again. . . Those who still think differently are looked upon as residual members of an almost extinct species" (Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, The Riddle of Resurrection: "Dying and Rising Gods" in the Ancient Near East [Stockholm, Sweden: Almquist & Wiksell International, 2001], pp. 4, 7).

Mettinger himself believes that myths of dying and rising did exist in the cases of Dumuzi, Baal, and Melqart; but he recognizes that such symbols are quite unlike the early Christian belief in Jesus' resurrection:

The dying and rising gods were closely related to the seasonal cycle. Their death and return were seen as reflected in the changes of plant life. The death and resurrection of Jesus is a one-time event, not repeated, and unrelated to seasonal changes. . . . There is, as far as I am aware, no prima facie evidence that the death and resurrection of Jesus is a mythological construct, drawing on the myths and rites of the dying and rising gods of the surrounding world. While studied with profit against the background of Jewish resurrection belief, the faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus retains its unique character in the history of religions. The riddle remains (Ibid., p. 221).


Notice Mettinger's comment that the belief in Jesus' resurrection may be profitably studied against the background of Jewish resurrection beliefs (not pagan mythology).

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/question-answer/P30/jesus-and-pagan-mythology

 

[tosca1]

Christians think they have a unique event...Christ Rising from the dead. But, of course, that myth has been around for ages. Long before the sandal wearing hippie ever walked the dunes between Jerusalem and Galilee, rode an ass in Damascus or faced his fate on a cross planted atop a hill, mythical characters were rising from the dead.



So, really, what we have here is myth sharing. Clearly, since Jesus came after all these other resurrected characters from what amount to fairy tales, reason dictates the Jesus myth too is a fairy tale.

Now, of course, Christians will say those other resurrections are myths but the resurrection of Jesus was real. Of course, we know better. Fact remains, Jesus myth is just as contrived as the Osirus and Achilles myths. Is there any doubt?

The quote from Mettinger differs from what you claim.
Okay....let's see if you can put your money where your mouth is..... Here is the challenge:


Show us the actual passages narrating the supposed parallel.

 

[calamity]

The quote from Mettinger differs from what you claim.
Okay....let's see if you can put your money where your mouth is..... Here is the challenge:


Show us the actual passages narrating the supposed parallel.

The parallels are that cultures which lived thousands of years before your precious Jesus had similar resurrection myths. Drops mic.

 

[calamity]

You assume the religion of Christ began with His mortal life but that is not what the Bible implies. It implies that the religion began with Adam. If Adam and Eve were taught of Christ, and LDS scriptures teach just that, and they taught their offspring about Christ, then knowledge of Christ and His resurrection was basically known from the very beginning . Then there is a really simple reason why many religions the pre-date Christ's mortal ministry have elements of resurrection, virgin birth, etc. It Is simply because they are corruptions from a more ancient, pure original.

Uh....wut?

 

[tosca1]

The parallels are that cultures which lived thousands of years before your precious Jesus had similar resurrection myths. Drops mic.

Give specific parallels! What particular resurrection myths?

Your own source (Mettinger) had never said that Christianity was copied or had a "myth-sharing" with pagans! In fact, he doesn't believe that!

 

[tosca1]

The parallels are that cultures which lived thousands of years before your precious Jesus had similar resurrection myths. Drops mic.

Here's another quote from Mettinger, busting your bs!

“Then Mettinger said he was going to take exception to that nearly universal scholarly conviction,” Licona continued. “He takes a decidedly minority position and claims that there are at least three and possibly as many as five dying and rising gods that predate Christianity. But the key question is this: Are there any actual parallels between these myths and Jesus’ resurrection?”

“What did Mettinger conclude?” I asked.

“In the end, after combing through all of these accounts and critically analyzing them, Mettinger adds that none of these serve as parallels to Jesus. None of them,” Licona emphasized.


“They are far different from the reports of Jesus rising from the dead. They occurred in the unspecified and distant past and were usually related to the seasonal life-and-death cycle of vegetation. In contrast, Jesus’ resurrection isn’t repeated, isn’t related to changes in the seasons, and was sincerely believed to be an actual event by those who lived in the same generation of the historical Jesus. In addition, Mettinger concludes that ‘there is no evidence for the death of the dying and rising gods as vicarious suffering for sins.’”

https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2013/04/bible-qa-was-jesus-resurrection-stolen-from-mythology/