Most personally convincing reasons you don't believe.

[Drich]

Okay, just remember I gave you a chance:

---

from post 195

Do you understand???

I am Saying That those who are older than Christianity do not lend themselves to the biblical narrative. Meaning their stories and the Gospel are not similar.

Again I am not saying their are older text. I am saying those that are can't be used as examples of "religious borrowing" The examples people use are either inaccurate or are from religions who's religious text post date the bible even if the religion itself has been known to exist before Christianity.

Even with our 'vast knoweledge' of the Greek pantheon of gods our earliest complete work is from the 15th century.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliothec...lodorus%29

As far as the Egyptians are concerned even less is known. Yes we have papyrus, tomb paintings, and various scraps and pieces of stories from one place or another, but in truth that's all we have. scraps. bits and pieces we have cobbled together from what is left of that society. In truth we don't even know what we don't know. as their is not one example or even anything close to a narrative that ties everything together. we just have what we currently think. Fact of the matter is the new kingdom/the reign of the Ramses deleted anything that was not of their system of belief.

Kind like someone trying to piece together what an ISIS held city believed 4000 years after they destroyed defaced and looted everything. We are currently cobbling together everything from the three dynasties into one big giant all encompassing narrative when infact some believe that everything attributed to the Egyptians could be from another unknown society all together. while the Egyptians reused and painted over what was left behind.

---

Your knowledge of archaeology, historical manuscripts, and ancient Egypt is stunningly underwhelming.  You must be taking it from xtian apologetics websites or xtian radio preachers or . . . wikipedia, thinking that "earliest complete work" proves something.  If you're insisting upon some "complete" bible, then you need to throw your King James version in the trash.  
    I've read some of those apologetics websites, where they crap their pants and deconstruct language trying to disprove that the Osiris myth, for example, influenced xtianity.  It's hilarious and sad at the same time - the complete lack of scholarship or intellectual integrity displayed by these people who are desperate to prove that their fantasies are true.
   The "dying and rising god" theme was prevalent in many cultures in the Middle East long before a ragtag contentious group split off from Canaanite tribes.  It's terribly easy to prove - - and to do so by the remaining writings, some from thousands of years before Jeebus.  And the stories are extremely similar - - more importantly, the concept is similar.  People trying to disprove them nitpick at the details - - they seem to think they can prove the forest doesn't exist because all of the trees aren't the same type.
  "In the ancient world there was a very widespread belief in the sufferings and deaths of gods as being beneficial to man. Adonis, Attis, Dionysos, Herakles, Mithra, Osiris, and other deities, were all saviour-gods whose deaths were regarded as sacrifices made on behalf of mankind; and it is to be noticed that in almost every case there is clear evidence that the god sacrificed himself to himself."

Sir Arthur Weigall, The Paganism in Our Christianity

citations???

Or is your supposed "whelming" knowledge supposed to be enough?