Is it egotistical to think that a God would die for you?

You forget Osiris. He was resurrected about 2500 years before the story of Jesus.- Oni

Actually Jesus is not even the first example of resurrection in the Bible.

The other "resurrections" in the Bible were only temporary and they went on to die again. What is meant by saying that Jesus is the "first" is bigger than that anyway, it means that He is now the first or the head of the New Creation and that all those who believe in Him will also be resurrected into transformed bodies just as He is. His resurrection is a new beginning.

The story of Osiris is ridiculously unlike the story of Jesus, obviously a myth. The myth isn't always told the same way for one thing. Part of the myth sometimes involves others bringing him back to life. Nothing like the accounts of Jesus, which have the stamp of truth in them to anyone being honest with the text.

I didn't say the story was like the story of Jesus. I said he was resurrected like in the story of Jesus. But he was still resurrected. My Bible doesn't have a stamp. Do I have the wrong Bible?- Oni

But that has nothing to do with the fact that Jesus is NOT the only or even the first resurrection in the Bible and it is also yet another example of misrepresenting what the Bible actually says.It is the ascension that is different but even there, Jesus is not unique or even the first.Have you ever read the Bible Faith?

What does that remind me of? Let me see? Hmm? Oh yeah the gospels.

The gospels do not tell different stories of how Jesus died and so on but the myths of Osiris do.

Who was the first person to visit Jesus after he left the tomb?

On what day was he crucified?
When did he ascend into heaven?
What were his last words?ABE
I really do not think Faith has ever read the bible.Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

The first person to visit the tomb AND the first person to see Jesus resurrected was Mary Magdalene. All the gospels agree at least that she was among the first visitors, and yes they all have different accounts of who she was with, what she did when, when she told the others and so on, but all that is incidental and has nothing to do with what I said -- about how Osiris actual death has completely different accounts, according to Wikipedia and there is no such discrepancy in the accounts of the important events in Jesus' life.Such incidentals as the order in which people went to the tomb of Jesus have no importance, and are the sort of thing different reporters are likely to remember differently, or simply choose to report with different emphases.ABE: As GDR has said more than once, this sort of discrepancy should work to the credibility of the gospels because it is realistic. To include such incidental detail at all is a mark of reality, not of myth, and the differences add to the reality. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

so.. not really much of a sacrifice for an eternal being is it?

unless of course they are guided by the holy spirit to write the inerrant word of god...
Then these "incidentals" start to make a few holes in the substance of your text.ABE: It does not add to the credibility of your claim that the bible is an INERRANT, divinely inspired text though.. does it? you can't have it both ways. Either the bible is inerrant truth and the word of god and therefore should not contradict itself, or, it is is the fallible word of fallible men and therefore cannot be taken as truth. pick a side and stick with it.Edited by Heathen, : No reason given.Edited by Heathen, : spelling

Different emphases are not contradictions. There is no problem with an inerrant Bible including variations in the details of events. All of them are true, they just occurred at different times and the different reporters remembered different aspects of them.

Have you thought about a career in law or politics?