Claim: Osiris was called “Lord of Lords”, “King of Kings”, “God of Gods”, “Resurrection and the Life”, “Good Shepherd”, “Eternity and Everlastingness”, and the god who “made men and women to be “born again”
Truth: These names for Jesus were
not used by Osiris, who was called, “Lord of All”, the “Good Being”, “Lord of the Underworld”, “Lord (King) of Eternity”, “Ruler of the Dead”, “Lord of the West”, “Great One”, “He who takes seat,” “the Begetter”, “the Ram”, “Great Word”, “Chief of the Spirits”, “Ruler of Everlastingness”, “Living God,” “God above the gods.” These rather general names were not uncommon for many other deities as well.
Is Jesus Simply a Retelling of the Osiris Mythology? | Cold Case Christianity
HA HA HA HA HA! IS this a joke about how bad apologetics are? I was wondering why the "claims" were nonsense? It's because it's an apologist with no credentials literally making stuff up:
J. Warner Wallace
J. Warner Wallace is a Dateline featured cold-case homicide detective, popular national speaker and best-selling author. He continues to consult on cold-case investigations while serving as a Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview. He is also an Adj. Professor of Christian Apologetics at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University, and a faculty member at Summit Ministries. He holds a BA in Design (from CSULB), an MA in Architecture (from UCLA), and an MA in Theological Studies (from Gateway Seminary)."
Christianity is a combination of Hellenism and Persian myths. A bad apologetics article that doesn't understand the debate doesn't change that.
Claim: Osiris’ birth was announced by Three Wise Men: the three stars Mintaka, Anilam, and Alnitak in the belt of Orion, and Osiris had a star in the east (Sirius) that signified his birth
Truth: It is true that some scholars connect Osiris with Orion, but they don’t stretch the imagination to call the three stars of the belt “wise men”, and there is no mention of an eastern star in the Osiris mythology.
Wow, I actually thought you knew better than this? There is a PhD historical field. Outside of that field you get crank like Ceasers Messiah, an investigative piece on how evidence shows Jesus was a creation of 3rd century Rome. It's convincing. Until you hear a Biblical historical scholar speak on it. It's total crank. As is this desperate apologetics either making stuff up or using Google?
The wise men are not part of the Osirus myth but they were believed to be Persian until Christian scholars admitted they probably didn't really exist -
"Furthermore, most biblical scholars pooh-pooh the idea that the magi were historical at all. The Catholic Bible scholar Raymond Brown, in his monumental study,
The Birth of the Messiah notes that it was a mark of modernist orthodoxy not to believe in the historicity of the magi story. Confronted with exotic wizards, magical stars, angelic messengers and a mystical trek across the desert, the modernist deconstructionist biblical experts were more scoffers than scholars. The deemed the Magi’s quest to be not only mystical, but mythical. The magi were wonderful wizards conjured up to make baby Jesus seem more special."
he went to study theology at Oxford University and was ordained a an Anglican minister in England. In 1995 Fr. Dwight and his family were received into the Catholic Church.
Were the Three Wise Men History or Myth?
Claim: Osiris had a Eucharist ceremony of sorts, in which his flesh was eaten in the form of communion cakes of wheat
Truth: There is no evidence for this in the research of the scholars
The eucharist is from Greek religions, adopted by CHristianity.
The Relationship between Hellenistic Mystery Religions and Early Christianity:
A Case Study using Baptism and Eucharist
Jennifer Uzzell
"
Eucharist.
-Perhaps the clearest point of contact between the Mysteries and Christian Eucharist, and one of which the Church Fathers were painfully conscious, lay in a sacramental meal of bread or cakes and wine mixed with water in which initiates to the cult of Mithras participated.
They seek salvation from the debased material world through a spiritual ascent through the spheres. Mithras was expected to return to earth to lead his followers in a final cataclysmic battle between good and evil.
-The Mithraic sacramental meal almost certainly predates Christianity and cannot, therefore, be contingent upon it.
-It seems likely that there was dialogue, friendly or otherwise, between the groups which led to ideological growth and development in both; with Christianity increasingly appropriating the language and ritual of the Cults in what it eventually came to refer to as the μυστηριον (mystery) of the Eucharist.
It is beyond doubt that substantial similarities exist between the rituals of baptism and Eucharist and the various sacral meals and initiations practised within the Mystery religions. These similarities extend beyond the forms of the rituals themselves into the purpose, symbolism and function of the rituals.
Pagan commentators such as Celsus and Lucian also clearly regarded Christianity as one of the Mysteries; with Lucian making use of Mystery terminology referring to Christianity as a καινη τελετε (literally a ‘new initiation’)."
: Osiris taught much of the same material as Jesus; many teachings are identically the same, word for word
Truth: There is absolutely no evidence of any of this, and the “wisdom” of Osiris is still available for review."
Every dying-and-rising god is different. Every death is different. Every resurrection is different. All irrelevant. The commonality is that there is
a death and
a resurrection. Everything else is a mixture of syncretized ideas from the borrowing
and borrowed cultures, to produce a
new and unique god and myth.
Within the confines of what was then the Roman Empire, long before and during the dawn of Christianity, there were many dying-and-rising gods. And yes, they were gods—some even half-god, half-human, being of divine or magical parentage, just like Jesus (
John 1:1-18;
Matthew 1:18-25;
Luke 1:26-35;
Philippians 2:6-8 &
Romans 8:3). And yes, they died. And were dead. And yes, they were then raised back to life; and lived on, even more powerful than before. Some returned in the same body they died in; some lived their second life in even more powerful and magical bodies than they died in, like Jesus did (
1 Corinthians 15:35-50 &
2 Corinthians 5:1-10). Some left empty tombs or gravesites; or had corpses that were lost or vanished. Just like Jesus. Some returned to life on “the third day” after dying. Just like Jesus. All went on to live and reign in heaven (not on earth). Just like Jesus. Some even visited earth after being raised, to deliver a message to disciples or followers, before ascending into the heavens. Just like Jesus.
Claim: Osiris was killed and later resurrected, providing hope every believer might also be resurrected into eternal life
Truth: Osiris was murdered and his body was then dismembered and scattered. Later, his body pieces were recovered and rejoined, and he was rejuvenated. Osiris then journeyed to the underworld, where he became the lord of the dead. He did not resurrect with a glorified body and walk with men on earth, as did Jesus. He was not alive again, as was Jesus, but was instead a “dead” god who never returned among the living
Is what the google version says.
Not only does Plutarch
say Osiris
returned to life and was
recreated, exact terms for resurrection (
anabiôsis and
paliggenesia:
On Isis and Osiris 35; see my discussion in
The Empty Tomb, pp. 154-55), and also describe his
physically returning to earth after his death (Plutarch,
On Isis and Osiris 19), but the physical resurrection of Osiris’s corpse is
explicitly described in pre-Christian
pyramid inscriptions! Osiris was also resurrected, according to Plutarch, on the “third day,” and died during a full moon, just like Christ: Passover occurs during the full moon; and in Plutarch,
On Isis and Osiris 39 and
42, Osiris dies on the 17th of Athyr, the concluding day of the full moon, and is raised on the 19th, two days later—thus three days inclusively, just like Jesus.
Plutarch
writes that “Osiris came to Horus from the other world and exercised and trained him for the battle,” and taught him lessons, and then “Osiris consorted with Isis after his death and she became the mother of Harpocrates.” It’s hard to get more explicit than that. Contrary to Ehrman, there is no mention of Osiris
not being in his resurrected body at that point. To the contrary, every version of his myth has him revive only
after Isis reassembles and reanimates his corpse. As Plutarch
says, “the soul of Osiris is everlasting and imperishable, but his body Typhon oftentimes dismembers and causes to disappear, and that Isis wanders hither and yon in her search for it, and fits it together again” (
On Isis and Osiris 54).
You seem very determined to tap dance around the point here, but your ludicrous arguments just appear ever more desperate.
