You all make a logical fallacy by assuming that just because previous examples of something had X then all subsequent examples must also have X. Just because the previous religions were false doesn't mean that Christianity is also. The pattern is broken. The examples I gave, Mithras and Osiris, were both mystery cults whereas Christianity was/is not.

(February 4, 2015 at 9:45 am)ChadWooters Wrote: You all make a logical fallacy by assuming that just because previous examples of something had X then all subsequent examples must also have X. Just because the previous religions were false doesn't mean that Christianity is also. The pattern is broken. The examples I gave, Mithras and Osiris, were both mystery cults whereas Christianity was/is not.

I don't think all subsequent examples must also have X. I think a subsequent example that you claimed to be different from X would have something different, such as Y. Since Y is lacking in your example, we can conclude that it's not different.

(February 4, 2015 at 9:45 am)ChadWooters Wrote: You all make a logical fallacy by assuming that just because previous examples of something had X then all subsequent examples must also have X. Just because the previous religions were false doesn't mean that Christianity is also. The pattern is broken. The examples I gave, Mithras and Osiris, were both mystery cults whereas Christianity was/is not.

No one has used the logical fallacy that you are accussing us of using. Show me the post where someone wrote that because one religion was false that all religions must then be false.

We are arguing that the adherents if preChristian religion had as strong of faith in their belief system as you have in yours

(February 4, 2015 at 9:45 am)ChadWooters Wrote: Just because the previous religions were false doesn't mean that Christianity is also.

It also doesn't mean that Christianity is true, you know?
What it is is a strong hint that people recycled myths over time.... and christianity seems to be just one iteration of the recycling ... errr... cycle.

(February 4, 2015 at 9:45 am)ChadWooters Wrote: You all make a logical fallacy by assuming that just because previous examples of something had X then all subsequent examples must also have X. Just because the previous religions were false doesn't mean that Christianity is also. The pattern is broken. The examples I gave, Mithras and Osiris, were both mystery cults whereas Christianity was/is not.

It does mean that the things Jesus did were not special, or impressive. There have been other stories of children of gods who were born of virgins. What did Jesus do that was special, compared to the other people?

(February 4, 2015 at 10:28 am)Chad32 Wrote:

(February 4, 2015 at 9:45 am)ChadWooters Wrote: You all make a logical fallacy by assuming that just because previous examples of something had X then all subsequent examples must also have X. Just because the previous religions were false doesn't mean that Christianity is also. The pattern is broken. The examples I gave, Mithras and Osiris, were both mystery cults whereas Christianity was/is not.

It does mean that the things Jesus did were not special, or impressive. There have been other stories of children of gods who were born of virgins. What did Jesus do that was special, compared to the other people?

"Because he actually did do all those things!"

Oh, of course. And the devil made up all those other stories so people wouldn't be impressed with Jesus in the long run.

(February 4, 2015 at 9:40 am)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote:

(February 3, 2015 at 9:49 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Mithras, Osiris and the rest are just myths and were understood as such by their adherents. Jesus Christ, on the other hand, was a real person and the early Christians knew that.

Nah.

1: There aren't very significant similarities between Mithras/Osiris and Jesus
2: The Egyptian religion was enforced by the state, same with many other religions, while Christianity grew despite the state.
3: Jesus was a real person, there is practically no debate amongst scholars of antiquity. Even if we were to exclude the Biblical sources, there are many others such as Tacitus et al. This before we even try to explain the rapid rise of Christianity if there were no Christ.

(February 4, 2015 at 11:03 am)YGninja Wrote:

(February 4, 2015 at 9:40 am)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote: Nah.

1: There aren't very significant similarities between Mithras/Osiris and Jesus
2: The Egyptian religion was enforced by the state, same with many other religions, while Christianity grew despite the state.
3: Jesus was a real person, there is practically no debate amongst scholars of antiquity. Even if we were to exclude the Biblical sources, there are many others such as Tacitus et al. This before we even try to explain the rapid rise of Christianity if there were no Christ.

Tacitus referred to Christians, not to Jesus.

The rapid rise of Christianity happened centuries after the alleged events.

Got anything else?

(not to mention the "rapid rise of a religion" says absolutely nothing about its veractiy, and the fact that Christianity swiftly became the state-mandated religion in its own right, much like the flaw that YGninja accuses the Egyptian pantheon of having)