Why Didn't God Leave Huge Quantities of Secular Evidence For Jesus?

[Subduction Zone]

The New Testament says that Jesus was born of a virgin. Virgin birth of Jesus - Wikipedia

And that was written to match the Old Testament. It was not written about an actual event. Did you forget the failure of Luke already?

 

[Skywalker]

Not really. Most of the world would disagree with you on this claim. You are making a logical error. Just because the gnostic gospels may be untrustworthy does not mean that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are trustworthy.

The four gospels keep things simple. It's not written in a way that sounds like someone embellishing an event.

Why The Gnostic Gospels Aren’t Reliable Sources | Reasons for Jesus

Compare Peter’s account of the exit from the tomb to the rather simplistic account in the canonical Gospel of John, which simply has Mary Magdalene discovering the empty tomb where she comes across two angelic figures in white sitting where the body of Christ had been lain. This encounter is followed by the risen Christ appearing to her.

 

[Skywalker]

And that was written to match the Old Testament. It was not written about an actual event. Did you forget the failure of Luke already?

You said it wasn't clear Jesus was born of a virgin. It's mentioned in the New Testament. Why do you think the New Testament was written as an allegory? Nothing in the texts I quoted sounds like an allegory.

 

[Skywalker]

And that was written to match the Old Testament. It was not written about an actual event. Did you forget the failure of Luke already?

The doctrine of the virgin birth is mentioned as early as Genesis 3:15. A Closer Look at the Challenge of Interpreting the Virgin Birth

Introduction

The virgin birth has always been one of the essentials of the Christian faith. Jesus was not born in sin and he had no sin nature (Hebrews 7:26). Given the sin nature is passed down from generation to generation through the father (Romans 5:12, 17, 19), the virgin birth thwarted the transmission of the sin nature and allowed for the incarnation. So the virgin birth is important to both the deity and humanity of Jesus.

The First Messianic Promise

It is after the fall of man has taken place that God makes the first messianic promise:

“God said ‘And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.” (Gen. 3:15)

The messianic interpretation of Gen 3:15 is recorded in the Palestinian Targum, (first century C.E.)

“And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between the seed of your offspring and the seed of her offspring; and it shall be that when the offspring of the woman keep the commandments of the Law, they will aim right [at you] and they will smite you on the head; but when they abandon the commandments of the Law, you will aim right [at them], and you will wound them in the heel. However, for them there will be remedy but for you there will be none, and in the future they will make peace with the heel of the king, Messiah.” [1]

I should also note that Dr. Alfred Edersheim in his classic work, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (appendix 9) mentions that additional rabbinic opinions support the understanding that Genesis 3:15 refers to the Messiah. The point is that we see what is called the “the Proto-evangelium” or the beginning of salvation history. God was planning on doing something for the entire world.

 

[rational experiences]

Ie example Sus.

Jesus meaning nose point.

Mountain high by returned God earth core radiation. An increment gathered from and with other burning planets cores also.

Came back and ark UFO mountain peak. Blew up the temple that never should have been rebuilt. Science.

By nose point pyramid fake mountain peak.

Basic advice.

Warning Kabbalah.

Not owned by humans owned as a UFO cause too much radiation lines in atmosphere.

Irradiation fall out effect.

Warning. Human you are not science.

Human you are not the image alien.

Human your image man formed in clouds by God owned gas heavenly ownership.

Alien image formed by radiation mass fallout.

Do not judge one another. Everyone is. Human first.

Father memory realised son baby man was mind possesed by ancient pyramid science when earth universe pulled away from galaxies in vacuum cause.

Earth was on fire

Machine parts evidence found inside earth fusion.

Warning Cabal was for all humans.

 

[rational experiences]

Heart core earth metal.

Hell is volcanic melt. Crystalline mass held fused forever by forever cold body space was melted.

Eternal hell the forever body.

Father said America one place history humans did pyramid science. Now owns massive underground hole.

America arose as a new continent when old America fell UFO alien war.

Science technology history.

Volcano heart core as mass not machine core can break through tunnels. Arise releasing melted crystal radiation. It transmits out of stone.

Becomes burning gas atmospheric lights with cooling stone transmitting feedback.

Looks like a rejected God mountain stone body effect. Reflected in above sky gases set alight. Warning signs seen first.

The warning of God stone temple destroying life as it falls. Mountain mass disintegrated at feet of mountain end cause.

 

[Skywalker]

Again, if you accept crank non-scholarly articles from laymen you will only learn bia opiniojs of people who desparately need Jesus to be real. So you do not care about what is true.

"It is hard to prove either that Zoroastrianism influenced Judaism or that Judaism influenced Zoroastrianism."

For him. Not for professors of Old Testament studies. At 2:00 she explains most of what we know as the OT was written during the Persian Period.

And as Carrier points out, Persian Zoroastrian system of messianism, apocalypticism, worldwide resurrection, an evil Satan at war with God, and a future heaven and hell effecting justice as eternal fates for all, was Judaized when they were imported into Judaism. None of those ideas existed in Judaism before that (and you won’t find them in any part of the Old Testament written before the Persian conquest).

They were not part of Jewish myth then during this period they were and they became much mor monotheistic. They borrowed ideas? No way around it. Well, except like and deny like thos apologetics articles.



Pre-Perian Satan was different. Satan worked with Yahweh and did his bidding. He tortured Job upon Yahwehs request, he was sent by Yahweh to inflict a plague to kill 70,000 people, he acted as prosecuter with Yahweh as Judge, he was even called an "agent of God".

Then after the Persian period he was exactly like the Persian devil.


Samuel 24, Yahweh sends the "Angel of Yahweh" to inflict a plague against Israel for three days, killing 70,000 people as punishment for David having taken a census without his approval.[17] 1 Chronicles 21:1 repeats this story,[17] but replaces the "Angel of Yahweh" with an entity referred to as "a satan".[17]
Samuel 24, Yahweh sends the "Angel of Yahweh" to inflict a plague against Israel for three days, killing 70,000 people as punishment for David having taken a census without his approval.[17] 1 Chronicles 21:1 repeats this story,[17] but replaces the "Angel of Yahweh" with an entity referred to as "a satan".[17]
Yahweh asks, "Have you considered My servant Job?"[21] The satan replies by urging Yahweh to let him torture Job, promising that Job will abandon his faith at the first tribulation.[22] Yahweh consents; the satan destroys Job's servants and flocks, yet Job refuses to condemn Yahweh.[2

THEN, it even says the JEWS WERE HEALAVILY INFLUENCED BY THE ZOROASTRINAIN RELIGION?????


"
During the Second Temple Period, when Jews were living in the Achaemenid Empire, Judaism was heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism, the religion of the Achaemenids.[27][8][28] Jewish conceptions of Satan were impacted by Angra Mainyu,[8][29] the Zoroastrian god of evil, darkness, and ignorance.[8] In the Septuagint, the Hebrew ha-Satan in Job and Zechariah is translated by the Greek word diabolos (slanderer), the same word in the Greek New Testament from which the English word "devil" is derived.[30] Where satan is used to refer to human enemies in the Hebrew Bible, such as Hadad the Edomite and Rezon the Syrian, the word is left untranslated but transliterated in the Greek as satan, a neologism in Greek.[30]

The idea of Satan as an opponent of God and a purely evil figure seems to have taken root in Jewish pseudepigrapha during the Second Temple Period,[31] particularly in the apocalypses.[32] The Book of Enoch, which the Dead Sea Scrolls have revealed to have been nearly as popular as the Torah,[33]"

Job 2:3 says, "The Lord said to the Adversary, “Have you thought about my servant Job, for there is no one like him on earth, a man who is honest, who is of absolute integrity, who reveres God and avoids evil? He still holds on to his integrity, even though you incited me to ruin him for no reason.” Satan didn't work for Yahweh, Yahweh used Satan to test Job.

Satan incited David to take a census of Israel, which resulted in God punishing David with a plague that killed 70,000 people. The name Satan means accuser not prosecutor. The belief of Satan being an agent of God comes from Kabbalah and Conservative Judaism, not the Bible. Satan - Wikipedia

Rabbinical scholarship on the Book of Job generally follows the Talmud and Maimonides in identifying "the satan" from the prologue as a metaphor for the yetzer hara and not an actual entity.[56] Satan is rarely mentioned in Tannaitic literature, but is found in Babylonian aggadah.[32] According to a narration, the sound of the shofar, which is primarily intended to remind Jews of the importance of teshuva, is also intended symbolically to "confuse the accuser" (Satan) and prevent him from rendering any litigation to God against the Jews.[57] Kabbalah presents Satan as an agent of God whose function is to tempt humans into sinning so that he may accuse them in the heavenly court.[58] The Hasidic Jews of the eighteenth century associated ha-Satan with Baal Davar.[59]

Each modern sect of Judaism has its own interpretation of Satan's identity. Conservative Judaism generally rejects the Talmudic interpretation of Satan as a metaphor for the yetzer hara, and regard him as a literal agent of God.[60] Orthodox Judaism, on the other hand, outwardly embraces Talmudic teachings on Satan, and involves Satan in religious life far more inclusively than other sects. Satan is mentioned explicitly in some daily prayers, including during Shacharit and certain post-meal benedictions, as described in Talmud[61] and the Jewish Code of Law.[62] In Reform Judaism, Satan is generally seen in his Talmudic role as a metaphor for the yetzer hara and the symbolic representation of innate human qualities such as selfishness.[63]

 

[Skywalker]

The Persians has their own use of Baptism?:
"The rite of Zoroastrian initiation was baptism, by either blood, urine, or water."
Iran Chamber Society: Religion in Iran: The Secrets of Zoroastrianism


Salvation (eternal life, salvation from death) was provided by the Persian messiah as well as many other mystery religions demigods.
Each culture adds their own spin to the concepts. Even if baptism did not exist the borrowing or messianic concepts. afterlife, heaven, hell, Satan vs God in an eternal strugle, resurrection at end times apoctalyipic world ends in fire and cult members get a new body. It's all the same.
There was a Jewish version a Thracian version, a Syrian version, a Greek version and others. All different in some ways but they copied the basic idea.

as Professor Stravopolou points out very clearly, the Israelites were poly-theistic until the Persian period and them began re-writing their myths and added so many elements of the Persian belief system that there is no denying that the Jewish scribes found ways to incorporate the myths into their books.

Carrier explains, they poured over passeges in the OT and found ways to suggest "oh look, if you interpret this passage this way it looks like we are getting a world savior also. Either that ot they would recieve new "revelations" about how they too would be having their world end and the messiah would save them to and their god wants them to have this and that as well....
Over a few centuries they made the Persian beliefs into Jewish beliefs.

Some day if you decide you are tired of being told incorrect facts by JP Holding and read what actual peer-reviewed works from biblical history fields you will learn a tremendous amount.

Bart Ehrman can help you with the NT. Mary Boyce has many books on the Persian religion.

The Messiah in the New Testament has a different meaning from Zoroastrians who believed in a Messiah. The Messiah in Zoroastrianism didn't die for the sins of all people.

Deuteronomy 6:4 says, "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" That is monotheism, not polytheism. Mark 12:29 saying, "And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:" is influenced by Old Testament monotheism, not Zoroastrianism.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The four gospels keep things simple. It's not written in a way that sounds like someone embellishing an event.

Why The Gnostic Gospels Aren’t Reliable Sources | Reasons for Jesus

You have to be kidding me. In fact the newer the gospel the greater the embellishment. Mark is relatively simple. Matthew and Luke a bit more embellished. And John goes whole hog.

 

[Skywalker]

Osiris was a dying/rising demigod who dies and was resurrected and gave the followers salvation
9afterlife). A savior demigod is the myth that is being copied. You can stop posting JP Holding articles because he isn't a scholars and provides no sources in his articles. If you think that is a good article to learn from then you clearly do not care about what is true. You just want people to make up things that support your beliefs even though they are lies and simple made-up information and have nothing to do with actual history which is something you could learn if you wanted to find actual truth.

This is from a PhD NT historian sourcing the Pyramid text and other early source information on Osirus.
Holding was using google.

"
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!

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).
And indeed, carved on the walls of the pyramids centuries before Christianity began were the declarations of the goddess Isis (or Horus, or their agents), “I have come to thee…that I may revivify thee, that I may assemble for thee thy bones, that I may collect for thee thy flesh, that I may assemble for thee thy dismembered limbs…raise thyself up, king, [as for] Osiris; thou livest!” (Pyramid Texts 1684a-1685a and 1700, = Utterance 606; cf. Utterance 670); “Raise thyself up; shake off thy dust; remove the dirt which is on thy face; loose thy bandages!” (Pyramid Texts 1363a-b, = Utterance 553); “[As for] Osiris, collect thy bones; arrange thy limbs; shake off thy dust; untie thy bandages; the tomb is open for thee; the double doors of the coffin are undone for thee; the double doors of heaven are open for thee…thy soul is in thy body…raise thyself up!” (Pyramid Texts 207b-209a and 2010b-2011a, = Utterance 676). That sure sounds like a physical resurrection of Osiris’s body to me. (As even confirmed by the most recent translation of James P. Allen, cf. pp. 190, 224-25, 272. The spells he clarifies are sung to and about the resident Pharaoh, but in the role of Osiris, receiving the same resurrection as Osiris, e.g. “there has been done for me what was done for my father Osiris on the day of tying bones together, of making functional the feet,” “do for him that which you did for his brother Osiris on the day,” etc.)

Plutarch goes on to explicitly state that this resurrection on earth (set in actual earth history) in the same body he died in (reassembled and restored to life) was the popular belief, promoted in allegorical tales by the priesthood—as was also the god’s later descent to rule Hades. But the secret “true” belief taught among the initiated priesthood was that Osiris becomes incarnate, dies, and rises back to life every year in a secret cosmic battle in the sublunar heavens. So in fact, contrary to Ehrman (who evidently never actually read any of the sources on this point), Plutarch says the belief that Osiris went to Hades was false (On Isis and Osiris 78); and yet even in that “public” tale, Osiris rules in Hades in his old body of flesh, restored to life. Hence still plainly resurrected. But as Plutarch explains (On Isis and Osiris 25-27 & 54 and 58), the esoteric truth was that the god’s death and resurrection occurs in sublunar space, after each year descending and taking on a mortal body to die in; and that event definitely involved coming back to life in a new superior body, in which Osiris ascends to a higher realm to rule from above, all exactly as was said of the risen Jesus (who no more remained on earth than Osiris did). The only difference is that when importing this into Judaism, which had not a cyclical-eternal but a linear-apocalyptic conception of theological history, they converted the god’s dying-and-rising to a singular apocalyptic event.

And that’s just Osiris. Clearly raised from the dead in his original, deceased body, restored to life; visiting people on earth in his risen body; and then ruling from heaven above. And that directly adjacent to Judea, amidst a major Jewish population in Alexandria, and popular across the whole empire. But as Plutarch said in On the E at Delphi 9, many religions of his day “narrate deaths and vanishings, followed by returns to life and resurrections.” Not just that one. Plutarch names Dionysus as but an example (and by other names “Zagreus, Nyctelius, and Isodaetes“). And we know for a fact this Dionysus wasn’t the only example Plutarch would have known. Plutarch only names him because he was so closely associated with Osiris, and the most famous.

Beyond the superficial similarities there isn't much in common with Jesus and Osiris. Unearthing Gospel Traces in Ancient Egyptian Religion

While we do not know whether various testimonies to the power of the one true God led many individuals to faith in him, the ancient Egyptians as a people continued in their polytheistic beliefs long past the golden age of Egypt’s power. Yet when the gospel of salvation through JesusChrist arrived, it was well received. Egypt was a people prepared for God’s truth about the grace available only through the shed blood of the virgin-born Son of God. Their deep-rooted cultural beliefs apparently made it easy for them to understand the gospel.

One of Egypt’s most well-known mythological stories told how Osiris became lord of the dead. It recounted Osiris’ murder at the hands of this brother Seth, as well as Osiris’ ultimate resurrection as god of the underworld with the help of his wife, Isis. The story also described the posthumous conception and birth of Isis’ son Horus, and Horus’ eventual revenge upon Seth.

These myths bear an unmistakable—though superficial and highly twisted—resemblance to the true account of Christ’s virgin birth and even to his eventual defeat of Satan, very loosely identified with Seth. Moreover, for centuries Egyptians had believed their priest-like pharaoh was a son of their sun god Ra, a divine being identified with the godHorus. And pharaoh was their intermediary with the gods. They believed that upon a pharaoh’s death he would become one with Osiris, his father and god of the underworld. As such, this “son of a god” and mediator would continue to influence the fate of those who died.

 

[Skywalker]

You have to be kidding me. In fact the newer the gospel the greater the embellishment. Mark is relatively simple. Matthew and Luke a bit more embellished. And John goes whole hog.

The ressurection stories are consistent apart from minor details. There is no reason to believe they are embellished. Do The Resurrection Stories Contradict In The Gospels? | Reasons for Jesus

By Erik Manning| The apostle Paul said that if Christ hasn’t risen, Christianity is a sham. (1 Corinthians 15:17) Many atheists agree and will happily point to the gospel accounts. Just how seriously should they take the claim of the resurrection? After all, aren’t the accounts riddled with contradictions? How can they possibly be trusted?

Historians don’t normally conclude that just because individual accounts have apparent contradictions that the event in question didn’t occur. But let’s allow that to pass for now. I think the majority of the discrepancies that critics bring up can be easily resolved. Here’s a list of four of the most popular contradictions in the resurrection account that skeptics like to point to.

#1. HOW MANY WOMEN WERE AT THE TOMB OF JESUS?
HOW MANY WOMEN CAME TO THE TOMB EASTER MORNING? WAS IT ONE, AS TOLD IN JOHN? TWO (MATTHEW)? THREE (MARK)? OR MORE (LUKE)?…

Atheist blogger Bob Seidensticker
LET’S LOOK AT THE TEXTS
“On the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark. She saw that the stone had been removed from the tomb.” (John 20:1)

“After the Sabbath, as the first day of the week was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to view the tomb.” (Matthew 28:1)

“When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they could go and anoint him.” (Mark 16:1)

“On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came to the tomb, bringing the spices they had prepared…Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the other women with them were telling the apostles these things.” (Luke 24:1,10)

Whoa there! On the face of it, you can see why skeptics would point to these passages to discredit the gospels. It seems like they can’t get their details straight. But are these accounts really so contradictory? Not really.

“NEVER READ ONE BIBLE VERSE”
It’s a bit amusing that Bob thinks that because John said that Mary Magdalene came to the tomb, he’s implying that others were not present. All we need to do is to keep reading to see that isn’t the case at all. In the very next verse, John says: “So she went running to Simon Peter and to the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said to them, “They’ve taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they’ve put him!” (John 20:2)

Wait a second. Where did this we come from? In passing, Mary Magdelene’s own words clearly show that there were other women. John reporting this implies that he’s well aware that there were other women at the tomb. No bludgeoning required. As Greg Koukl has famously said, “never read a Bible verse.” You have to keep reading and get the context before making assumptions about the text. Otherwise, it would seem that you’re either looking for a negative verdict or you’re just trying to fleece someone.

THE SKEPTIC’S BAD ASSUMPTIONS
As for the other accounts, why assume that each gospel account is supposed to give us a complete, detailed list of the women? Luke explicitly says that there were others that he didn’t name. In no gospel did it say these were the women who came to the tomb and there was no one else.

There’s no contradiction here unless you bring that assumption to the text. Selecting to name some women is not an automatic denial that there were no others. If I say I went to the store with my wife last night, I’m not automatically excluding the fact that I brought my four kids with me. I just left out a detail. So what?

 

[Skywalker]

Did I mention the Second Coming?

The fact that the second coming is not a major widely believed doctrine in Zoroastrianism shows that the New Testament didn't borrow from that aspect of it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The ressurection stories are consistent apart from minor details. There is no reason to believe they are embellished. Do The Resurrection Stories Contradict In The Gospels? | Reasons for Jesus

Are they though? The days are different, the witnesses are all different, who was there first and how many are different. The original ending of Mark lacks "details" that all the others have.

 

[rational experiences]

Science to old science by thinking against science God O seal. Original sin never God was Satan mass leaves a hole as it was already self consuming.

Origin of sin self consuming.

Food of God gets eaten energy and only a radiating hole gets left.

You can never hold the power of God relativity.

Peak mass you can never own the mountain.

Why ie. Sus. Point nose broke that law.

Law broken before.

Moses ark reasoning.

Cooled.

Did point pyramid fake again..broke law again.

Science released origin of sin.

God mass.

Made A sink hole as heart radiation molten hell.

God gets unsealed beneath our feet..released and disappeared.

The vacuum sent back planetary irradiated black hole mass all pulled together in vacuum.

Satanic his UFO then melts you.

Self combustion cause

If a bush bursts into flames the garden. Ever wonder why believing in Satan evicted life from the garden?

It was taught relativity about science. Past science. Re enacted science. Rebuilt re enacted science ended Jesus incident

Man did it. God changed

Congratulations lying scientists.

 

[rational experiences]

Theme a human consumed energy to exist.

Microbe good energy in water.

Science man thinks.
I wiil design.

Machine.

It too needs energy to react..move.

I use my presence to falsify machine.

Energy is natural. It was never created. What science lies about.

They convert energy. Use it as converting.... then stop it disappearing by control is not inventing energy.

 

[rational experiences]

Are they though? The days are different, the witnesses are all different, who was there first and how many are different. The original ending of Mark lacks "details" that all the others have.

The theme relativity is philosophy first.

Not a machine. Reaction is artificial by design.

What creation is not doing.

Jesus Phi story.

Mountain nose peak Sus. Example ie.

Meaning is the example.

A teaching.

Maths false prophet.

Said cannot hold Jesus Phi mountain peak the sis. Isis. Constant fake.

Cannot hold O maths circle the teaching.

O used to remove peak mass. A formula via pyramid.

They pretended to make peak point disappear

Yet it was natural.

Using crystals. Atlantis theme they set alight crystal jewel mass by pyramid. Started burning atmosphere.

Pretending mountain mass was disappearing.

Thesis a calculation only

Vision really occurred in past.

No reaction yet.

So they falsely transmitted from crystal jewel

Then set crystal on fire.

Atlantis sAtanlit.

Science did it.

 

[rational experiences]

Light gas mass burning.

Never a number count.

Humans say light burns 12 hours.

Gas light always burning in mass never time relativity teaching

Vacuum owns gases burning.

Ancient gases cooled not burning.

Release earth radiation space heats.

Vacuum stops cooling.

Night time cooled by vacuum sets alight.

Known science history

Why science tells the occult scientist he is a liar.

We are all humans you know.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

Lost in all this discussion is the original question I asked which no Christian has managed to answer:

If God truly wanted us to believe in Jesus why didn't He leave truckloads of secular evidence for Jesus so that that we didn't have to accept the word of church leaders whose only proof for Jesus is insisting Jesus wasn't a myth, he was real?

For me, the very fact there isn't any secular evidence for Jesus or the apostles is proof positive the Jesus of the Bible is an invention of man's mind--built up slowly over the decades from a great prophet to a god. We see this in the gospels starting with Mark. In Mark his own family say Jesus is insane, out of his mind. Also there are times when he's powerless to do miracles. But in Matthew and Luke Jesus is now a demigod--somewhat divine but not wholly. he never falters like he does in Mark but he is still subservient to the Father. By the time we get to John's gospel a hundred years later Jesus is fully god. You can see the accretion of legend of Jesus from man to god. This would be typical of a religion growing and changing to meet the demands of the people the church leaders are trying to attract--fashion a religious belief after what the people expect.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You said it wasn't clear Jesus was born of a virgin. It's mentioned in the New Testament. Why do you think the New Testament was written as an allegory? Nothing in the texts I quoted sounds like an allegory.

No, I pointed out that the virgin myth story has been shown to be a myth. Yes, we know that it is mentioned in the New Testament and we know that it is wrong. You admitted as much when you could not refute the fact that Luke made up his story out of whole cloth. You used lying sources to try to defend your beliefs instead of finding a valid source that supports you.

 

[Skywalker]

No, I pointed out that the virgin myth story has been shown to be a myth. Yes, we know that it is mentioned in the New Testament and we know that it is wrong. You admitted as much when you could not refute the fact that Luke made up his story out of whole cloth. You used lying sources to try to defend your beliefs instead of finding a valid source that supports you.

Attis was not born of a virgin. One could say there are other parallels and nobody said that Christianity copied other faiths verbatim, but even those similarities are exaggerated. Attis, Cybele, and Jesus

• [*]Attis was born on December 25th of the Virgin Nana. One story cited makes Cybele Attis' virgin mother, but this comes from Ovid and perhaps from some statues -- it is not the chief story.
  We've already talked twice now, with Mithra and Dionysus, about Dec. 25th and why it doesn't matter -- but as gravy, let me add that I have found nowhere any indication that this date was associated with Attis in any way. That said, what of Attis' virgin birth? Herodotus records nothing about such a thing; the story alluded to comes much, much later, and rather than being a virgin birth, it is rather another case of Zeus playing the role of dirty old god -- albeit this time, much less directly.
  
  As the story goes [Verm.CA, 90-1; VermLAGR, 4, 9], Zeus (as Jupiter) was running around looking for ways to get his jollies and saw Mt. Agdus, which looked liked the goddess Rhea. (Don't ask how, but I guess if you're a sexual maniac like Zeus, after a while, it could be that even a mountain looks good.) In the ensuing fracas, Zeus drops some of his seed on the mountain, and from this arises a wild and androgynous creature named Agdistis.
  
  The gods don't like the obnoxious Agdistis, so Dionysus sneaks up and puts wine in Agdistis' water to put him to sleep. While he is asleep, Dionysus ties a rope around Agdistis' genitals, ties the other end of the rope to a tree, yells "Boo!" and -- well, you can take it from there.
  
  From the resulting blood, a pomegranate (or almond) tree springs up, and much later, Nana happens by, picks some of the fruit, and puts it in her lap, and then it disappears -- upon which, she finds herself pregnant with Attis.
  
  Virgin birth? Sort of -- virgin conception? No -- it's just Grandpa Zeus being the deadbeat dad again. The baby Attis is abandoned, but does end up being raised by goats.
  
  
  [*]He was considered the savior who was slain for the salvation of mankind. On we go, to Attis' soteriology -- and to put it mildly, this is just plain wrong.
  In a study devoted entirely to the subject of "soteriology" in the Attis cult, Gasparro finds no "explicit statements about the prospects open to the mystai of Cybele and Attis" and "little basis in the documents in our possession" for the idea of "a ritual containing a symbology of death and resurrection to a new life." [Gasp.AAO, 82] Put it bluntly: Attis was no savior, and was never recognized as such. The closest we get to this is from a writer named Damascius (480-550 AD!) who had a dream in which a festival of Attis celebrated "salvation from Hades" (see more below). We also see some evidence of Attis as a protector of tombs (as other gods also were, guarding them from violation); use of Attis with reference to grief and mourning -- but when it comes to the gravestones of devotees of Cybele and Attis, they are "all equally oblivious to special benefits the future life guaranteed by such a religious status." [Gasp.Sot, 90-4].
  
  Attis may indeed have been raised somehow, but it didn't do us any good!