Why I am an Apologist

Why I am an Apologist

Posted on by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

I suppose if you were to close your eyes and imagine a Christian apologist, a young woman would not be the first picture to pop up. In choosing a job where my main concern is defending, clarifying and preaching the truth I’ve found that I will not always feel “at home.” As a woman it would be easier to settle down and let my husband shoulder the work of defending the faith. It would certainly fit the status quo better and then I might have time to be a full-time mother. But the fires of California this week offer a good picture of how I see my job of “defending the faith.” Just as all hands are needed to defend us against the fire’s destruction, so are all hands needed to defend us from the false ideas ravaging the souls of the American people.

The truth of the matter is every human is an apologist, for we all hold ideas that we believe are true. And we defend them, sometimes well, sometimes shabbily, even if they’re not worthy of a defense. The question is, “What do we count worth defending?”

For the last three years my husband and I have worked as a husband-wife team, running our fledgling non-profit Soulation. We weave spiritual formation with apologetics in order to defend truth. Our goal is to demonstrate a man and woman who both want to walk into becoming more “appropriately human.” We speak, we write and we work together. Dale’s book, Living with Questions, was released by Youth Specialties in August 2007. He spoke last Sunday at the National Youth Specialties Conference where 3000 copies of his book were given to the attendants. My three year apologetic work on femininity, Ruby Slippers: How the Soul of a Woman Brings Her Home (April, 2007), has been out for 6 months. Wednesday evenings you’ll find us typing on our laptops taking questions on Soulation’s online chat forum (Ask LIVE! http://www.soulation.org/).

Our annual board meeting is approaching where we’ll re-evaluate how much time we need to settle our souls down into a rhythm of receiving from our God the insight and strength to share with others. For in all the hubbub of promoting our books and taking invitations we’ve realized that the most crucial thing is to remain attentive to the tugging Spirit of God to “grow here,” or “study there,” or “confess this,” or “rewrite that.” The number of books sold or the size of our events is not as significant as the growth in our own souls. For that is the message of Jesus. It’s the most important thing I can defend and it is the foundational reason for why I am an apologist. It is worth breaking stereotypes, it is worth being misunderstood, it is worth getting my hands dirty, it is worth seeing fires extinguished and truth free to grow.

by Jonalyn Grace Fincher
Author of Ruby Slippers: How the Soul of a Woman Brings Her Home

Zeitgeist, the Movie – Christianity versus the Pagan Mystery Religions

Zeitgeist, the Movie – Christianity versus the Pagan Mystery Religions

Posted on by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

The Zeitgeist Movie has taken up the task of comparing Christianity to the pagan mystery religions. The movie attempts to prove Christianity is just another myth, like these mystery religions, through comparing alleged similarities between these religions and Christianity. There is much work to be done on demonstrating the problems with these comparisons. I will begin with a quick look at a couple of the alleged similarities between Christianity and the pagan mystery religions stories. I am going to focus on the virgin birth, sacrificial death, and resurrection stories of four of the mystery religions (which I covered a little bit in previous posts).

Virgin Birth Stories:
Adonis: born from a myrrh-tree, the bark of which burst after ten months’ gestation, allowing the infant to come forth.

Osiris: the offspring of an affair between the earth god Seb (Keb or Geb, as the name is sometimes transliterated) and the sky-goddess Nut

Mithras: born out of a rock on the banks of a river under a sacred fig-tree, came forth clenching a dagger in one hand and a torch in the other hand; which he used to illumine the depths from which he came

Dionysus: Zeus, in the form of a serpent, visited Persephone and she bore him Zagreus, that is, Dionysus, a horned infant

Sacrificial Death Stories:
Adonis: Ares takes on the likeness of a boar in order to attack Adonis, Adonis is torn to pieces by the wild boar while hunting

Osiris: his brother, Set (or Seth), coaxed Osiris into a coffin, which he soldered shut with lead
– Osiris was then set adrift in the Nile to die
– later was found by his sister, Isis, who brought him back with her
– when Set discovered Osiris’ body, he chopped Osiris up into 14 pieces and spread him out all over the land

Mithras:– the sacrifice was a bull who contained all the “germs” of life, there is no recorded death of Mithras

Dionysus: the Titans attacked him while he gazed at himself in a mirror, he took on many shapes to evade attackers, he was cut to pieces by the murderous knives of his enemies while in the form of a bull

Resurrection Stories:
Adonis: after his death, Adonis was raised to the underworld for half of every year and to the upper world for half of every year
– He was supposedly given to Persephone, the goddess of death, for part of the year, and to Aphrodite, the goddess of love, for part of the year
– this representation of Adonis residing with death for part of the year and with love and fertility part of the year coincides with the seasons and crop cycles

Osiris: pieced back together and revived by the power of several gods, revival entailed rites which the Egyptians perform over the bodies of the departed, reigned as king over the dead in the other world

Mithras: no clear resurrection story, ascends to heaven in the sun’s chariot

Dionysus: his mother pieced together his mangled limbs and made him young again
– or shortly after his burial he rose from the dead and ascended up to heaven (only possible similarity..but nothing said of bodily resurrection)
– or that Zeus raised him up as he lay mortally wounded
– or that Zeus swallowed the heart of Dionysus and then begat him afresh by Semele
– or his heart was pounded up and given in a potion to Semele, who thereby conceived him
– so many stories, which one is the correct one?

The alleged similarities here are strained. These stories are not the same as the Biblical stories of Jesus’ birth by the virgin Mary, Jesus’ willing sacrifice to deal with sin and death for all mankind, and Jesus’ triumphant bodily resurrection as the “first born” of the resurrected. Of course, it may be argued that I am taking the stories at face value. But what I am showing is that a person needs to examine these similarities for what they are, which is really not that similar. Jesus birth by a virgin does not equal Adonis’ birth from a myrrh tree or Mithras’ birth from a rock.

But the arguments for the alleged similarities get much more problematic. In my next post(s), I will look at the following in more detail: the alleged similarities do not pre-date Christianity (who is influencing who), the argument ignores basic Christian history and doctrine (Christianity does not claim Christ was born on the 25th of December), the argument is not substantiated by a consensus of scholarship (a checks and balances system on ideas), the alleged similarities lack historical evidence, all reports about Jesus’ death and resurrection infer a dated experience concerning a historical person, and none of the pagan mystery religions attempt to undergird the stories of their rising gods with historical evidence.

MJ

References:Carnoy, Albert J. “Iranian Mythology,” Volume Six, Mythology of All Races. New York, Marshall Jones Company: 1917.

Parrinder, Geoffrey. Ed. The Illustrated Who’s Who in Mythology. New York, MacMillan Publishing Company: 1985.

Puhvel, Jaan. Comparative Mythology. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press: 1987.

Willis, Roy. Ed. “Persian Myths.” World Mythology. Richmond Hill, Duncan Baird Publishers: 1993.

Weston, Jessie. From Ritual to Romance. Chapter IV: Tammuz and Adonis. Available from: http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/frr/frr07.htm#fn_39texts.com/neu/frr/frr07.htm#fn_39. The Internet Sacred Text Archive. Accessed May 22, 2007.

Yamauchi, Edwin M. Easter: Myth, Hallucination, or History. Available from: http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/yama.html. Accessed January 22, 2007.

Habermas, Gary. Mike Licona. The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus. Grand Rapids, Kregel Publications: 2004. pg. 90.

Frazer, Sir James George. The Golden Bough. Available from: http://www.bartleby.com/196/79.html. Accessed May 22, 2007.

McDowell, Josh. “Is The New Testament Filled With Myths”. Chapter 14 of A Reasoned Defense. Available from: http://www.greatcom.org/resources/areadydefense/ch14/default.htm. Accessed January 22, 2007.

Metzger, Bruce. “Methodology in the Study of Mystery Religions and Early Christianity.” From Historical and Literary Studies:, Jewish, Pagan, and Christian. Available from http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/mystery_religions_early_christianity.htm. accessed January 22, 2007
© Mary Jo Sharp 2007

False Ideas Fit for Survival?

False Ideas Fit for Survival?

Posted on by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

I have been reading/listening to some Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett lately. These two gentleman are promoting a concept that religion is an infectious idea (a meme, as they call it) that is fit for survival, and has therefore survived through the course of human history. As I was reading through I was wondering about something and thought some of you might like to tackle this idea (either for or against).

Here’s what I was thinking: If, through the process of natural selection, an idea can survive that is fit for propagation, then does that idea necessarily have to match up with reality?

Dennett says that religion is a fit idea that has survived because of its very “fit-ness.” He ascribes the continuance of religion as attributed to the process of natural selection. Throughout his discussion of religion (Breaking the Spell), he is basically claiming that God is false or unknowable (so false in practicality). However, natural selection has advanced and evolved this idea of God. So has the process of evolution given humanity a false, fit idea about God? If this is what Dawkins and Dennett are supporting (of course, not stated that way), then what else might be a false idea that has survived due to “fit-ness” through natural selection?
Thanks,
MJ
Some books related to this matter:
Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
Alister McGrath, The Dawkins Delusion: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine – a rebuttal of Dawkins’ book
What is Baptism?

What is Baptism?

Posted on by confidentchristianity@gmail.com
Since it is football season, let us consider players on a team who do not adhere to the coaches commands or calls in a game. The games would then be filled with chaos and one would wonder if the individual really desired to be on the team with such a lack of submission to the coach. Although Christianity is not a game and much more is at stake than championships in football, it too has a proper order and clear commands. A command that is apparent from the words of Christ is pertaining to baptism. In the previous article regarding baptism it was stated that salvation does not require baptism, so why get baptized? Simply put, baptism is a step of obedience to the command of Christ, as well as a symbol proclaiming union with Christ and it is a declaration that the believer will stand with the people of Christ.The act of baptism is a command from Christ Jesus, he said “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you”.[1] The command to be baptized is also noted in the day of Pentecost. Peter preached Christ and responded to the hearers saying “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”.[2] “Baptizing was a concomitant of the command to make disciples, as was teaching. Christian baptism, along with the proclamation of the gospel, was established by Christ himself.”[3]

Baptism is not only a command, but it is also a symbol proclaiming and painting a union with Christ. “It is a powerful form of proclamation of the truth of what Christ has done; it is a “word in water” testifying to the believer’s participation in the death and resurrection of Christ (Rom. 6:3-5).”[4] In the life of the believer baptism paints the picture of the old life being buried and the new life rising up for the glory of God that believers may walk in the newness of Christ.

Furthermore, it is a declaration of the believer testifying that he will stand with the people who belong to Christ Jesus. These testimonies happen time and time again in Scripture, for example with Peter and the Eunuch in Acts 8 or in Acts 2 when the people received the word and they were immediately baptized. These were believers testifying that they belonged to the church known as followers of Christ. Baptism was and still is a mark of the believer.

Even though baptism is a command from Christ which proclaims union with Him as well as with the church, many today still question if it is necessary. The answer is a resounding “Yes!” Although it is not required for salvation, it is necessary to obey all that Christ commanded which includes baptism.

Are you a person who has repented and claims to be a follower of Christ Jesus, yet you have not been baptized? Do not delay any longer and follow through with obedience to Christ.

“Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and do not do what I say?” Luke 6:46

Deanna

[1] Matthew 28:19-20
[2] Acts 2:37
[3] Norman, Stanton R., The Baptist Way, Distinctives of the Church, Broadman & Holman, Nashville, TN, 2004.
[4] Erikson, Millard J., Christian Theology, Baker Academics, Grand Rapids, MI, 1998.

Debate: Who Was Muhammad?

Debate: Who Was Muhammad?

Posted on by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

If you are interested in a really fast-paced debate with two well-prepared scholars, I must recommend this recent debate between Christian apologist, David Wood, and Muslim apologist, Ali Ataie, at the University of California, Davis. The debate was sponsored by the Muslim Student Association, Campus Life, and Campus Crusade for Christ.

These two apologists reject political correctness to get at the heart of the issues surrounding Muhammad’s character, the scientific evidence for the Qur’an, the reasons Christians reject Muhammad as a prophet, and the material from the earliest Muslim manuscripts.
At the beginning of the debate, Wood cordially suggests that this will be no “interfaith picnic” and that the debate is not going to be “pretty.” His descriptive foreshadowing of the two hours ahead is spot on. Wood proceeds to lay out a series of arguments against the character of Muhammad and against the trustworthiness of the argument from scientific evidence and from literary excellence. Ataie responds with a rejection of the source material Wood is quoting, calling Wood’s arguments a “smokescreen” and pointing the finger back at the character of Jesus. In the end, though, Wood’s arguments go unanswered. Ataie spends more time attempting (but not succeeding) to build a similar case against the character of Jesus than he spends on defense of the character of the prophet Muhammad.

The debate is available on DVD from Amazon.com. For more information on how to purchase a copy click here.

MJ
“Resurrection” Myths vs. Resurrection of Jesus – Mithras

“Resurrection” Myths vs. Resurrection of Jesus – Mithras

Posted on by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

– This is the third in a series of posts on resurrection myths by Mary Jo

Main Question: Was the story of Jesus’ resurrection unique in the first century or did other written accounts of resurrections like Jesus’ exist before or during the time period of the New Testament writings?


Why Mithras? There is so much hype on the internet, TV, and airwaves about the similarities between Christianity and Mithraism. I recently saw a YouTube video of a British television show claiming that Christianity was based on Mithraism. The host declared this as if it was evidenced, historical fact!

Some writings I have read on Mithras suggest that Christianity is a more highly evolved and refined version of the story of Mithras. Usually, several similarities are referenced with this claim; these can be read at the Tektonics website article on Mithraism: “Mighty Mithraic Madness: Did The Mithraic Mysteries Influence Christianity?” Upon reading the historical evolution of the god, Mithras, though, I have come to be very skeptical that Christianity borrowed worship rituals and sacred texts from this ancient Iranian god. The similarities stand upon little to no evidence from the ancient world. I am particularly concerned that the evidence for these similarities is only found in the Roman worship of Mithras; dating about the same time as the Christian faith was flourishing. Due to the Roman absorption of the deities of cultures they conquered, a much better explanation is a Roman incorporation of Christianity’s appealing aspects into the rituals and symbolism of Mithraism.

The Cult of MithrasIranian/Persian – Mithra
Hindu – Mitra
Roman – Mithras (later)

“Mitra” = contract

Mithra was the preserver of law and order. Also was the god of war, described as riding his four-horsed golden chariot against the demons and their worshippers.

NAMA MITHRAS, DEUS GENITOR RUPE NATUS’ – Holy Mithras the God born from the Rock.[i]

The story:
Mithra was born of a rock on the banks of a river under a sacred fig-tree. As he came forth from the rock he clenched a dagger in one hand and a torch in the other hand, which he used to illumine the depths from which he came. After Mithra had clothed himself in fig-leaves he took to subjugating the beings already created in the world. He did so by first measuring his strength with the sun; afterwards he concluded this endeavor with a treaty of friendship, being that he was a god of contracts. These two allies have supported each other ever since.

In Iranian creation mythology, there exists a primeval ox that contained the “germs”[ii] of the animal species and even a certain number of useful plants. Mithra is supposed to have attacked the primeval ox with help from his ally, the sun. He seized the beast by the nostrils with one hand and plunged his dagger into the ox’s flank with the other.[iii] As Mithra killed the beast, the “germs” of life spilled out and brought forth life to the earth.

Mithra was not the Supreme Being that created the universe in the Iranian mythology. Instead there are two beings representative of good and evil which are Ahura Mazda, the good being, and his arch rival, Angra Mainyu who came from the abyss of endless darkness. In this story, Ahura Mazda created life, and Angra Mainyu formed evil demons to assist him in his battle against Ahura Mazda. Mithra was a created “god,” the god of contracts and law.

Around the 6th or 7th century B.C., the prophet Zoroaster (also known as Zarathustra) further shaped the “inherent dualism”[iv] of Persian faith by making Ahura Mazdah[v] alone worthy of absolute worship. In doing so Zoroaster, eclipsed the worship of the god, Mithra, but further refined Mithra by setting him up as part of a threesome of gods that judge the souls of man. “The threesome Mithra, Sraosa, and Rasnu also figure as judges of the souls of the dead, with the “righteous Rasnu” as the special weigher of men’s deeds.”[vi]

Roman Worship of Mithras
Rome originally came into contact with Mithraism through Cilician pirates somewhere around 67 BC according to Plutarch, the Greek writer. The worship of Mithraism spread through Rome via the military camps and was attractive to young warriors. The Roman emperors known to have worshipped Mithras were Commodus (reigned 180-192 AD), Septimius Severus (reigned 193-211 A.D.), Caracalla (reigned 211-217 AD) and Geta (reigned 209-212 AD.) Mithraism flourished under these and subsequent emperors.[vii] “The most detailed descriptions of Mithras are found in the religious texts of ancient India and Persia, which preceded the Roman worship of Mithras by many centuries. The Roman evidence for Mithras, on the other hand, consists chiefly of sculptures.”[viii]

The earliest practices of Mithras worship in Rome are evidenced at mithraea (Mithras sanctuaries) dating from around the 2nd century. The latest evidence dates from the fourth century. Despite its great popularity, Mithraism was never a state cult, and no public spaces were built for Mithras, nor holidays connected with this god. This evidence supports Mithraism as a distinctly private religion.[ix]

Basically, from what I researched, this deity underwent numerous changes in Rome from its original Iranian-Persian conception. Rome was a vast empire that extended over numerous cultures and those cultures’ mythologies. As stated in World Mythology, “the Romans absorbed the myths of their conquered subjects. For the modern observer, the result is an array of apparently contradictory images – temples of native Italian deities side by side with those of Greek or Easter gods; high-ranking “Roman” priests standing shoulder to shoulder with the foreign, flamboyant, self-castrated priests of the Great Mother. No wonder some Romans debated what “real” Roman myth or religion might be.”[x] This proves to be a better description of why the worship of Mithras in the mystery religions bears similarities to Christianity, rather than the other way around.

MJ

Note: To investigate Mithraism and the rise of the cult (because there is so much more than I have presented), visit your local library’s reference section on mythology and world religions. Also, please check referenced documents for further documentation. Articles quoted have many more sources than provided here.

For Further Reading:
Reference Books
Willis, Roy. Ed. “Persian Myths.” World Mythology. Richmond Hill, Duncan Baird Publishers: 1993.

Parrinder, Geoffrey. Ed. The Illustrated Who’s Who in Mythology. New York, MacMillan Publishing Company: 1985.

Carnoy, Albert J. “Iranian Mythology,” Volume Six, Mythology of All Races. New York, Marshall Jones Company: 1917.

Puhvel, Jaan. Comparative Mythology. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press: 1987.

Online Articles
Metzger, Bruce. Historical and Literary Studies: Pagan, Jewish, and Christian. Available from: http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/mystery_religions_early_christianity.htm Accessed January 22, 2007.

McDowell, Josh. “Is The New Testament Filled With Myths”. Chapter 14 of A Reasoned Defense. Available from: http://www.greatcom.org/resources/areadydefense/ch14/default.htm. Accessed January 22, 2007.

Endnotes:
[ii] Carnoy, Albert J. “Iranian Mythology,” Volume Six, Mythology of All Races. New York, Marshall Jones Company: 1917. pgs.286.
[iii] Ibid. pgs. 287-288
[iv] Willis, Roy. Ed. “Persian Myths.” World Mythology. Richmond Hill, Duncan Baird Publishers:1993. pg.67.
[v] Ahura Mazda is both spelled with or without the last letter, h: Ahura Mazdah.
[vi] Puhvel, Jaan. Comparative Mythology. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press: 1987. pg.102
[vii] Gods, Goddesses, and Mythology. Tarrytown, Marshall Cavendish Corporation: 2005. pgs.891-898.
[viii] Ibid. pg. 891.
[ix] Ibid.
[x] Ibid. pg. 166
© Mary Jo Sharp 2007
Is Baptism Required for Salvation?

Is Baptism Required for Salvation?

Posted on by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

Summer time is filled with company picnics, corporate golf tournaments, family reunions, college pool socials and all sorts of kid camps. Each summer activity is unique in its group and they are typically set apart by a specific mark in which they can be identified. Some will wear clothing items and others will wear jewelry as a mark to specify who they represent. Society is able to identify groups of people with common marks, such as hula skirts are associated with Hawaii, crowns are associated with royalty and baptism is associated with religion. Baptism within a church dedicated to the Holy Scriptures is often looked upon as evidence of salvation. So, is baptism required for salvation? No, the Bible indicates that salvation comes through faith and baptism is simply a picture of salvation within the person being baptized.

Really “it is not until Justin Martyr, in the middle of the second century, that we find a relatively full ritual description of baptismal practice, and not until the late second century that we find sustained theological reflection in Tertullian’s treatise De Baptismo.”[1] It would be best to turn to the pages of Scripture in order to attain a clearer picture of baptism and its identification with salvation.

It would be incorrect to look at Scriptures individually without taking the Bible as whole into consideration knowing that the Bible does not contradict itself. So first look to Acts 15, Romans 4:5 Romans 3:22,24-26,28 and 30, Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8-9 and Philippians 3:9 in order to understand that there are no external acts necessary for salvation. It is through these Scriptures that one can understand that salvation comes through faith in Jesus Christ.

If baptism were required for salvation then there would be references to baptism with each salvation call. For example, Peter makes reference to baptism in Acts 2:38, yet he makes no reference to it in Acts 3:12-26. Instead he refers to sin and forgiveness in Christ for salvation. Paul never made water baptism part of the salvation message. He even emphasizes in 1 Corinthians 1:17 that he was sent to preach the gospel and does not mention baptism.

In addition, take notice to the people who were not baptized, yet they were called saved. The Penitent woman in Luke 7:37-50, the paralytic in Matthew 9:2, the Publican Luke 18:13-14 and the thief on the Cross Luke 23:39-43. In Acts 10:44-48 Cornelius is noted as being saved and then he is called to be baptized. Also note “there is no indication that the apostles themselves had been baptized with water”[2] And to be reminded Jesus was baptized probably to authenticate John’s baptism, but He did not need to be saved.

Other passages that may seem to make reference to baptism being necessary must be examined within its context as well as its language. For example, “Mark 16:16, a verse often quoted to prove baptism is necessary for salvation, is actually a proof of the opposite. Notice that the basis for condemnation in that verse is not the failure to be baptized, but only the failure to believe. Baptism is mentioned in the first part of the verse because it was the outward symbol that always accompanied the inward belief.”[3]

Therefore, baptism is an associated mark of a Christian, it is known as a picture of the redemptive work of God. However baptism is not required for salvation. It is faith through grace that is associated with salvation. “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Deanna

[1] Martin, Ralph P. & Davids, Peter H., Dictionary of the Later New Testament & Its Developments, Inter Varsity Press, Downers Grove Illnois, 1997.
[2] Ibid, 114.
[3] MacArthur, John, “Is Baptism Necessary for Salvation?, www.gty.org/resources.php?section=issues&aid=176441.

“Resurrection” Myths vs. Resurrection of Jesus – Osiris

“Resurrection” Myths vs. Resurrection of Jesus – Osiris

Posted on by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

This is the second in a series of posts on resurrection myths by Mary Jo

Main Question: Was the story of Jesus’ resurrection unique in the first century or did other written accounts of resurrections like Jesus’ exist before or during the time period of the New Testament writings?

The Cult of Osiris

Egyptian
Greek – Usiris: many of the names of gods differ for the Greek version of Osiris’ story
The story:Osiris was the Egyptian god of the underworld. Isis and Osiris were two of the children of the earth-god Seb (Geb) and the sky-goddess Nut; though Nut was also the wife of the sun-god, Ra. Osiris married his sister, Isis, and reigned as a king on the earth. He is allegedly the ruler of Egypt that brought the Egyptians out of cannibalism and introduced them to a corn diet along with help from Isis who discovered wheat and barley growing wild in the fields and introduced the cultivation of these grains to the people. Osiris also brought the Egyptians out of savagery by teaching them to worship the gods and giving them laws. He decided to share his blessings of civilization and agriculture with the rest of the world and traveled all over training mankind in these ways, leaving Isis to rule Egypt.

Upon Osiris’ return, he is duped by his brother, Set (Greek: Typhon), into laying down in a coffer made just for him. His brother and co-conspirators nail the lid on the coffer, solder it with lead, and throw the coffer into the Nile River. Isis sets out to find her beloved and wanders up and down the Nile searching for him. Osiris’ coffer floats out to sea and lands on the shores of Byblus, where it is engulfed by an erica-tree that springs up around it. Isis, with a tip from the god of wisdom, eventually finds Osiris’ coffer in a column of a palace that had used the tree in construction and takes the coffer back with her. However, when she leaves the coffer to visit her son, Horus, her brother, Typhon finds the coffer, and recognizing the body inside, tears Osiris into 14 pieces and spreads him out all over. Isis recovers all the pieces save one and buries each piece where she finds it. This spreading out of Osiris’ bodily burial is to explain the worship of him in numerous Egyptian cities and also to keep Typhon from finding Osiris’ burial spot.

The “resurrection”[1]:According to Egyptian tradition, Isis and her sister, Nephthys, lament over Osiris’ scattered, dead body and their lament catches the attention of the sun-god, Ra. Ra sends Anubis down from heaven and along with Isis, Nephthys, Thoth, and Horus, he pieces together the scattered Osiris. With help from Isis, Osiris is revived to the position of Lord of the Underworld, Lord of Eternity, Ruler of the Dead.

Similarities to the resurrection story of Jesus:
Both died, both were brought back to some kind of existence after life

Dissimilarities to the resurrection story of Jesus:Life: Osiris allegedly ruled on earth as a god-king over all of Egypt, Jesus did not rule as an earthly king, but proclaimed the Kingdom of Heaven as having arrived on earth

Death: Osiris was duped into his demise, Jesus sacrificially and willingly died for all mankind

Resurrection: Osiris was pieced back to together by other gods out of Isis’ desire for her dead husband, Jesus was raised to a new life having conquered physical death giving hope to all mankind

Afterlife: Osiris was raised to the position of Ruler of the Underworld, Jesus was raised to a new body, the firstborn of the resurrected, and rules with God over all creation

What about the dating of these stories? Who is influencing who? A couple of quotes from two articles:

– The key here is dating. Most of the alleged parallels between Christianity and mystery religions, upon close scrutiny will show that Christian elements predate mythological elements. In cases where they do not, it is often Jewish elements which predate both Christianity and the myth, and which lent themselves to both religions.[2]

– In the case of all three, there is no evidence earlier than the second century A.D. for the supposed “resurrection” of these mystery gods.[3]

– For a discussion of certain parallels between the Osiris cult and Christianity, where “any theory of borrowing on the part of Christianity from the older faith is not to be entertained, for not only can it not be substantiated on the extant evidence, but it is also intrinsically most improbable.” see S. G. F. Brandon. “The Ritual Perpetuation of the Past,” “Numen”, vi (1959), 122-129 (quotation is from p. 128).[4]

Also, the Osiris myth directly relates to the corn crop cycle. As taken from The Golden Bough,

The foregoing survey of the myth and ritual of Osiris may suffice to prove that in one of his aspects the god was a personification of the corn, which may be said to die and come to life again every year.

and

But Osiris was more than a spirit of the corn; he was also a tree-spirit, and this may perhaps have been his primitive character, since the worship of trees is naturally older in the history of religion than the worship of the cereals. The character of Osiris as a tree-spirit was represented very graphically in a ceremony described by Firmicus Maternus.

A name for Osiris was the “crop” or “harvest”; and the ancients sometimes explained him as a personification of the corn.

I do not believe an alternative representation for Jesus’ life – specifically the crop cycle or the seasons – can be well evidenced. I also do not see any kind of story revolving around Jesus where the characters are gods and demi-gods, which is true to the plot of most mystery religion stories.

MJ

Note: Please check referenced documents for further documentation. Articles quoted have many more sources than provided here.

For Further Reading:Metzger, Bruce. Historical and Literary Studies: Pagan, Jewish, and Christian. Available from: http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/mystery_religions_early_christianity.htm.%3C/a Accessed January 22, 2007.

McDowell, Josh. “Is The New Testament Filled With Myths”. Chapter 14 of A Reasoned Defense. Available from: http://www.greatcom.org/resources/areadydefense/ch14/default.htm. Accessed January 22, 2007.

Frazer, Sir James George. The Golden Bough. Available from: http://www.bartleby.com/196/79.html Accessed May 22, 2007.

Endnotes:

[1] The term “resurrection” is used here only for comparative purposes. I am currently looking into whether or not this term was a Judeo-Christian term borrowed by the mystery religions or if the mystery religions ever used this term at all.

[2] McDowell, Josh. “Is The New Testament Filled With Myths”. Chapter 14 of A Reasoned Defense. Available from: http://www.greatcom.org/resources/areadydefense/ch14/default.htm. Accessed January 22, 2007.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Metzger, Bruce. “Methodology in the Study of Mystery Religions and Early Christianity.” from Historical and Literary Studies: Jewish, Pagan, and Christian. Available from http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/mystery_religions_early_christianity.htm. accessed January 22, 2007. This quote is a footnote from page 12.
© Mary Jo Sharp 2007

By Chance or Intelligent Design

By Chance or Intelligent Design

Posted on by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

Recently after visiting a local archeology museum it was apparent that the philosophy of the exhibits, were immersed in evolution. The museum was filled with wide eyed children in awe at every corner reading about fossils, dinosaurs and apes through the lens of evolution which began with Darwinism. Unfortunately, this philosophy is treated as empirical science and not limited to museums, it is taught in our public schools today. “The truth is that Darwinism is not science but a naturalistic philosophy masquerading as science. So an honest debate between Darwinism and Christianity is not fact versus faith but philosophy versus philosophy, worldview versus worldview.”[1] The theory of evolution which is derived from Darwinism does not stand on factual evidence it is a philosophy of naturalism that tries to stamp out God and yet demands an Intelligent Designer.

Charles Darwin a naturalist is considered to be the father of evolution, who proposed a theory on how evolution occurs in the book On the Origin of Species published in 1859. Darwin thought that the origin of life happened by preexisting species developing into new species. For centuries it has been thought that the physical universe was eternal and Darwin was basically stating that there was no need for a creator because life was continually evolving.

As Darwinism claims that we are by chance evolving into forms of life just happening to produce intelligent beings, take a look at just one of the important aspects of the body, called DNA. “Simply put, DNA is like a language in the heart of the cell, a molecular message, a set of instructions telling the cell how to construct proteins-much like the software needed to run a computer. Moreover, the amount of information DNA includes is staggering: A single cell of the human body contains as much information as the Encyclopedia Britannica-all thirty volumes-three or four times over.”[2] So how can evolution by chance or accident produce this type of development? The answer is that evolution can not but an Intelligent Designer can.

In addition since Darwin, scientists have figured out that the universe is not eternal but is expanding and evolution must have a beginning therefore, we now have the big bang theory. “The big bang theory delivers a near fatal blow to naturalistic philosophy, for the naturalistic credo regards reality as an unbroken sequence of cause and effect that can be traced back endlessly.”[3] But the big bang theory, can only trace back to the big bang explosion and along with evolution it still calls for an Intelligent Designer.

Where Darwinism can not provide answers for the difficult questions such as when did the earth begin and who created humans with the capabilities needed in life? Christianity can produce answers. It begins in the Genesis account when “God created the heavens and the earth,”[4] when “God created man in His own image”[5] and when He “breathed life into His nostrils.”[6] It is “apparent that God thought the fact of creation significant enough to put it first.”[7] It is also in the opening statements in the book of John as well as in the book of Hebrews and laced throughout other books in the Bible. It should also be noted that the Creation in Christianity answers the most important question, who are we? Why are we here?

Furthermore, it is time that “all Christians learn how to respond to the challenge posed by Darwinism”[8] in order to expose the holes in the theories of evolution and reveal the truth, which is “in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” Genesis 1:1

Deanna

[1] Charles and Pearcy Colson, Nancy, How Now Shall We Live (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, 1999), 96.
[2] Ibid, 75.
[3] Ibid, 59.
[4] Genesis 1:1.
[5] Genesis 1:26.
[6] Genesis 2:7.
[7] Erikson, Millard J., Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Academic, 1998, 393.
[8] Charles and Pearcy Colson, Nancy, How Now Shall We Live (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, 1999), 83.