Thanks, that reminds me to finish
that page! And the following one. I am using sources from our local university library.
the Egyptian god Osiris:
– Virgin Born? No.
– A “Son of God” ? Yes, if Geb is considered a deity (Osiris is the oldest son of Geb).
– A Savior? No.
– Performed miracles? No.
– Communal Meal of Bread/Wine? No.
– Crucified? No.
– Resurrected? Yes and No, depends how you interpret revivification. Scholars disagree.
– Ascended / Descended ? Yes, descends to the underworld.
– Divine Judge? Yes, presided over judgment of the soul.
the Greek god Dionysos (sometimes spelled Dionysus), or Roman god “Bacchus”:
– Virgin Born? No, born of a mortal woman but this was not a virgin birth since Zeus literally “slept with Semele secretly.”
– A “Son of God” ? Yes, son of Zeus.
– A Savior? Yes.
– Performed miracles? No.
– Communal Meal of Bread/Wine? Yes, wine was frequently involved with the cult.
– Crucified? No, ripped apart by the Titans.
– Resurrected? Restored to life from his heart. Is this a “resurrection” ?
– Ascended / Descended ? Yes, descends to the underworld.
– Divine Judge? No.
There other parallels with Dionysos, who did live BEFORE Jesus, whereas most of the “parallels” for the other “gods” show up actually AFTER Jesus lived. In other words, they were Christian influenced, not pre-Christian.
“Christianity, on the other hand, on the whole protected itself from such syncretism, albeit in part by incorporating into itself elements of other religions. Any similarities or mutual influence – in the symbolic structure of ritual or belief – between mystery-cult and Christianity should not blind us to the profound difference in their ethics and organization. Unlike the (generally nameless) initiates of Dionysos (or Mithras, etc), early ‘Christians’ were organized in regulated self-reproducing communities. The specific identity of the church was thereby preserved, and this was a factor in the eventually complete victory of Christianity over pagan mystery-cult…Christianity, an offshoot of Judaism in a Hellenised world, triumphed by simultaneously adapting to that world and nevertheless preserving its own organizational specificity. In doing so, it had to combat the rival appeal of Dionysos (as well as of other cults) without being entirely immune to his influence.” (Richard Seaford,
Dionysos [Routledge, 2006], page 129, 130)
Jonathan Z. Smith in his book
Drudgery Divine: On the Comparison of Early Christianities and the Religions of Late Antiquity (1990) concludes:
“…it is now held that the majority of the gods so denoted appear to have died but not returned; there is death but no rebirth or resurrection. What evidence was relied on by previous scholarship for the putative resurrection can be shown, it is claimed, to be based on a misinterpretation of the documents, or on late texts from the Christian era (frequently by Christians) which reveal an
interpretatio Christiana of another religion’s myths and rituals, or a borrowing of the Christian motif, at a late stage, by the religions themselves…” (J. Z. Smith,
Drudgery Divine, page 101)
Bruce Metzger, the great New Testament scholar and textual critic, is cited by Ronald Nash:
“It must not be uncritically assumed that the Mysteries always influenced Christianity, for it is not only possible but probable that in certain cases, the influence moved in the opposite direction…Unlike the deities of the Mysteries, who were nebulous figures of an imaginary past, the Divine Being whom the Christian worshiped as Lord was known as a real Person on earth only a short time before the earliest documents of the New Testament were written.” (Metzger in Nash,
The Gospel and the Greeks, page 187, 186)
I recommend this book by the evangelical Nash:
The Gospel and the Greeks: Did the New Testament Borrow from Pagan Thought? (P & R Pub, 1992, updated 2003)
Phil P