Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

My contentions with the dying-rising god are far more technical than parallels. Parallelism is, in reality, an exceedingly weak system to use epistemologically, because there are numerous alternatives that it cannot actually decide between (polygenesis or reliance, if reliant in what direction, etc). It only works when we can demonstrate a genetic relationship, i.e. Osiris and Dionysos works because we can actually show where ancient authors conflated them.

And we can see where Christians themselves made similar conflations with Jesus and pagan gods. Even Paul made similar proposals in Acts of the Apostles. Nor are we limited to just what ancient writers thought. Where would such a line of distinction even be? If Herodotus, Diodorus, and Plutarch never made such assessments, would we then not be able to make the same assessments? So your pseudo-philosophical dismissal for parallelism is nothing but a weak attempt at confusing the issue.

And yes, Osiris was believed to be bodily reconstituted. There is no rejecting that. But is that body alive the same way a human person is? No. It is alive in the afterlife, it is alive but represented as a green mummy, it is alive AND dead. As Frankfort pointed out, Osiris was paradoxical as both a living and dead deity simultaneously.

Did you not even read the scholars and the primary sources I quoted that emphatically said that Osiris is resurrected?

The Egyptian afterlife wasn't a parallel dimension. It was the same, corporal world that everything exists in. The mummy is used, so that the deceased may resurrect in his physical body.

nightshadetwine wrote: ↑Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:37 pm

Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 4:52 pm Osiris was bodily, physically resurrected.

I've had a run-in with this Chris Hansen character before. They seem to be one of those people that dismisses any possible connection or parallel if every detail doesn't 100% match. So in order for there to be gods that die and rise/resurrect, they all have to be exactly the same. It's pretty absurd.

So far I'm not impressed with anything he's had to say. Just the typical collage student who thinks he knows more than someone else, because he went to collage.

Chris Hansen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 01, 2020 4:45 pm Actually, it does matter. Egyptians did not conceptualize him as living in the same way a person was. He was living in his own right, but not the same as a human on earth. It is well worth noting because this is on conflict juxtaposition to how Jesus rises. Jesus is alive in every way we are to Christians, he humanly resurrects on Earth.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're saying a deity isn't actually "risen" or "resurrected" because they weren't resurrected in the exact way Jesus was. This is completely irrelevant, it doesn't matter if it's not exactly the same. Although the resurrection texts do describe the deceased being resurrected very similar to Jesus. They're said to get up, shake off the dirt/dust and bandages, and ascend out of their tomb to the sky "Just like Osiris". So even if Osiris wasn't resurrected in the same way Jesus was, the people who are ritually identified with Osiris are resurrected like Jesus. They're literally described in the texts as getting up and ascending to the sky. That's how they got to the netherworld, by ascending to the sky.

So it doesn't matter if you personally don't think Osiris was "resurrected" or "risen" because the Egyptians did. To the Egyptians, Osiris completely conquered and overcame death. This is why they hoped to share in his resurrection. It's the same concept as Jesus.

Also you don't need to block quote at me. I've read all the books you've cited and have them on my shelves.

I'd add Osiris is such a huge problem not even Mettinger considers him a dying-rising god as of 2004.

I "block quote" you because it sounds like you need to re-read those books. You don't seem to understand that Osiris was resurrected and risen according to the ancient Egyptians. It doesn't matter what you or Mettinger think about Osiris, it's what the Egyptians thought about Osiris. He was a "risen" deity that overcame death and offered them salvation.

Chris Hansen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 01, 2020 4:45 pm

Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Wed Jul 01, 2020 4:44 pm So far I'm not impressed with anything he's had to say. Just the typical collage student who thinks he knows more than someone else, because he went to collage.

Then go away and stop bothering me, because I'm not impressed with someone whose only tactic is amateurish parallelomania.

Guy I don't know where you think you are but no one here has to do anything you have to say. If you can't handle criticism then you best be going elsewhere.

Also, "I'm not impressed with someone whose only tactic is amateurish parallelomania."

Just lol man. Only? Not only is that not my main field of interest, it's not even a major component to my theories.

Chris Hansen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 01, 2020 4:59 pm

Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Wed Jul 01, 2020 4:42 pm

And yes, Osiris was believed to be bodily reconstituted. There is no rejecting that. But is that body alive the same way a human person is? No. It is alive in the afterlife, it is alive but represented as a green mummy, it is alive AND dead. As Frankfort pointed out, Osiris was paradoxical as both a living and dead deity simultaneously.

Did you not even read the scholars and the primary sources I quoted that emphatically said that Osiris is resurrected?

The Egyptian afterlife wasn't a parallel dimension. It was the same, corporal world that everything exists in. The mummy is used, so that the deceased may resurrect in his physical body.

... yes... in the afterlife...

The afterlife is THIS WORLD, fool. It's why the deceased is commanded to wake up and stand up. It's why Osiris is commanded in the Pyramid Texts to sit on his throne again.

And I've read literally every single book and source you cited cover to cover. Literally every single one.

I don't believe you at all.

Chris Hansen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 01, 2020 5:04 pm Also if my ideas were "pseudo-philosophical" I wonder why they are the consensus of scholars of religion... like with Russell McCutcheon. There is a reason the dying-rising god has only survived in Biblical studies and basically nowhere else at all... because Bible scholarship (like mythicists as a whole) are exceedingly slow and outdated on method.

Because I'm not interested in what Biblical scholars have to say about Egyptian beliefs and practices. If you want to know about Egypt then read Egyptologists. They actually know what they're talking about, and all say that Osiris was believed to be bodily resurrected.

smh.

So stfu.

Osiris was physically resurrected.

The afterlife WAS this life.

There was no dualistic concept of body/spirit in Egypt. Everything was material, the body, the Ba, the Ka, and the Akh.

Ta-Amen, the Duat, and the Imperishable Stars, were actual, physical locations, not parallel dimensions.

And you don't know what you're talking about.

These are all facts.

Chris Hansen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:56 pm "transfiguration and life as a God in Heaven"

Heaven... cosmologically distinct from Earth. End of story and proof you didn't even bother to read these through. What you said were facts. You just have cherry picked what facts you want.

LMAO:

Every single one of Joseph's references were being pulled straight out of Boswell's book, including the Louis V. Žabkar, Glazov, and others hahaha. Couldn't even be bothered to do your own bloody research. That is just astounding. What absolute laziness. You are just a parrot for Boswell.

Heaven is an actual, physical location in Egyptian culture, idiot. It is not cosmologically distinct. You're the one twisting what is written.

This proves that you don't actually understand anything that you have read, and I doubt if you've even read anything about this at all.

And I'm using Boswell's website (I don't have his book) because it's convenient for me. Nor did I hide that fact because I have linked to his website twice now, so you're not uncovering some great mystery. I'm not going to find each book (and yeah, I have quit a few of the books Boswell used, though not all of them because they cost too much for to afford) and type out everything just for you. My time is much more valuable than that.