Diatribes on nuns aside, you still generalise by picking out examples and incidences of specific religious groups that support your dislike of those religions and then you apply these with a broad stroke to religion overall.
I honestly don't blame you for hating religion when all you are able to focus on is negative aspects that have manifested in various religions over time.
But your generalisations just don't add up to me. There are always exeptions and positive examples to be found. I may not be able to convince you of this as i can see you are quite entrenched in your views. That's fine.

You ask why a link between cruelty and religion. I believe that man can be cruel, and man can be religious. Man being cruel while being religious would therefore be the only link. Perhaps the cruel man/woman enjoys the righteous cover of religion, i do not know.

On the subject of helping others you are right, it can be done any time, anywhere, and by anybody, but the question is HOW do you help, what is the best way of helping someone?
A nun has possibly decided that she will help, and this has left her with this question. Perhaps she has found a method of helping in religious service.

What i know of the parables in the Bible is that they are written to convey a (usually) simple message. They are not meaningless. Whether they contain a truthful message or not is then certainly up to the reader to decide or believe or whatever.

Donnie I just see that which you are saying as only an excuse. The claim of the religious is perfection , believe in their god and all sorts of magic follows. I give a general negative example because one example proves religions claims wrong. Obviously if a priest, a man who is inspired by god rapes a child then that destroys all positive claims of what a priest is and all that god represents. When god is spoken of it is a GOD that is spoken of there is no room for error by the believer who is already claiming something that is highly suspect in the first place. It is conveniant for a person to drivel on about the glory of god , the moral code of the religion on one hand in all of gods absolute and then pathetically excuse the deeds of those who are practising the ideology. Even if by some unnatural impossible development god did exist and he was what he is claimed to be then the deeds and the values of those who follow him have proved him worthless. As it stands they base their claim on nothing and thus prove he does not exist anyway.

Religion/god belief claims its superiority on the basis it is good and moral. I am saying that religion/god belief is definetely not good and definetely not moral.

I wonder why it is nearly everything that is claimed by religion is not true including the worth of believing in god there is no worthy argument supporting religion.

People can believe what they want but why not worship idols in the privacy of the home , indulge in the dungeons and dragons of the bible and churches and leave people out of it?

waterboy,

Mystery cults have several characteristics, not only secrets. My comments about cults were one to three centuries before Fermicus Maternus. That said, I quote the Catholic Encyclopaedia, on mystery:

“In conformity with the usage of the inspired writers of the New Testament, theologians give the name mystery to revealed truths that surpass the powers of natural reason. Mystery, therefore, in its strict theological sense is not synonymous with the incomprehensible, since all that we know is incomprehensible, i.e., not adequately comprehensible as to its inner being; nor with the unknowable, since many things merely natural are accidentally unknowable, on account of their inaccessibility, e.g., things that are future, remote, or hidden. In its strict sense a mystery is a supernatural truth, one that of its very nature lies above the finite intelligence.”

- sod [Hebrew, mystery]: Proverbs 20:19, Judith 2:2
- Revelation: Matthew 13:11, Colossains, Timothy 3:9. 1 Corinthinthians 15:51
- Incarnation: Romans 16:25, Ephesians 3:4 & 6.19; Colossians 1:26, 4:3

Obviously, The Bible is poor source but does provide some illustration.

Further, you are wrong. There were initiates. They were called, catechumen, whom waited two to three years for Baptism.

The mystery of Christ’s resurrection is related to the mystery of renewal of corn. There are also heaps of commonalities with Mithras, and, for the godhead Serapis.
“The grave of Dionysus was said to have been torn in pieces. His "resurrection" (revival) is variously related. The blood, [A Communion, added] it must be remembered, was both the seat and the medium of the life. Hence this act was probably regarded as aiding the development of the new life.” [Fermicus Maternus, in Thornburn 1916). Waterboy, you ask questions, but don't answer mine [1~5]. You said I was ignorant of history and used bad sources. Put-up. Please don’t quote the Internet at me. Provide real citations.

Oliver,

You have not formed a cogent argument linking your 'facts 1-5' as evidence to your conclusion that "Christianity is a mystery religion". Your 'facts 1-5' are completely irrelevant since their truth does not prove your thesis and their untruth would not disprove it. If you read my posts more carefully you will find that I have refuted your logic and your conclusions and not your 'facts 1-5'.

In this thread Sells is making the perfectly orthodox assertion that metaphysical dualism is not consistent with Christian teaching though this will come as a surprise to many contemporary Christians and perhaps to you also. This fact alone distinguishes Christianity markedly from the mystery religions, Platonic philosophy, zoroastrianism and Graeco-Roman religion in general.

Christianity is in a continuity with pre-exilic Hebrew faith (quite antithetical to Greek philosophy and eastern religion) and even if Christian religious culture has adopted some of the accidental characteristics of other religions that does not bring it into identity with those religions. This is a point you seem incapable of comprehending.

The "Christianity is just another mystery cult" argument has been around for 1600+ years without making much headway and hasnt made any worthwhile contribution to the human condition. It looks like a duck.. but its a dead duck!

waterboy,

Thanks.

The "facts" did not all relate to mystery cults. Some did, some didn't. Various comments followed the ebbs and flows of thread.

In the first instance, I was addressing your assertion that I was using rubbish history.

Just the same, the what I said about godheads and attributes stands. Mystery cults is not on the secrets known the initiated. You still haven't shown were Toynbee and Wells are wrong.

Creation-Rebirth, Virgin-Birth, Blood Sacafice-Resurrection. Magic Meals, Meaassages from the gods. All this is not superficial. Your need to read some Roman and Egygtion history. If you have that little green Bible College Greek, forget it, read the court Greek of Alexander.

Hi GZ Tan,

Apologies I just found a number of questions and comments you posted for me last month (I believe 25th March ).
I was overseas on holidays and wasn't accessing OLO.

Peace,

T