Mithra and Jesus

[Tassman]

[QUOTE=mig_killer2;2346954]



Dear mig_killer 2, I will respond to your 2 very long back-to-back posts in due course. In the meantime you might light to look at the following extract from “How to think like a Fundy”, which I think speaks to the issue. I’ve bolded the relevant section. The link:

http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/fundy.html

3) Debating techniques

Here we delve into the murky world of online debating with heathens. You can witness to lost souls in USENET newsgroups (such as alt.atheism and talk.origins), or in message fora on their websites.

Self contradiction

In a heated argument, you will often find yourself losing track of your previous posts, and the atheist will often accuse you of contradicting comments you made earlier. As your words are Bible-based, it stands to reason that they should therefore be correct at all times. Refer to "1 Inerrancy". Alternatively, remember that, as slaves of The Evil One, atheists will do their best to twist your words and attempt to confuse you. If this appears to be happening, ignore their comments and pray for strength.

Logic and reason

These are the playthings of the unbeliever, and you should have no truck with them. Faith in the Lord is all you need. The atheist will try to imply that God should be bound by the rules of logic, but God invented logic and so cannot be constrained by it! The more illogical and unreasoning you are, the harder it becomes for atheists to refute your statements. They will scream "But that doesn't make sense! It is logically impossible!" - be that as it may, your faith will tell you that you are correct. With God, all things are possible - including impossible things. What more do you need?

The burden of proof is on the skeptic

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" you will be told. But just who is making the extraordinary claim here? You, who simply observe the Creator's hand in all things, or the infidel who against all logic and reason denies the very same. Clearly, it is incumbent on the unbelievers to support their ludicrous assertions that there is no God. Ask them if they can prove God does not exist. Ask how they can be so arrogant to make this claim, when they have not searched the entire universe for God. They will come back and ask you to disprove the existence of Zeus, Vishnu and unicorns, but you should dismiss such childish nonsense - there is no comparison between the fairy-tale gods of other religions and the Truth of Christianity, Their inability to disprove God is evidence enough that He is real. If they cannot overturn your theory, they are clearly being unreasonable by refusing to accept it.
Repeating yourself

After spending a few days debating with a group of atheists, you should leave them alone for a week or so. This will give them time to come to terms with the truths you have revealed. Also, it will provide time for new people to join the discussion. This allows you to return to the forum once more and repeat your statements, unchanged, for the benefit of newcomers. We recommend storing your longer arguments in a text file, so it can be easily cut-and-pasted into the forum. If the forum regulars object, explain that, having already corrected their misconceptions, you are now simply trying to reach the new members and those who still unreasonably reject the truth. If they are civilised people, they will respect this and stand aside. Repeat this technique until you are banned from the board or placed in everybody's killfile.

Huge posts

To take the wind out of your opponent's sails, reply to the smallest query with pages and pages of text. Ideally, you should spend a couple of hours writing this yourself, but if you don't have the time cut-and-paste relevant (or, if possible, irrelevant) information from other Christian websites or resources. Try to spend at least ten kilobytes explaining why they should pray more, why they should fear Hell, how Christ died for their sins, why prominent Christian philosophers and scientists disagree with them, how long-dead Christians have already proven them wrong, and so on. Ask as many obscure questions as possible. If they are truly sincere (which, being atheists, is impossible) they will answer all of your points. If they fail to answer all of your points and questions, victory is yours. Make a note of this humiliating defeat and remember to bring it up often when dealing with this particular individual. (This is also a handy technique to use during a live debate with evolutionists. )

A variant on this theme is to post numerous verses from the Bible to support your argument. Why bother with a hundred words of explanation, when a single verse will do it all for you. Simply post the verse that refutes the atheist, and then maybe two or three more referring to hellfire. As the verses are known to be true, little more need be said on the matter. If the atheist predictably comes back with a counter argument, post the same verses again but suggest that he actually read them this time.

Grammar and spelling

- Are not important, as long as the Spirit guides you. If you are criticised for being unable to form a sentence in English, or using words like "athiset", "Noahs arc", "evolotin" and "revilatian" - worry not. It is not the trivia of punctuation and spelling which is important, but getting the message of God across.

Consider this excellent example. To the untrained eye, the writer may appear to be an illiterate, ignorant dolt, but just feel the love in his words:

"i was wonder if you yourself knew that darwin disowned his theroy in his last days knowing that fossils show species suddenly appering not sight mutations made over long periods of time. the fact is eveolution is total improvible."

Only the coldest of hearts could not be moved by such testimony. This is the sort of level of incoherent drooling you should be aiming for.

You should combine a flimsy grasp of the English language with your own distinctive writing style. The following are quite fashionable at the moment:

• writing everything in lower case without any punctuation at all this can be quite difficult to read but is very easy to type which is a bonus dont you think

• ALTERNATIVELY, WRITE EVERYTHING IN CAPS. THIS MAKES YOUR IMPORTANT MESSAGE STAND OUT AND PEOPLE WILL TAKE NOTICE OF IT AND REALISE THAT YOU REALLY MEAN IT.

• short, disjointed.....sentences separated by long......strings of dots.....this makes you look quite.....thoughtful as if you are......pausing every now and......then.

• Overuse of exclamation marks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! can emphasise the point you are trying to make!!!!!!!!!!!! Question marks also work well, don't they???????????????????????????

• Show ur mastery of the Internet by using words like "u" instead of "you", "2"

instead of "to" and "too", "ur" instead of "your" and "you're", and u 2 can spread the gospel 2 other kewl d00dz.

If English is not your first language, all the better. The way you present your argument says a lot about you, so pick wisely.

Knowledge of the subject

Whether you are talking about evolution, the origins of the universe, basic human anatomy, or the structure of the solar system, there is no need to concern yourself with learning anything at all about the issue. See "1 Inerrancy". By definition, those who disagree with you are wrong, deluded and possibly perverts, so it is a bad idea to pollute your mind with their religious beliefs. All the evidence in the world is no match for a single grain of the True Faith.
If they say "But evolution doesn't work like that! You are completely clueless!" remind them that evolution doesn't actually work at all. Has a cow ever given birth to a dog? Do we see hydrogen turning into people around us? If we "evolved" from chimps, why are there still chimps? Why do we not see amoebae sprouting legs and talking? These harsh insights will cut through their dogma like a hot knife through butter.

If discussing evolution, try asking for a complete list of transitional fossils from ape to human. They may provide you with a few dozen examples, but it is hardly complete, is it? How can you be expected to accept such shoddy evidence? Go on to inform them that those are not transitional fossils anyway, as there are no transitionals. Clearly God created all species individually, otherwise they would have no trouble finding the evidence. The gaps in the fossil record are therefore solid evidence for creationism.

If they refer you to papers or websites showing that the universe is billions of years old, refer them in turn to Genesis. Explain how carbon dating methods have been shown to be hopelessly flawed. For instance, when the Turin Shroud was dated, the so-called experts put it around the 14th Century, instead of 33AD. This obviously calls into question all the other radiometric dating guesses they will throw around.

[historic salve]

<Sarcasm>

But Maxvel, don't you see that this leads to another problem? Ignatius says that Christ was a real person who rose from the dead, fine. But he doesn't say anything about the ascension! Ignatius must have believed that Christ died after he rose again. Since he was supposedly a disciple of the Apostle John, this glaring omission on his part is all the more suspicious. Maybe the ascension was added into the Gospels after his death in 110.

I'm sure that you'll wave away the facts by telling me I'm making an "argument from silence."

This is a fair warning to those sarcastically impaired the preceding text was written in jest.

I see that all you fundies are ignoring my brilliant post. I take it you're just too to respond.

[element771]

I know that this may be technically off topic but I would like you to back up your previous statements about Richard Carrier.

What serious journals is he an active contributor to?

How do you know he is held in high standings by his colleagues (you should not count his atheist buddies to give an honest appraisal of his abilities)?

Although off topic, I think that your assessment of Carrier is pertinent in showing your tendency to rely on marginal scholarship to prove your point.

[GakuseiDon]

Ignatius refers to “historic” episodes from the gospels and Paul does not refer to “historic” episodes of Jesus.

That doesn't answer my question. Mystery religions could be centred around people thought to be historical. To repeat: Paul uses the word "mystery". Ignatius uses the word "mystery". How do you determine that Paul was a follower of a mystery religion, but Ignatius was not, other than just assume it? What is the key, IYO?

Paul was writing in a Hellenistic culture where the norm was the mystery religions which provided the religious concepts and language of the day. Naturally Paul modeled himself on them with his theology, as is evident from his epistles but with strong Jewish overtones.

So you assert. But every time you assert this, you never back it up with references FROM "the Hellenistic culture of the day". All you give is Paul.

Can you give ANY references from the Hellenistic culture of the day? Otherwise, all you are doing continuously is asserting "Paul matches Hellenistic thinking".

Now, I say that Paul matches the Hellenistic thinking of the day, which is why I claim that Paul believed in a historical Jesus. The difference is that I actually have given references from pagan sources that show that the people around whom mystery religions revolved were thought to be historical.

How about we do this: forget about Paul for the moment. YOU present your references from pagan sources about the gods involved in mystery cults, I present MY references from pagan sources, and we do a compare. My honest impression is that you are just repeating the same things about Paul all the time because you have nothing from pagan sources on mystery religions to support you.

Now, here is a recent comment of yours: "The Hellenist’s view was that the savior, whether Osiris’s scattered/reassembled body or Mithras’s slaying of the bull occurred in an eternal dimension."

So: these are some of MY references. This is from the writings of Lucian, writing around 160 CE:

http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/lofts/2938/deasyria1.html
"Nonetheless, there are some inhabitants of Byblos who say that Osiris of Egypt lies buried among them, and the mourning and the ceremonies are all made in honor of Osiris instead of Adon. And I shall tell you the reason why this seems to be true to them. Each year a head comes from Egypt to Byblos, making a sea journey of seven days, and the winds drive it, by guidance of the gods, and it does not turn aside in any direction, but comes only to Byblos. And this is wholly marvelous. It befalls every year, and happened the time that I was in Byblos, and I saw the head that is of Byblos."

Here he talks about Attis, another figure in mystery religions:

"There is another holy story which I heard from a wise man, that the goddess is Rhea [Kybele] and the sanctuary founded by Attis. Attis was a Lydian by birth, and he first taught the ceremonies that belong to Rhea [Kybele]. And all rites which Phrygians, Lydians, and Samothraceans perform, they learned from Attis. For when Rhea [Kybele] castrated him, he ceased to lead the life of a man, but changed to female form, and donned women's clothing. He went out to every land and performed ceremonies and related his sufferings and praised Rhea [Kybele] in song. Eventually he came to Syria, and since the people beyond the Euphrates did not accept him, nor his rites, he founded the sanctuary in this place."

Here he talks about Dionysus, another mystery cult figure:

"I believe what men say concerning the sanctuary, since it accords in most respects to the Greeks who deem the goddess Hera [Atargatis] and the sanctuary made by Dionysos, son of Semele. For without a doubt, Dionysos came to Syria on that journey during which he went to Ethiopia. And in the temple are many indications that Dionysos is the founder, namely foreign garments and gems of India and elephants' tusks which Dionysos brought from Ethiopia."

So, IF this reflects the common Hellenistic thinking, then using YOUR logic, we should assume that Paul thought of Jesus as a historical person. Now, you may say "Oh, but OTHERS believed that they were saviours who acted in an eternal dimension". But please don't just assert it. Finally, finally, please back it up with SOMETHING from pagan sources. If all you are going to do is repeat Paul (or other Christian writings) again and not pagan writings, then fine. That's as much of an admission from you as I will get, I guess.

[mig_killer2]

Huge posts

To take the wind out of your opponent's sails, reply to the smallest query with pages and pages of text. Ideally, you should spend a couple of hours writing this yourself, but if you don't have the time cut-and-paste relevant (or, if possible, irrelevant) information from other Christian websites or resources. Try to spend at least ten kilobytes explaining why they should pray more, why they should fear Hell, how Christ died for their sins, why prominent Christian philosophers and scientists disagree with them, how long-dead Christians have already proven them wrong, and so on. Ask as many obscure questions as possible. If they are truly sincere (which, being atheists, is impossible) they will answer all of your points. If they fail to answer all of your points and questions, victory is yours. Make a note of this humiliating defeat and remember to bring it up often when dealing with this particular individual. (This is also a handy technique to use during a live debate with evolutionists. )

A variant on this theme is to post numerous verses from the Bible to support your argument. Why bother with a hundred words of explanation, when a single verse will do it all for you. Simply post the verse that refutes the atheist, and then maybe two or three more referring to hellfire. As the verses are known to be true, little more need be said on the matter. If the atheist predictably comes back with a counter argument, post the same verses again but suggest that he actually read them this time.

you sir are truly, TRULY pathetic. I responded with a "huge" post because I had a huge post to respond to and lots of points and issues to cover. if you actually read, you'll notice that my text comprises of roughly 50 to 55% of the actual text. your text comprises of a large portion of the actual text

but regardless, I am personally looking forward to your responses to my points about NT criticism and NT historicity.

[mig_killer2]

Hello GakuseiDon.

Ignatius refers to “historic” episodes from the gospels and Paul does not refer to “historic” episodes of Jesus. Paul was writing in a Hellenistic culture where the norm was the mystery religions which provided the religious concepts and language of the day. Naturally Paul modeled himself on them with his theology, as is evident from his epistles but with strong Jewish overtones.

Ignatius was writing at a time of the "historic" Jesus as found in the gospels becoming the accepted model. The point I was making was that even in such an environment many of the early church fathers like Ignatius were still very much affected by the language and concepts of the Mystery Religions. Hellenism and the Mysteries absolutely permeated the Roman Empire and profoundly affected everybody including Judaism.

Christianity evolved and continued to evolve until the era of the great Church Councils when it was largely halted by the effective means of providing dire punishment for those who deviated from the orthodox line.

could you perhaps provide some evidence that Christianity was influenced by hellenistic mystery cults or that Paul was influenced by mystery cults OTHER THAN THE USE OF THE WORD "mystery"?

[Tassman]

That doesn't answer my question. Mystery religions could be centred around people thought to be historical. To repeat: Paul uses the word "mystery". Ignatius uses the word "mystery". How do you determine that Paul was a follower of a mystery religion, but Ignatius was not, other than just assume it? What is the key, IYO?


So you assert. But every time you assert this, you never back it up with references FROM "the Hellenistic culture of the day". All you give is Paul.

Can you give ANY references from the Hellenistic culture of the day? Otherwise, all you are doing continuously is asserting "Paul matches Hellenistic thinking".

Now, I say that Paul matches the Hellenistic thinking of the day, which is why I claim that Paul believed in a historical Jesus. The difference is that I actually have given references from pagan sources that show that the people around whom mystery religions revolved were thought to be historical.

How about we do this: forget about Paul for the moment. YOU present your references from pagan sources about the gods involved in mystery cults, I present MY references from pagan sources, and we do a compare. My honest impression is that you are just repeating the same things about Paul all the time because you have nothing from pagan sources on mystery religions to support you.

Now, here is a recent comment of yours: "The Hellenist’s view was that the savior, whether Osiris’s scattered/reassembled body or Mithras’s slaying of the bull occurred in an eternal dimension."

So: these are some of MY references. This is from the writings of Lucian, writing around 160 CE:

http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/lofts/2938/deasyria1.html
"Nonetheless, there are some inhabitants of Byblos who say that Osiris of Egypt lies buried among them, and the mourning and the ceremonies are all made in honor of Osiris instead of Adon. And I shall tell you the reason why this seems to be true to them. Each year a head comes from Egypt to Byblos, making a sea journey of seven days, and the winds drive it, by guidance of the gods, and it does not turn aside in any direction, but comes only to Byblos. And this is wholly marvelous. It befalls every year, and happened the time that I was in Byblos, and I saw the head that is of Byblos."

Here he talks about Attis, another figure in mystery religions:

"There is another holy story which I heard from a wise man, that the goddess is Rhea [Kybele] and the sanctuary founded by Attis. Attis was a Lydian by birth, and he first taught the ceremonies that belong to Rhea [Kybele]. And all rites which Phrygians, Lydians, and Samothraceans perform, they learned from Attis. For when Rhea [Kybele] castrated him, he ceased to lead the life of a man, but changed to female form, and donned women's clothing. He went out to every land and performed ceremonies and related his sufferings and praised Rhea [Kybele] in song. Eventually he came to Syria, and since the people beyond the Euphrates did not accept him, nor his rites, he founded the sanctuary in this place."

Here he talks about Dionysus, another mystery cult figure:

"I believe what men say concerning the sanctuary, since it accords in most respects to the Greeks who deem the goddess Hera [Atargatis] and the sanctuary made by Dionysos, son of Semele. For without a doubt, Dionysos came to Syria on that journey during which he went to Ethiopia. And in the temple are many indications that Dionysos is the founder, namely foreign garments and gems of India and elephants' tusks which Dionysos brought from Ethiopia."

So, IF this reflects the common Hellenistic thinking, then using YOUR logic, we should assume that Paul thought of Jesus as a historical person. Now, you may say "Oh, but OTHERS believed that they were saviours who acted in an eternal dimension". But please don't just assert it. Finally, finally, please back it up with SOMETHING from pagan sources. If all you are going to do is repeat Paul (or other Christian writings) again and not pagan writings, then fine. That's as much of an admission from you as I will get, I guess.

We have been through all this before and when I provide the evidence you simply don’t accept it (its called denial) and then continue to claim that I have not provided evidence. It is a common tactic in TWeb, raised to an art form by the likes of Doctor Jack Bauer.

You are being utterly disingenuous when you list the mystery religions centered on historical people and you know this full well because we have discussed this many times in other threads. Yes, many of the more ancient salvation myths began life as quasi historical events…as you have listed. And many of them continued to be thought of as historical by the ignorant masses…who were the majority in an illiterate age…up to the time of Paul.

But, as Plutarch makes abundantly clear there is a higher interpretation and a lower interpretation of these “events”. You have acknowledged this previously in our discussion of the Plutarch interpretations of the Osiris myth. Furthermore, Plutarch makes it clear that the higher interpretation of these events is the interpretation to be preferred by educated people.

The lower interpretation is the ancient, quasi-historical on earth and it predates Platonism. The higher interpretation is the post Platonic one whereby the concepts of the multi-tiered universe and the saving events have been transferred from the original earthly plane to the sub-lunar sphere and given eternal significance.

By the time of Paul the Hellenistic concept to be taken seriously was the higher one, NOT the residue of PRE-Platonic, PRE-Mystery religion concepts. It is the heavenly spheres that divine activity occurs, outside of time, not on earth.

For example, in the first century BCE, well within the Hellenistic era we have the Preexistent Messiah in the Similitude’s of 1 Enoch, in Enoch’s journey through the seven heavens. In chapters’ 37-71is the frequent reference to a being who is called 'the righteous one, the chosen one, The Messiah and ‘the son of man who has existed eternally.' Obviously an image later adopted by Christianity". - Prof. James C. Vanderkam

And the higher view of the Hellenistic Mystery Religions is to be found in other apocryphal works like the Ascension of Isaiah whereby the saving events of Jesus are placed in the sub-lunar sphere. The angel takes Isaiah to the seventh heaven and on the way there, in the firmament: 9 we went up into the firmament, I and he, and there I saw Sammael (Satan) and his hosts; and there was a great struggle in it, and the words of Satan, and they were envying one another 10And as above, so also on earth, for the likeness of what is in the firmament is here on earth. 11And I said to the angel, "What is this envying?" 12And he said to me, "So it has been ever since this world existed until now, and this struggle will last until the one (the son of man) comes whom you are to see, and he will destroy him."

So, for Paul his Mystery Religion Christianity is not based in historical events on earth. There was no reason for it. By Paul’s time Platonic Hellenism was well established and the Christian Mystery Religion did not have the baggage of an ancient tradition, with its saving events occurring in an earthly location. It did not need to reinterpret an ancient earthbound myth into Platonic terms as with Osiris or Dionysus etc.

From the start, Paul’s mystery religion was in keeping with Hellenistic Platonism, as would have been well understood by the people of the day, and set in the upper realms in an eternal place where all the saving acts occur (and have occurred) outside time and space…as in (Ephesians 3:9) ... the mystery, which from the beginning of the world has been hid in God and (Colossians 1:26) the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now made manifest to his saints.

[Glenn P]

We have been through all this before and when I provide the evidence you simply don’t accept it (its called denial) and then continue to claim that I have not provided evidence. It is a common tactic in TWeb, raised to an art form by the likes of Doctor Jack Bauer.

This is mere poseurism, with the silent hope that nobody will check by reading the thread.

Are you feeling lucky?

[GakuseiDon]

We have been through all this before and when I provide the evidence you simply don’t accept it (its called denial) and then continue to claim that I have not provided evidence.

No, you've made assertions. But you haven't provided evidence. Evidence would be: "This is the primary source, and this is what it says!" And then you'd give the actual quote. An assertion would be: "Plutarch backs me up!" without providing any quotes.

So let's see what you evidence you produce from pagan sources to back up what you assert was "common Hellenistic thinking" back then.

You are being utterly disingenuous when you list the mystery religions centered on historical people and you know this full well because we have discussed this many times in other threads.

From my perspective: I've given reference after reference from primary sources showing that those gods were regarded as historical people. You've given me nothing except assertions to show that they were thought to have acted in a "spiritual realm".

Yes, many of the more ancient salvation myths began life as quasi historical events…as you have listed.

Lucian wrote around 160 CE, Amnouy, not at the dawn of these myths.

And many of them continued to be thought of as historical by the ignorant masses…who were the majority in an illiterate age…up to the time of Paul.

Lucian wasn't part of the ignorant masses. He was a well-educated author. I can give you quotes from Tacitus, also, if you like. Plutarch supports me, not you, if you would only look at his actual words.

(ETA) Tacitus, writing around 110 CE, writing about Saturn, Jupiter and Isis:
http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/histories.5.v.html

"Some say that the Jews were fugitives from the island of Crete, who settled on the nearest coast of Africa about the time when Saturn was driven from his throne by the power of Jupiter. Evidence of this is sought in the name. There is a famous mountain in Crete called Ida; the neighbouring tribe, the Idaei, came to be called Judaei by a barbarous lengthening of the national name. Others assert that in the reign of Isis the overflowing population of Egypt, led by Hierosolymus and Judas, discharged itself into the neighbouring countries.

But, as Plutarch makes abundantly clear there is a higher interpretation and a lower interpretation of these “events”. You have acknowledged this previously in our discussion of the Plutarch interpretations of the Osiris myth. Furthermore, Plutarch makes it clear that the higher interpretation of these events is the interpretation to be preferred by educated people.

Well, give us the lower and higher interpretations given by Plutarch then. Remember the thread where I analysed his ACTUAL words? Where I actually quoted what he ACTUALLY said about Osiris? How about you return the favour. IF Plutarch supports your view of Hellenistic thinking, what did Plutarch ACTUALLY write that you believe supports your view of "saving acts" being performed above the earth?

The lower interpretation is the ancient, quasi-historical on earth and it predates Platonism. The higher interpretation is the post Platonic one whereby the concepts of the multi-tiered universe and the saving events have been transferred from the original earthly plane to the sub-lunar sphere and given eternal significance.

Assertion. What is the "saving event" by Osiris? And SHOW me his words, please, don't just assert it.

For example, in the first century BCE, well within the Hellenistic era we have the Preexistent Messiah in the Similitude’s of 1 Enoch, in Enoch’s journey through the seven heavens. In chapters’ 37-71is the frequent reference to a being who is called 'the righteous one, the chosen one, The Messiah and ‘the son of man who has existed eternally.' Obviously an image later adopted by Christianity". - Prof. James C. Vanderkam

??? What is this relevant to? If it is an image later adopted by Christianity, surely it would have to have been consistent with a Jesus dying on earth? I mean, I see no sense in that comment. You keep introducing these tangents, and when I question you on them, you say I am going off-topic. Please -- what is the relevance of the above statement? Did that being perform a "saving act" in the heavens? If not, what on earth (hehe -- a pun) does this have to do with the subject?

And the higher view of the Hellenistic Mystery Religions is to be found in other apocryphal works like the Ascension of Isaiah whereby the saving events of Jesus are placed in the sub-lunar sphere.

Sigh. No, they weren't. Honestly, I do wish you would qualify such blanket statements. This statement is much closer to the truth:

"EVERY known version of AoI shows Jesus coming to earth. However, Doherty -- and Doherty alone -- proposes that an earlier version didn't. Amnouy is personally convinced that Doherty is correct. However, there are absolutely ZERO -- zip -- nada -- zenzen nai -- null -- meiyou -- versions of apocryphal works whereby the saving events of Jesus are placed in the sub-lunar sphere"

Any parts of that statement you want to disagree with?

So, for Paul his Mystery Religion Christianity is not based in historical events on earth. There was no reason for it. <snipped>

All following assertions snipped. I want evidence, not assertions please.

So, all I can see from the above is the assertion that Plutarch supports you. So, can you now produce Plutarch's ACTUAL RELEVANT words to show support for Osiris's "saving act" that was not performed on earth?

[historic salve]

Zenzen nai, I'll have to remember that.

[Tassman]

could you perhaps provide some evidence that Christianity was influenced by hellenistic mystery cults or that Paul was influenced by mystery cults OTHER THAN THE USE OF THE WORD "mystery"?

Paul was not so much “influenced” by the mystery cults so much that his Christianity WAS a new mystery cult…one based on Hellenistic Judaism. I will give you a random sampling of the numerous similarities between the mystery cults and early Christianity.

Five centuries before the arrival of Christianity were the Eleusinian mysteries. According to Hippolytus (170-235 CE), a leader of the Roman Church, in certain Eleusinian mystery rites among the things shown to the initiates was a single head of grain. This grain was beheld in silence as a manifestation of the life in it, which symbolized the life in all. Paul compared the mystery of death and resurrection to the planting and the sprouting of a seed. (1 Corinthians 15:36-37) What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. And what you sow is not the body which is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain.(John 12:24) ... unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.

Long before Christianity the Eleusinians instituted the ritual of baptism as part of initiation into the mystery. The initiates were required to undergo a preparatory purification; they marched in a procession to the sea and washed their sins away by baptism. The Roman historian Livy (64/59 BCE to 17 CE) mentions that ceremonial washing preceded initiation into the mysteries of Dionysus. Through baptism they secured glorious immortality in the afterlife. Their message was "new life grows out of every grave."

For the Eleusinians being born again and securing forgiveness of sins by submersion in water was a mystery. Baptism symbolized the purification of the soul. Tertullian wrote, "... in the Apollinarian and Eleusinian rites they are baptized, and they imagine that the result of this baptism is rebirth and the remission of the penalties of sins ..."

Like the mystery religions, early Christians conducted baptizing at the time of initiation. Peter ordered baptizing as soon as they repented. (Acts 2:38) Then Peter said to them, repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins...

In the Dionysian mystery the initiates would have a profound religious experience (known as the sacred madness) and their soul would unite with the god Dionysus. The soul would be "with god" or "in god." The initiates became “enthei”, that is, they dwelled "in god." The idea of dwelling "in god" appears in John's letter. (1 John 4:15) Whosoever will confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwells in him, and he in God. Paul often used the expression "in Christ." (Galatians 3:28)...For you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Romans 16:7) My fellow prisoners...who also were in Christ before me. (2 Corinthians 5:17) Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature. "In Christ" is equivalent to "dwell in Christ." It reflects the Mystic Union or the Mystic Communion, which was practiced in many of the mystery religions of that period.

Plato wrote that during the initiation, the initiates "search eagerly within themselves to find the nature of their god, they are successful, because they have been compelled to keep their eyes fixed upon the god ... they are inspired and receive from him character and habits, so far as it is possible for a man to have part in God." The mystery initiates believed that through the secret rituals they would gain secret knowledge and thus accomplish a mystical union with the divine. This idea is clearly reflected in the following verses. (John 6:56) Whosoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. This is not something that an historical Jesus would have said. Even in a symbolic way, this statement is contrary to the Law of Moses. Paul’s Lord’s Supper 1 Cor 11 was divinely revealed to him as an eternal event not set in time or place and therefore not blasphemous. Only after Christianity had become separate from the discipline of Judaism and Jesus was becoming an historical figure, as opposed to a mythic figure was the Lord’s Supper turned into the Last Supper and set on earth as an historic event.

Uniting with God was also an idea shared by the Stoics of that era. Seneca (4 BCE to 65 CE) wrote, "God is near you, he is with you, he is within you." Paul wrote (Colossians 1:27) ... Christ in you...

The Orphics (and the Dionysians) practiced the mystery of communion long before Jesus. They had sacramental communion with their god, Dionysus, who had suffered, died, and arose. Justin Martyr reported that they used wine and bread in their communion: "For when they say Dionysus was born of Zeus' union with Semele, and narrate ... that he was torn to pieces and died, he arose again and ascended to heaven, and when they use the wine in his mysteries, is it not evident that the Devil has imitated the previously quoted prophecy ...?" Justin Martyr admitted that the Dionysians were practicing communion before the Christians, but, he explained, they did so because the Devil imitated an ancient prophecy of the Old Testament. (ahem) Through the mystery of communion, the Orphics became one with their god. The Christian communion is almost identical to the Orphic ritual. (John 6:55-56) “For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink. Whosoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.”

The Orphics believed that the world was under the power of evil and that the body is a burden and bondage for the soul, whose destiny is to escape this bondage and arrive at eternal and blessed life. They also believed that man's efforts to win salvation were powerless without divine assistance. This idea appears in the following verse of John. (John 6:44) No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.

There are further parallels between the Orphics and the Hellenist Christians. The Orphics believed that Dionysus, being born from the divine Zeus and the mortal woman Semele, had a two-fold nature. Likewise, Jesus had a two-fold nature, divine and human. Dionysus was persecuted and murdered, yet was resurrected and became victorious. Jesus was persecuted, murdered, and was victorious through his resurrection.

The religion of Isis had its roots in the Egyptian religion of Osiris, which existed more than 2300 years BCE. According to the Pyramid Texts (ca. 2350-2100 BCE), Isis mourned for her murdered husband, the god Osiris. Osiris was the central deity of ancient Egypt. He was the god of the dead and the underworld. With his sister-wife, Isis, and their son, Horus, he formed the DIVINE TRINITY. During the Hellenistic era the Egyptian religion of Osiris was fused with the Greek mystery religions. The result of this syncretism was the mystery religion of Isis and Osiris. Frank C. Babbit wrote, "That the worship of Isis had been introduced to Greece before 330 BC is certain from an inscription found in the Peiraeus, in which the merchants of Citium ask permission to found a shrine of Aphrodite on the same terms as those on which the Egyptians founded a shrine of Isis ... In Plutarch's own town have been found two dedications to Serapis, Isis, and Anubis ...

“The mysteries of Isis were established before the Christian era and became highly popular around the Mediterranean during the first century CE. During the formative years of Christianity the mysteries of Isis drew converts from every corner of the Roman Empire. Her priests were dedicated missionaries, like soldiers crusading for her "hallowed name." "Isi swas tender hearted" as a mother. "The friend of slaves and sinners ... and the downtrodden." She was a savior goddess, like Jesus. Resurrection was the main theme of the religion of Isis. "Born again" meant a mystical death that was followed by a spiritual birth, much like the Christian idea of "born again".

The Isis followers believed in the symbolism of the seed that has to be buried and has to die for a new plant to spring up with more seeds. Plutarch wrote that in Egypt wooden boxes in the shape of Osiris were filled with earth and planted with seed of corn. The boxes were placed in tombs. The sprouting corn in this funerary context represented new life. (John 12:24) I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. They believed that the rite of baptism would wash away all initiate's confessed sins. They believed that from then on his or her life would be changed for the better because he had enrolled himself in the service of the savior goddess Isis. Apuleius (born ca. 124 CE, died probably after 170 CE), in his book Metamorphoses, wrote, "The act of initiation was performed in the manner of voluntary death and salvation obtained by favor." (Ephesians 2:8) For by grace you are saved through faith; salvation ... is the gift of God.

Mithraism appeared in the eastern Mediterranean at about the same time as Christianity, but was much older in its Persian form. It did not become popular until after 100 CE when it spread from Syria and Anatolia throughout the Roman Empire, reaching into Gaul and Britain. It became early Christianity's most serious rival. There are not many historical facts that establish Mithras’ influence on Christianity. That there were many common beliefs and practices there is no doubt and to some extent these similarities between the two religions may have been the result of inter-borrowing.

But it is important to note that the beliefs common to them both existed before the establishment of either Mithraism or Christianity in the Roman Empire and were widespread in the eastern Mediterranean prior to them. The study of Mithraism confirms the widespread religious syncretism of the Mystery Religions in throughout the Hellenistic world and this includes Christianity.

[Glenn P]

Five centuries before the arrival of Christianity were the Eleusinian mysteries. According to Hippolytus (170-235 CE), a leader of the Roman Church, in certain Eleusinian mystery rites among the things shown to the initiates was a single head of grain. This grain was beheld in silence as a manifestation of the life in it, which symbolized the life in all. Paul compared the mystery of death and resurrection to the planting and the sprouting of a seed. (1 Corinthians 15:36-37) What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. And what you sow is not the body which is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain.(John 12:24) ... unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.

Wait a second. Paul referred to grain, and that's the connection?

Surely you jest. Was there any similarity between the two references to grain? Your brief description suggests that there are not. One is a contemplation of the life within the grain. The other is an analogy between a dying and rising body from the earth, and a seed planted in the earth

Now it becomes clear why you've waited until now to show the so-called evidence.

Long before Christianity the Eleusinians instituted the ritual of baptism as part of initiation into the mystery. The initiates were required to undergo a preparatory purification; they marched in a procession to the sea and washed their sins away by baptism. The Roman historian Livy (64/59 BCE to 17 CE) mentions that ceremonial washing preceded initiation into the mysteries of Dionysus. Through baptism they secured glorious immortality in the afterlife. Their message was "new life grows out of every grave."

Ceremonial washing is common enough that this is not important. Many religions had such things.

For the Eleusinians being born again and securing forgiveness of sins by submersion in water was a mystery. Baptism symbolized the purification of the soul. Tertullian wrote, "... in the Apollinarian and Eleusinian rites they are baptized, and they imagine that the result of this baptism is rebirth and the remission of the penalties of sins ..."

Like the mystery religions, early Christians conducted baptizing at the time of initiation. Peter ordered baptizing as soon as they repented. (Acts 2:38) Then Peter said to them, repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins...

So where is the thing Tertullian referred to - the belief that baptism effects rebirth? It's not in Acts at all.

You're guilty of the hasty comparison.

In the Dionysian mystery the initiates would have a profound religious experience (known as the sacred madness) and their soul would unite with the god Dionysus. The soul would be "with god" or "in god." The initiates became “enthei”, that is, they dwelled "in god."

Right - and this occurs in some tribal religions too. A person literally loses his mind, goes "mad" as you say, and is possessed by the God, losing control over his/her own natural faculties.

The idea of dwelling "in god" appears in John's letter. (1 John 4:15) Whosoever will confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwells in him, and he in God. Paul often used the expression "in Christ." (Galatians 3:28)...For you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Romans 16:7) My fellow prisoners...who also were in Christ before me. (2 Corinthians 5:17) Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature. "In Christ" is equivalent to "dwell in Christ." It reflects the Mystic Union or the Mystic Communion, which was practiced in many of the mystery religions of that period.

No. You've hastily drawn together two ideas based on a superficial linguistic similarity. For Paul in Galatians 3:28, "in Christ" referred to being spiritual descendants of Abraham, since Christ was in Abraham's line, and we have faith in Christ.

As for John's usage, you have much work to do if you're going to argue that the trance-like madness of the mystery cults is what he was referring to. You may not just assert it.

Plato wrote that during the initiation, the initiates "search eagerly within themselves to find the nature of their god, they are successful, because they have been compelled to keep their eyes fixed upon the god ... they are inspired and receive from him character and habits, so far as it is possible for a man to have part in God." The mystery initiates believed that through the secret rituals they would gain secret knowledge and thus accomplish a mystical union with the divine.

Search within themselves to find the nature of their god eh? OK, now let's look at the way you use this:

This idea is clearly reflected in the following verses. (John 6:56) Whosoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.

<Sarcasm>

Yeah, because that obviously means that they should search eagerly within themselves to find the nature of God. You're right, that truly is "clearly reflected" here.

This is a fair warning to those sarcastically impaired the preceding text was written in jest.

This is not something that an historical Jesus would have said. Even in a symbolic way, this statement is contrary to the Law of Moses.

This claim is unrelated to the previous, and contrary to this statement of yours, it would only be unlawful if literal.

Paul’s Lord’s Supper 1 Cor 11 was divinely revealed to him as an eternal event not set in time or place and therefore not blasphemous.

Where did you get this assertion from? That he learnt about the event from Jesus directly is his claim. We've been there before.

Only after Christianity had become separate from the discipline of Judaism and Jesus was becoming an historical figure, as opposed to a mythic figure was the Lord’s Supper turned into the Last Supper and set on earth as an historic event.

Mere assertion. Worthless.

Uniting with God was also an idea shared by the Stoics of that era. Seneca (4 BCE to 65 CE) wrote, "God is near you, he is with you, he is within you." Paul wrote (Colossians 1:27) ... Christ in you...

Again, you're only appealing to similar word use. As noted above, you haven;t at all shown that this meant to the Stoics what it meant to the New Testament writers.

The Orphics (and the Dionysians) practiced the mystery of communion long before Jesus. They had sacramental communion with their god, Dionysus, who had suffered, died, and arose. Justin Martyr reported that they used wine and bread in their communion: "For when they say Dionysus was born of Zeus' union with Semele, and narrate ... that he was torn to pieces and died, he arose again and ascended to heaven, and when they use the wine in his mysteries, is it not evident that the Devil has imitated the previously quoted prophecy ...?" Justin Martyr admitted that the Dionysians were practicing communion before the Christians, but, he explained, they did so because the Devil imitated an ancient prophecy of the Old Testament. (ahem) Through the mystery of communion, the Orphics became one with their god. The Christian communion is almost identical to the Orphic ritual. (John 6:55-56) “For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink. Whosoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.”

You and you alone are the one inserting the term "practiced the mystery of communion" into the Orphic rites. You are doing this to forge a linguistic similarity.

Justin does not use the term {racticed communion" or anything like that to describe the pagan practices. You are trying to create an impression of similarity beyond what even Justin said - namely that they used wine as part of their mysteries.

The Orphics believed that the world was under the power of evil and that the body is a burden and bondage for the soul, whose destiny is to escape this bondage and arrive at eternal and blessed life.

How very un-Pauline!

See, even you are citing evidence against your position.

They also believed that man's efforts to win salvation were powerless without divine assistance. This idea appears in the following verse of John. (John 6:44) No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.

Name a single religion that denies this.

There are further parallels between the Orphics and the Hellenist Christians. The Orphics believed that Dionysus, being born from the divine Zeus and the mortal woman Semele, had a two-fold nature. Likewise, Jesus had a two-fold nature, divine and human. Dionysus was persecuted and murdered, yet was resurrected and became victorious. Jesus was persecuted, murdered, and was victorious through his resurrection.

Oh let me guess, this is the story (the details of which you are concealing, where he is born to a female deity, torn to pieces by Titans, re-gestated by Semele who is accidentally incinerated, and then sewn into the thigh of Zeus/Jupiter, until he reaches full term for the second time, and is born for the second time, from the thigh of Zeus/Jupiter. Right?

Sure, that's death and resurrection! Yeah, I mean it reads just like the story of Jesus!

It's not looking too good so far. I can definitely see why you've kept all your evidence a secret until now!

The religion of Isis had its roots in the Egyptian religion of Osiris, which existed more than 2300 years BCE. According to the Pyramid Texts (ca. 2350-2100 BCE), Isis mourned for her murdered husband, the god Osiris. Osiris was the central deity of ancient Egypt. He was the god of the dead and the underworld. With his sister-wife, Isis, and their son, Horus, he formed the DIVINE TRINITY.

Um, no he didn't. The fact that there were three people invovled doesn't make it a Trinity. You know what the Trinity is, right?

During the Hellenistic era the Egyptian religion of Osiris was fused with the Greek mystery religions. The result of this syncretism was the mystery religion of Isis and Osiris. Frank C. Babbit wrote, "That the worship of Isis had been introduced to Greece before 330 BC is certain from an inscription found in the Peiraeus, in which the merchants of Citium ask permission to found a shrine of Aphrodite on the same terms as those on which the Egyptians founded a shrine of Isis ... In Plutarch's own town have been found two dedications to Serapis, Isis, and Anubis ...

This is not in dispute, so sure, granted.

“The mysteries of Isis were established before the Christian era and became highly popular around the Mediterranean during the first century CE. During the formative years of Christianity the mysteries of Isis drew converts from every corner of the Roman Empire. Her priests were dedicated missionaries, like soldiers crusading for her "hallowed name." "Isi swas tender hearted" as a mother. "The friend of slaves and sinners ... and the downtrodden." She was a savior goddess, like Jesus. Resurrection was the main theme of the religion of Isis. "Born again" meant a mystical death that was followed by a spiritual birth, much like the Christian idea of "born again".

Just so that the readers don't get as confused as you are - let's be reminded that your introduction of the word "resurrection" has nothing to do with a figure in the Isis-Osiris story dying and then rising again, which never happened in the story. You're just slipping the word in to forge an association.

The Isis followers believed in the symbolism of the seed that has to be buried and has to die for a new plant to spring up with more seeds. Plutarch wrote that in Egypt wooden boxes in the shape of Osiris were filled with earth and planted with seed of corn. The boxes were placed in tombs. The sprouting corn in this funerary context represented new life.

Yes, bnew life like osiris's new life - in the underworld. Interesting how the deliberate omission of a few details makes all the difference.

(John 12:24) I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds.

And?

They believed that the rite of baptism would wash away all initiate's confessed sins. They believed that from then on his or her life would be changed for the better because he had enrolled himself in the service of the savior goddess Isis. Apuleius (born ca. 124 CE, died probably after 170 CE), in his book Metamorphoses, wrote, "The act of initiation was performed in the manner of voluntary death and salvation obtained by favor." (Ephesians 2:8) For by grace you are saved through faith; salvation ... is the gift of God.

So let me get this straight - if a religion says that we are saved by having faith in God, and that salvation is a gift - which is what this verse says - you'll claim that it has a "mystery religion" element?

Mithraism appeared in the eastern Mediterranean at about the same time as Christianity, but was much older in its Persian form. It did not become popular until after 100 CE when it spread from Syria and Anatolia throughout the Roman Empire, reaching into Gaul and Britain. It became early Christianity's most serious rival. There are not many historical facts that establish Mithras’ influence on Christianity. That there were many common beliefs and practices there is no doubt and to some extent these similarities between the two religions may have been the result of inter-borrowing.

How surprisingly forthright of you!

Even if you were able to salvage a couple of these claims, your case is so much weaker than you take it to be. And why couldn't you have gotten off your butt a few dozen pages ago with some of this "evidence"?

[GakuseiDon]

Amnouy, what a waste of a post. :( Earlier I wrote to you:

Amnouy, as you have no doubt seen, some mythicists claim that "Mithras was crucified, had 12 disciples, etc, just like Jesus". But when asked to validate this, they tend to only give quotes from the NT to show that Jesus was crucified, had 12 disciples, etc. They don't give the Mithras side in the first place.

I think you tend to do the same, on the mystery cult ideas. I'm certainly more interested in learning about the Mithras mystery cults. So rather than list what Christianity shared with them, can you give information about the Mithras mystery cults, in the first place? And of course the sources for your information, please.

Your most recent post contains comparisons between the pagan side and Christianity, with references on the Christian side... but with nary a reference to support your assertions about the pagan side. But it is your assertions about the pagan side that you've been asked to back up. Are your assertions right? Are they wrong? Who knows! Do you? I don't mean to be sarcastic, but have you actually validated ANY of the unreferenced information that you presented in your last post?

[element771]

I know that this may be technically off topic but I would like you to back up your previous statements about Richard Carrier.

What serious journals is he an active contributor to?

How do you know he is held in high standings by his colleagues (you should not count his atheist buddies to give an honest appraisal of his abilities)?

Although off topic, I think that your assessment of Carrier is pertinent in showing your tendency to rely on marginal scholarship to prove your point.

Are you ignoring me?

[mig_killer2]

Paul was not so much “influenced” by the mystery cults so much that his Christianity WAS a new mystery cult…one based on Hellenistic Judaism. I will give you a random sampling of the numerous similarities between the mystery cults and early Christianity.

Five centuries before the arrival of Christianity were the Eleusinian mysteries. According to Hippolytus (170-235 CE), a leader of the Roman Church, in certain Eleusinian mystery rites among the things shown to the initiates was a single head of grain. This grain was beheld in silence as a manifestation of the life in it, which symbolized the life in all. Paul compared the mystery of death and resurrection to the planting and the sprouting of a seed. (1 Corinthians 15:36-37) What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. And what you sow is not the body which is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain.(John 12:24) ... unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.

Long before Christianity the Eleusinians instituted the ritual of baptism as part of initiation into the mystery. The initiates were required to undergo a preparatory purification; they marched in a procession to the sea and washed their sins away by baptism. The Roman historian Livy (64/59 BCE to 17 CE) mentions that ceremonial washing preceded initiation into the mysteries of Dionysus. Through baptism they secured glorious immortality in the afterlife. Their message was "new life grows out of every grave."

For the Eleusinians being born again and securing forgiveness of sins by submersion in water was a mystery. Baptism symbolized the purification of the soul. Tertullian wrote, "... in the Apollinarian and Eleusinian rites they are baptized, and they imagine that the result of this baptism is rebirth and the remission of the penalties of sins ..."

Like the mystery religions, early Christians conducted baptizing at the time of initiation. Peter ordered baptizing as soon as they repented. (Acts 2:38) Then Peter said to them, repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins...

In the Dionysian mystery the initiates would have a profound religious experience (known as the sacred madness) and their soul would unite with the god Dionysus. The soul would be "with god" or "in god." The initiates became “enthei”, that is, they dwelled "in god." The idea of dwelling "in god" appears in John's letter. (1 John 4:15) Whosoever will confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwells in him, and he in God. Paul often used the expression "in Christ." (Galatians 3:28)...For you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Romans 16:7) My fellow prisoners...who also were in Christ before me. (2 Corinthians 5:17) Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature. "In Christ" is equivalent to "dwell in Christ." It reflects the Mystic Union or the Mystic Communion, which was practiced in many of the mystery religions of that period.

Plato wrote that during the initiation, the initiates "search eagerly within themselves to find the nature of their god, they are successful, because they have been compelled to keep their eyes fixed upon the god ... they are inspired and receive from him character and habits, so far as it is possible for a man to have part in God." The mystery initiates believed that through the secret rituals they would gain secret knowledge and thus accomplish a mystical union with the divine. This idea is clearly reflected in the following verses. (John 6:56) Whosoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. This is not something that an historical Jesus would have said. Even in a symbolic way, this statement is contrary to the Law of Moses. Paul’s Lord’s Supper 1 Cor 11 was divinely revealed to him as an eternal event not set in time or place and therefore not blasphemous. Only after Christianity had become separate from the discipline of Judaism and Jesus was becoming an historical figure, as opposed to a mythic figure was the Lord’s Supper turned into the Last Supper and set on earth as an historic event.

Uniting with God was also an idea shared by the Stoics of that era. Seneca (4 BCE to 65 CE) wrote, "God is near you, he is with you, he is within you." Paul wrote (Colossians 1:27) ... Christ in you...

The Orphics (and the Dionysians) practiced the mystery of communion long before Jesus. They had sacramental communion with their god, Dionysus, who had suffered, died, and arose. Justin Martyr reported that they used wine and bread in their communion: "For when they say Dionysus was born of Zeus' union with Semele, and narrate ... that he was torn to pieces and died, he arose again and ascended to heaven, and when they use the wine in his mysteries, is it not evident that the Devil has imitated the previously quoted prophecy ...?" Justin Martyr admitted that the Dionysians were practicing communion before the Christians, but, he explained, they did so because the Devil imitated an ancient prophecy of the Old Testament. (ahem) Through the mystery of communion, the Orphics became one with their god. The Christian communion is almost identical to the Orphic ritual. (John 6:55-56) “For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink. Whosoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.”

The Orphics believed that the world was under the power of evil and that the body is a burden and bondage for the soul, whose destiny is to escape this bondage and arrive at eternal and blessed life. They also believed that man's efforts to win salvation were powerless without divine assistance. This idea appears in the following verse of John. (John 6:44) No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.

There are further parallels between the Orphics and the Hellenist Christians. The Orphics believed that Dionysus, being born from the divine Zeus and the mortal woman Semele, had a two-fold nature. Likewise, Jesus had a two-fold nature, divine and human. Dionysus was persecuted and murdered, yet was resurrected and became victorious. Jesus was persecuted, murdered, and was victorious through his resurrection.

The religion of Isis had its roots in the Egyptian religion of Osiris, which existed more than 2300 years BCE. According to the Pyramid Texts (ca. 2350-2100 BCE), Isis mourned for her murdered husband, the god Osiris. Osiris was the central deity of ancient Egypt. He was the god of the dead and the underworld. With his sister-wife, Isis, and their son, Horus, he formed the DIVINE TRINITY. During the Hellenistic era the Egyptian religion of Osiris was fused with the Greek mystery religions. The result of this syncretism was the mystery religion of Isis and Osiris. Frank C. Babbit wrote, "That the worship of Isis had been introduced to Greece before 330 BC is certain from an inscription found in the Peiraeus, in which the merchants of Citium ask permission to found a shrine of Aphrodite on the same terms as those on which the Egyptians founded a shrine of Isis ... In Plutarch's own town have been found two dedications to Serapis, Isis, and Anubis ...

“The mysteries of Isis were established before the Christian era and became highly popular around the Mediterranean during the first century CE. During the formative years of Christianity the mysteries of Isis drew converts from every corner of the Roman Empire. Her priests were dedicated missionaries, like soldiers crusading for her "hallowed name." "Isi swas tender hearted" as a mother. "The friend of slaves and sinners ... and the downtrodden." She was a savior goddess, like Jesus. Resurrection was the main theme of the religion of Isis. "Born again" meant a mystical death that was followed by a spiritual birth, much like the Christian idea of "born again".

The Isis followers believed in the symbolism of the seed that has to be buried and has to die for a new plant to spring up with more seeds. Plutarch wrote that in Egypt wooden boxes in the shape of Osiris were filled with earth and planted with seed of corn. The boxes were placed in tombs. The sprouting corn in this funerary context represented new life. (John 12:24) I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. They believed that the rite of baptism would wash away all initiate's confessed sins. They believed that from then on his or her life would be changed for the better because he had enrolled himself in the service of the savior goddess Isis. Apuleius (born ca. 124 CE, died probably after 170 CE), in his book Metamorphoses, wrote, "The act of initiation was performed in the manner of voluntary death and salvation obtained by favor." (Ephesians 2:8) For by grace you are saved through faith; salvation ... is the gift of God.

Mithraism appeared in the eastern Mediterranean at about the same time as Christianity, but was much older in its Persian form. It did not become popular until after 100 CE when it spread from Syria and Anatolia throughout the Roman Empire, reaching into Gaul and Britain. It became early Christianity's most serious rival. There are not many historical facts that establish Mithras’ influence on Christianity. That there were many common beliefs and practices there is no doubt and to some extent these similarities between the two religions may have been the result of inter-borrowing.

But it is important to note that the beliefs common to them both existed before the establishment of either Mithraism or Christianity in the Roman Empire and were widespread in the eastern Mediterranean prior to them. The study of Mithraism confirms the widespread religious syncretism of the Mystery Religions in throughout the Hellenistic world and this includes Christianity.

Dr. Jack bauer already smoked you like a joint, but he left me a little roach, so I'll get out my roach clip and get what's left.

the jews did practice something we would call "baptism", but there is this tendency among scholars to attach christian names to non-christian rites with some similar motifs, and then marvel at the similarities. but the cult of dionysis and other mystery religions is certainly not the origin of christian baptism. christian baptism and possibly dionysian baptism has origins in the Old Testament.

but you might object. so now, lets examine the 2 possibilities, either A: baptism has roots in the old testament, or B: it has roots in pagan religions

well, the jews of the 1st century were very well aware of these pagan religions and found them all to be abhorrent. They practiced (as christians do today) henotheism, which is the belief that your god and only your god is the one true god worthy of praise and worship.

all the authors of the new testament were certainly jewish, and Paul was a pharisee. it makes vastly more sense and does not simply beg the question to say that Pauline baptism has roots in Judaism

next you said that there is a holy trinity, isis, horus, and seb, but that's merely 3 people involved. it does not quite make it a trinity.