:eek3:

 

getting back on topic: heres some interesting info to look at that makes a pretty good case against jesus. i came across it while doing a research paper for mythology. anyone who's studied much mythology knows that Dionysus (aka Bacchus) was a jesus-figure that predated jesus. he was worshipped in a cult fashion, as was jesus. he was born of a virgin as was jesus. he was the son of a god, he was resurrected just like jesus. anyways here are the links, you can judge for yourself. if you're interested, just do a search on google on the subject. theres plenty of supporting information. or just read the "Bacchae", by Euripedes.

Pagan Godmen
Dionysus

if you are christian, how do you cope with that argument? do you deny that christianity evolved from many other similar religions? or do you actually believe that in a long line of cult religions, chrisianity is the "true" religion? btw im not trying to insult anyone with this. im just curious because I myself could have never been able to commit to a religion for reasons like this.

 

First off, I respectfully protest that in quoting information like this, you are resorting to the same kind of propaganda techniques employed by the individual whom you mean to criticise.

Your sites are blatantly and obviously clearly intentionally anti-Christian, just as Tirod's sites are blantant LDS propaganda.


Mythology? LOL... The Crown rests, my lord. :P

Anyone who calls the great god Dionysos a "Jesus figure" does not understand either Dionysos/Bacchus or Jesus Christ, in my humble opinion.

The teachings of Christ clearly evince that he preached love as the highest ideal; however, he never preached the self indulgent orgiastic sexual expressions that Dionysos/Bacchus evidently indulged in. To this day, the word Bacchanal is a synonym for orgy.

C'mon, now. You are throwing politically charged words around without due consideration to the meanings of the words and the consequences of your actions.

C'mon, now. Semele was not a virgin. Moreover, when the Great Olympian Thunderer took you, you were definitely taken, and you were no longer a virgin, even if you were at the beginning of the act.

Yes, Dionysos was resurrected; however, his resurrection had nothing to do with the kind of sacrifice that Christ made. Christ deliberately suffered as a man, died, was buried, and descended to the Fortress of Tarturus, broke the Gates of Brass with his own hands, and raised Adam and Eve from their graves.

There are many ancient myths of this kind of sacrifice. You would have done better to talk about Mithra or the sacrifice in Gilgamesh instead of talking about Bacchus/Dionysos.

The love that the friends in the Sumerian epic Gilgamesh is understandable because we as humans know that we are capable of that kind of love, and that kind of sacrifice for the sake of our love.

This, by itself, makes it possible to believe Christ's sacrifice. You know as a human possessed of human love that you would willingly sacrifice yourself if it would save a friend. We are also taught that we humans and our emotions are a part of the Image of God. It is, therefore, no stretch of the imagination for us to believe that God himself would one day face the misery of sin and take the entirety of it unto himself.

I believe that there is one true faith, perhaps best evinced on this planet by Orthodox Christianity's preservation of the original teaching's of Christ and the preservation of the Church established by the Apostles.

That does not mean that there are not other truths out there in the legions of universes created by the same God, and it does not mean that the saviour and great lover of mankind has not portrayed himself in different forms in different places for different peoples in different existences.

I am an Orthodox Christian. That does not mean that I do not see truth in Buddha's teachings. That does not mean that I do not respect the Wiccan oath to "do no harm, then do what ye will."

The Son of God is salvation.

We can usually tell where God is not, but it might not always be clear to you where he is or can be if you have closed your mind to the majesty of his creations and refused to understand what an infinitessimally microscopic portion of Creation we form by ourselves.

Never reject anything out of hand!

 

Dionysus or Bacchus (whichever you prefer) was never equated to Jesus and never has been held to those standards in any way shape or form.

Dionysus was a god based in festive drinking and certain amounts of excess and good times. Dionysus being equated to christ can only be made in one area and that is in the fact that the festival of Dionysus falls at the same time as the Christian celebration of christmas....in this matter it was a case of changing the event name and idea behind it rather than trying to change the people and stop them from celebrating a "pagan" holiday

 

Dionysus, also commonly known by his Roman name Bacchus, appears to be a god who has two distinct origins. On the one hand, Dionysus was the god of wine, agriculture, and fertility of nature, who is also the patron god of the Greek stage. On the other hand, Dionysus also represents the outstanding features of mystery religions, such as those practiced at Eleusis: ecstasy, personal delivery from the daily world through physical or spiritual intoxication, and initiation into secret rites. Scholars have long suspected that the god known as Dionysus is in fact a fusion of a local Greek nature god, and another more potent god imported rather late in Greek pre-history from Phrygia (the central area of modern day Turkey) or Thrace.

Dionysus (also spelt Dionysos) is the Greek God of ritual dance and sacred mysticism, of death and new life. He can be gentle or provoke the wildness within us all, literally able to drive both his followers and his enemies mad. Euripedes called him 'most gentle and most terrible'. Dionysus is the patron of poetry, the song, and drama, and of course wine and its intoxication effects. He was credited with the invention of wine making and its use on Earth and this became almost his chief attribute in his Roman form - Bacchus. Unlike Pan for instance, Dionysus is counted as one of the twelve major Gods of Mount Olympus.

"Mankind ... possesses two supreme blessings. First of these is the goddess Demeter, or Earth - whichever name you choose to call her by. It was she who gave to man his nourishment of grain. But after her there came the son of Semele [Dionysus] who matched her present by inventing liquid wine as his gift to man."
Euripdes : Bacchae

Dionysus is a pardox however, or a series of paradoxes, like a Chinese box. In ancient art he is the God most often represented. People identified readily with him, born of a human mother, and therefore half human. Like the Christian Mary, he is felt to be able to understand the problems of humanity and to intercede on our behalf with the other Gods. Dionysus symbolizes excess and even the value and significance of excess and the potential of this path for inner transformation.

"The paradoxical combinations that he embodies bespeak an utter strangeness. A god of blissful ecstasy and savage flesh-eating terror; a god described as ‘effeminate’ and yet also the bull-horned and phallic god of male potency; an untamed god of wild mountain rites who brings pandemonium in his wake, yet also a benefactor honored for his gifts of viniculture and theatre, key elements of Greek civilization; he was a fertility god, sometimes considered the life force itself, yet in his myths he was a dark and liminal figure, frequently involved with the spirits and realms of the dead; a subversive god whose myths tell of his incitement to riot and the destruction of kings, yet he was later embraced as a model for rulers as diverse as Alexander the great and the Ptolemaic kings of Egypt."
Denise Durance

"He borders on madness, as opposed to the rationality of Apollo. Wisdom for him is not the slow accumulation, the step by step approach. But the sudden illumination, the rapture of revelation. he is change and transformation."
Edinger

 

mythology=religion. the bible is mythology too. i misrepresented myself and i apologize. the class is titled "greek mythology"

and im not saying that dionysus=jesus. im saying that the majority of the ideas that compose what jesus is, came from previous myths/stories/religions. in my opinion, it just happened that jesus' character was more compatible with the people and the times than were any of his predecessors. thats part of the reason that christianity survives today as a thriving religion and Dionysus is taught in my mythology class. christianity just happened to come into fashion around 300 AD and the romans picked it up as their official religion. thats it. not to say that the teachings of the religion are not valid.

that is an excellent way to look at it IMO

okay i told myself i wasnt going to get into a stupid religious argument but this is starting to feel like one so im going to leave it here. i just thought it was an interesting point to bring up that some people might not be aware of.

 

what happens when we find aliens and they dont believe nor have ever heard of jesus christ? :eek3: there is an argument....the day we find other life on another planet in the universe and they are all about jesus..that is when I will fall in line with the rest of yall christian folks...till then...atheism works just fine for me

 

If LDS is not a cult why do they have to go door to door to sell it? If the faith was so great and righteous it would sell its self. LDS is no better then Jehovah witness which does the same thing and is considered a cult by many.

Support Science not superstition my 2 cents

 

You have to understand that while you accept something as fact based on faith, others do not have that same faith as you. The whole point of you putting the word out there and trying to get people to "understand" what you have to say is that you want them to accept the same things through faith as you have done.

You can present as much "evidence" as you want but there is absolutely no way of proving what you believe in to someone that does not have faith in the same things you do. You can't make a logical argument for someone to have faith in something. They either do or they don't. It's a decision they have to make and any amount of "proof" from your Mormon propaganda sites isn't going to make your argument any more logical.

As for myself, I have my own beliefs but I know that not everyone else has those same beliefs. When I explain those beliefs to other people I don't make any attempt to "prove" them. I say it's what my religion has to say on the matter, and leave it at that. All I do is offer up another viewpoint that I have happened to learn from my own religion, because to do anything more than that goes beyond simply informing people and telling them that what I say is the absolute truth.

Is it that hard of a concept for you to understand that people with different beliefs from you can have faith in something just as strongly as you have faith in what you believe?

 

As for the second part of your signature:

"My signature content bares the sole purpose of helping people understand
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Not to preach.
Until you understand it, in all its truths, please refrain from criticising."

You say you're not preaching, but right there you're preaching! Understand it in all its truths? Basically you want to tell us that the only way we are allowed by you, the uber authority on Mormonism, to talk about your religion is if we start having faith in the same things as you.

Guess what? It ain't gonna happen.