Jump to content

Jesus in comparative mythology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TheologyJohn (talk | contribs) at 14:30, 24 May 2007 (→Adduced Evidence: NOTHING is undisputed in biblical studies :)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Part of a series on
Jesus
Jesus in Christianity
Jesus in Islam
Background
Jesus in history
Perspectives on Jesus
Jesus in culture

The Jesus-myth hypothesis disputes the historicity of Jesus in the light of mythological aspects of Jesus Christ as portrayed in the gospels. It is now rejected by the majority of Biblical scholars and historians of classical antiquity.[1]

Mythography of Christ

Main article: mythological aspects of Jesus Christ

Study of study of the Christ narrative in mythography goes back to ideas of a solar myth and a sacrificial king forwarded by Max Müller and James Frazer in the late 19th century. These studies did separate mythological from historical aspects, but did not impinge on the existence of a historical Jesus as such. Frazer explicitly stated that "my theory assumes the historical reality of Jesus of Nazareth [...] The doubts which have been cast upon the historical reality of Jesus are [...] unworthy of serious attention."[2]

Often cited mythological parallels are the Horus and Osiris cults of Ancient Egyptian religion as syncretized into Hellenistic Orphic and Dionysian mystery religions, the cult of Mithras in the Roman Empire, and, of course, the mythology of the Hebrew Bible employed in the gospels themselves. The Pan-Babylonianist school in particular further adduces Mesopotamian cults of a resurrected fertility god, Tammuz.

Christ as Gnostic fiction

In spite of Frazer's verdict that attepts to build a case of the non-historicity of Jesus from mythological parallels as "unworthy of serious attention", such attempts have been repeatedly made. Presently, as in Frazer's time, New Testament scholars and historians consider the question as resolved in favour of Jesus' historicity[1].

Bruno Bauer, a Hegelian thinker who argued that the true founder of Christianity was an Alexandrian Jew, Philo, who had adapted Judaic ideas to Hellenic philosophy.

Other authors included Edwin Johnson, who argued that Christianity emerged from a combination of liberal trends in Judaism and Gnostic mysticism. Less speculative versions of the theory developed under Bible scholars such as A. D. Loman and G. I. P. Bolland. Loman argued that episodes in Jesus's life, such as the Sermon on the Mount, were fictions written to justify compilations of pre-existing liberal Jewish sayings. Bolland developed the theory that Christianity evolved from Gnosticism and that "Jesus" was a symbolic figure representing Gnostic ideas about God.

The most influential of the books arguing for a mythic Jesus was Arthur Drews's The Christ-Myth (1909) which brought together the scholarship of the day in defence of the idea that Christianity had been a Jewish Gnostic cult that spread by appropriating aspects of Greek philosophy and Frazerian death-rebirth deities. This combination of arguments became the standard form of the mythic Christ theory. Joseph Wheless in his 1930 Forgery In Christianity claimed there was an active effort to forge documents to make the myth seem historical beginning as early as the 2nd century.

The later works by George Albert Wells drew on the Pauline Epistles and the lack of early non-Christian documents to argue that the Jesus figure of the Gospels was symbolic, not historical. Earl Doherty proposed that Jewish mysticism influenced the development of a Christ myth, while John M. Allegro proposed that Christianity began as shamanic religion based on the use of hallucinogenic mushrooms.[3]

Most recently Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy have popularized the Jesus-myth concept in their book The Jesus Mysteries.[4]

In recent years, opinions of a purely mythical Christ have been advanced by Emeritus Professor of German George Albert Wells (The Jesus Legend and The Jesus Myth) and by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, co-authors of The Jesus Mysteries and Jesus and the Lost Goddess, who are both popular writers on mysticism, with Gandy having an MA in ancient pagan mystery religions. Another proponent is Earl Doherty (The Jesus Puzzle).

Adduced Evidence

While the mythological parallels in the gospel narrative are widely recognised, a claim of non-historicity must make a case that biographical details reported in the gospels rather than the historical core of the narrative are secondary embellishments intended to create a fictitious impression of historicity.

The New Testament epistles

It is widely held that the authentic letters of Paul of Tarsus are the earliest surviving Christian writings. The earliest datable references we have and the earliest manuscripts are from Paul [5]. However epistles discuss theology and morality abstractly while gospels teach metaphorically showing examples from "Jesus' actual life and ministry". Proponents of Jesus as myth note however that the epistles are silent in areas where you would expect to see events from Jesus's actual life [6]

  • Quotes of "Jesus' teachings" are not attributed to him
  • When describing the church there is no mention of Jesus' "recent activities"
  • Areas that would normally beg for references to Jesus' ministry lack such references

G. A. Wells suggests that the level of discussion of the historical Jesus in the Pauline epistles, except for the Pastorals, as well as in Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, the Johannine epistles and Revelation supports his position. In these works, Wells conjectures, references to Jesus is presented as "a basically supernatural personage only obscurely on Earth as a man at some unspecified period in the past".[7] Wells considers this to be the original Christian view of Jesus, based not on the life of a historical figure but on the personified figure of Wisdom as portrayed in Jewish wisdom literature.

A more radical position is taken by Earl Doherty, who holds that these early authors did not believe that Jesus had been on Earth at all. He argues that the earliest Christians accepted a Platonic cosmology that distinguished a "higher" spiritual world from the Earthly world of matter, and that they viewed Jesus as having descended only into the "lower reaches of the spiritual world".[8] Doherty also suggests that this view was accepted by the authors of the Pastoral epistles, 2 Peter, and various second-century Christian writings outside the New Testament. Doherty contends that apparent references in these writings to events on earth, and a physical historic Jesus, should in fact be regarded as allegorical metaphors.[9] Opponents regard such interpretations as forced and erroneous.[10]

Historiography and methodology

Earl Doherty argues that the gospels are inconsistent concerning "such things as the baptism and nativity stories, the finding of the empty tomb and Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances" and contain numerous "contradictions and disagreements in the accounts of Jesus' words and deeds". He concludes that the evangelists freely altered their sources and invented material, and therefore could not have been concerned to preserve historical information.[8]

Although seldom remarked on by New Testament scholars, some advocates of the Jesus Myth theory argue that historians lack any reliable and widely accepted methodology for determining what is historical and what is not. As J. D. Crossan, a well respected scholar of early Christianity, comments, "I do not think, after two hundred years of experimentation, that there is any way acceptable in public discourse or scholarly debate, by which you can go directly into the great mound of the Jesus tradition and separate out the historical Jesus layer from all later strata".[This quote needs a citation] While this is not an argument that Jesus did not exist any more than it is an argument that the Paul described in Acts, or even Napoleon, did not exist, advocates of the Jesus Myth theory believe it does call into question the results of historical inquiry into Jesus of Nazareth.[citation needed]

Opponents of the theory, including skeptical commentators such as the Jesus Seminar, argue that some reliable information can be extracted from the Gospels if consistent critical methodology is used.[citation needed]

Mainstream scholarly reception

The idea of Jesus as a myth has received strong criticism from a number of biblical scholars and historians. The points below highlight some of these criticisms.

  • Parallels between Christianity and Mystery Religions are not considered compelling evidence by some scholars. [citation needed]
  • Through cultural diffusion it would have been natural for Jesus and/or his followers within a Hellenized Judea to incorporate the philosophy and sentiment of Epicureanism, Stoicism, Platonism/proto-Gnosticism , and mystery cults.[11] The ideas that these belief systems brought concerning the afterlife, presence of the divine, and wisdom were incorporated into Judaism for several centuries before Jesus and can be found in the Old Testament and Apocrypha.[citation needed]
  • Those who do not hold to the Jesus-Myth disagree with the notion that the Apostle Paul did not speak of Jesus as a physical being. They argue that arguments from silence are unreliable and that there are several references in Paul's letters to historical facts about Jesus's life. [12] He claims that Jesus "descended from David according to the flesh."[13] Paul also states that "God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law"[14] and that "the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being."[15] Paul clearly states that in "taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness, And being found in human form, he [Jesus] humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death--even death on a cross."[16] Furthermore, he invokes the "command," "charge," or "word" of Jesus four times[17] in the Epistles.
  • The Epistle to the Hebrews is debatably an early source, which some, but not all, scholars put before 70 CE.[18] Their reasoning is that the Epistle makes mention of animal sacrifice, which was a practice that fell out of favor in Judaism after the destruction of the temple. In Hebrews, Jesus is mentioned several times in physical form[19] and even speaks.[20]
  • Christianity was actively opposed by both the Roman Empire and the Jewish authorities, and mainstream Christianity would have been utterly discredited if Jesus had been shown as a non-historical figure. There is good early evidence in Pliny, Josephus and other sources of the Roman and Jewish approaches at the time, and none of them involved this suggestion.[12]
  • Some scholars, like Michael Grant, do not see significant similarity between the pagan myths and Christianity. Grant states that "Judaism was a milieu to which doctrines of the deaths and rebirths, of mythical gods seemed so entirely foreign that the emergence of such a fabrication from its midst is very hard to credit."[21]

Overall, the unhistoricity theory is regarded as effectively refuted by almost all Biblical scholars and historians.

The nonhistoricity thesis has always been controversial, and it has consistently failed to convince scholars of many disciplines and religious creeds. ... Biblical scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted.[1]

However, Doherty's interpretation of this fact is that:

New Testament scholarship has not kept pace with today’s mythicism... Someone in the mainstream, a respected, open-minded critical scholar, unencumbered by confessional interests and peer pressure, needs to take a fresh look, to consider and address every aspect of the mythicist case in an in-depth fashion...[22]

Footnotes

  1. ^ a b c Van Voorst, Robert E (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence (Studying the Historical Jesus). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. p. 16. ISBN 978-0802843685.
  2. ^ Frazer, JG (2005). The Golden Bough - A Study in Magic and Religion. Cosimo. ISBN 978-1596056855.
  3. ^ Allegro, John M. (1970). The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross: A Study of the Nature and Origins of Christianity Within the Fertility Cults of the Ancient Near East. London: Hodder and Stoughton. ISBN 0-340-12875-5.
  4. ^ Freke, T (2001). The Jesus Mysteries: Was the "Original Jesus" a Pagan God?. Three Rivers Press. ISBN 978-0609807989. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  5. ^ John 18 exempted see List of New Testament papyri for additional information
  6. ^ See for example Doherty's The Sound of Silence
  7. ^ Wells, GA (1999). "Earliest Christianity". New Humanist. 114 (3): 13–18. Retrieved 2007-01-11. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  8. ^ a b Doherty, E (1997). "The Jesus Puzzle: Pieces in a Puzzle of Christian Origins". Journal of Higher Criticism. 4 (2). Retrieved 2007-01-09. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  9. ^ Doherty, E. "Christ as "Man": Does Paul Speak of Jesus as an Historical Person?". The Jesus Puzzle: Was There No Historical Jesus?. Retrieved 2007-01-11.
  10. ^ Price, C (2005-05-20). "Earl Doherty use of the phrase "According to the Flesh" (sic)". Bede's Library. Retrieved 2007-01-11.
  11. ^ Martin, WC (1966). These Were God's People: A Bible History. Southwestern Company. pp. 392, 432–440. ASIN B000HSGIW4.
  12. ^ a b France, RT (1986). Evidence for Jesus (Jesus Library). Trafalgar Square Publishing, 19-20. ISBN 0340381728.
  13. ^ Romans 1:3
  14. ^ Galatians 4:4.
  15. ^ 1 Corinthians 15:21.
  16. ^ Philippians 2:7-8
  17. ^ Romans14:14, 1 Corinthians 7:10 and 9:14, and 1 Thessalonians 4:15.
  18. ^ See Epistle to the Hebrews.
  19. ^ Hebrews 5:7, 7:14, and 12:3.
  20. ^ Hebrews 10:5-9
  21. ^ Grant, Michael (1995). Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels. Scribner. p. 199. ISBN 0684818671.
  22. ^ Doherty, E. "Responses to Critiques of the Mythicist Case". Retrieved 2007-01-09.

Further reading

  • Allegro, John M. (1992). The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth (2nd rev. ed. ed.). Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. ISBN 0-87975-757-4. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  • Atwill, Joseph (2003). The Roman Origins of Christianity. J. Atwill. ISBN 0-9740928-0-0.
  • Atwill, Joseph (2005). Caesar's Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus. Berkeley, Calif.: Ulysses. ISBN 1-56975-457-8.
  • Brodie, Thomas L. (2000). The Crucial Bridge: The Elijah-Elisha Narrative as an Interpretive Synthesis of Genesis-Kings and a Literary Model for the Gospels. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press. ISBN 0-8146-5942-X.
  • Ellegård, Alvar (1999). Jesus: One Hundred Years Before Christ: A Study in Creative Mythology. London: Century. ISBN 0-7126-7956-1.
  • Freke, Timothy (1999). The Jesus Mysteries: Was the 'Original Jesus' a Pagan God?. London: Thorsons. ISBN 0-7225-3676-3. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Grant, Michael (1999) [1977]. Jesus. London: Phoenix. ISBN 0-75380-899-4.
  • Meier, John P. A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus (3 vols. ed.). New York: Doubleday.
    1. The Roots of the Problem and the Person. 1991. ISBN 0-385-26425-9.
    2. Mentor, Message, and Miracles. 1994. ISBN 0-385-46992-6.
    3. Companions and Competitors. 2001. ISBN 0-385-46993-4.
  • Price, Robert M. (2000). Deconstructing Jesus. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-57392-758-9.
  • Price, Robert M. (2003). The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man: How Reliable is the Gospel Tradition?. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-59102-121-9.
  • Price, Robert M. (2005). "New Testament narrative as Old Testament midrash". In Jacob Neusner and Alan J. Avery-Peck (ed.). Encyclopaedia of Midrash: Biblical Interpretation in Formative Judaism. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 90-04-14166-9.
  • Sanders, E. P. (1993). The Historical Figure of Jesus. London: Allen Lane. ISBN 0-7139-9059-7.
  • Seznec, Jean. 1972, The Survival of the Pagan Gods, Princeton University Press, ISBN 0691017832
  • Theissen, Gerd (1998). The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide. trans. John Bowden. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. ISBN 0-8006-3123-4. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Thompson, Thomas L. (2005). The Messiah Myth: The Near Eastern Roots of Jesus and David. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-08577-6.
  • Wells, G. A. (1982). The Historical Evidence for Jesus. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. ISBN 0-87975-180-0.
  • Wells, G. A. (1999). The Jesus Myth. Chicago: Open Court. ISBN 0-8126-9392-2.

See also

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jesus_in_comparative_mythology&oldid=133178370"