One of the more interesting attacks on Jesus is comparing him to some mythological characters. It seems that the easiest way to attack the Bible is to prove that it is nothing bad fiction, and the easiest way to do that is to apparently show that the Bible does nothing but retread older stories. Of course, Jesus makes a great target because he is so obvious. It seems funny until you see how little research they put into the attack.
The most common characters used are Dionysus, Mithras, and Horus. Given the miracle at Cana where Jesus turned water into wine and the resurrection, Dionysus is probably the better fit. Dionysus also had an entourage, and frequently came into town on a donkey spreading the word. However, that word was "wine", and he hardly had a virgin birth. The closest he comes to a resurrection is that he was "twice-born"; he was killed as an infant, but Zeus put him into his thigh where he was born a normal childd, so to speak. However, that was pretty much.
Conversely, Horus is probably the furthest. Horus' connection is simply that he was part of a trinity of closely-linked deities (Osiris, Isis, Horus), but otherwise there is no other link. Not only was he hardly the product of a virgin birth, but he was also never killed (therefore no resurrection). He was also a god of war, compared to Jesus being a messiah of peace. While it can be argued that he had twelve followers, it was simply because the stars, and therefore the twleve signs of the zodiac, followed the Sun, which Horus represented. Horus didn't even have a ministry; in fact, he rarely interacted with humans at all. at one point he was even replaced as sun god by Aten.
Mithras is the fun one of the lot. There are plenty of similarities to Jesus, but only if you seriously do not do your research. Most of the similarities appear to be the result of misinterpretations (his "twelve disciples" were from a picture of him with the twleve signs of the Zodiac, for example) and later additions (attributes of Jesus were tacked on after the 4th century AD as the two personages were combined by some Mithras devotees). He did have a ministry, and while Jesus and he did preach much the same things, a certain perspective needed to be allowed for; while both preached community, there were some differences in how they perceived peace, Mithras being a warrior god and all.
The bottom line is that it's an interesting form of attack to go after religion by going after the origin of its stories. We as human like to recycle a lot of things, and that includes stories that we find powerful and motivational. We'll continue to do so and we'll even add more stories as we find stories we like, that resonate with us. As that allows us to adapt,to grow, to become greater, I'm not so sure that that's something that needs to be discouraged. It should be interesting to see which stories become important over time, and last to the next generation or the generations beyond that.
The synthesis of those stories gives a very interesting look at who we are, and it should be interesting to see where we go from here.
The most common characters used are Dionysus, Mithras, and Horus. Given the miracle at Cana where Jesus turned water into wine and the resurrection, Dionysus is probably the better fit. Dionysus also had an entourage, and frequently came into town on a donkey spreading the word. However, that word was "wine", and he hardly had a virgin birth. The closest he comes to a resurrection is that he was "twice-born"; he was killed as an infant, but Zeus put him into his thigh where he was born a normal childd, so to speak. However, that was pretty much.
Conversely, Horus is probably the furthest. Horus' connection is simply that he was part of a trinity of closely-linked deities (Osiris, Isis, Horus), but otherwise there is no other link. Not only was he hardly the product of a virgin birth, but he was also never killed (therefore no resurrection). He was also a god of war, compared to Jesus being a messiah of peace. While it can be argued that he had twelve followers, it was simply because the stars, and therefore the twleve signs of the zodiac, followed the Sun, which Horus represented. Horus didn't even have a ministry; in fact, he rarely interacted with humans at all. at one point he was even replaced as sun god by Aten.
Mithras is the fun one of the lot. There are plenty of similarities to Jesus, but only if you seriously do not do your research. Most of the similarities appear to be the result of misinterpretations (his "twelve disciples" were from a picture of him with the twleve signs of the Zodiac, for example) and later additions (attributes of Jesus were tacked on after the 4th century AD as the two personages were combined by some Mithras devotees). He did have a ministry, and while Jesus and he did preach much the same things, a certain perspective needed to be allowed for; while both preached community, there were some differences in how they perceived peace, Mithras being a warrior god and all.
The bottom line is that it's an interesting form of attack to go after religion by going after the origin of its stories. We as human like to recycle a lot of things, and that includes stories that we find powerful and motivational. We'll continue to do so and we'll even add more stories as we find stories we like, that resonate with us. As that allows us to adapt,to grow, to become greater, I'm not so sure that that's something that needs to be discouraged. It should be interesting to see which stories become important over time, and last to the next generation or the generations beyond that.
The synthesis of those stories gives a very interesting look at who we are, and it should be interesting to see where we go from here.
No comments:
Post a Comment