Christ myth theory

This article is part of the Jesus and history series of articles.

Jesus as myth or The Jesus Myth refers to a collection of ideas that have in common the central theme that elements of beliefs about Jesus, and the Jesus narrative in the New Testament, are actually syncretisms from older myths. It is usually associated with a skeptical position on the existence of Jesus as an actual historical figure and is a minority view with little academic support.

The theory is based on apparent similarities between early Christian accounts of Jesus and pre-existing mystery religions, and at the more extreme limit of the theory is also based in part on the lack of extant evidence about his life outside the Gospels in the view of the holders of the theory. The extreme limit of the theory has not found widespread acceptance among Bible scholars and historians.

The debate over the truth of Jesus' existence requires academic analysis of the available evidence from times near-contemporary with the dates for Jesus' life, and it depends on the reliability and biases of such evidence. It includes the use of historiography, philology, and to an extent hermeneutics as tools for analysing the evidence. The relevant evidence itself can be broken down into Christian and non-Christian texts; the only surviving Christian texts close enough to the era being the books within the New Testament itself. The earliest part of the New Testament, and thus the most important to answer the question, are the Pauline Epistles, though as these contain very little actual narrative concerning Jesus. It is important to note that the majority of scholars believe that Paul has quoted Jesus several times and if the Epistle to the Hebrews was made before the destruction of the Second Temple, it too has several passages where Jesus struggles with opposition and speaks. The later accounts in the Gospels are also of significance. The purpose of this article is not to provide said academic analysis, but rather to provide an account of research that has been performed into the subject thus far.

History of the theory

Some have suggested that the idea dates to New Testament times, citing 2 John 1:7's "many deceivers [who] are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh." Some scholars studying this period believe that these early quotes refer to docetism, the belief that Jesus appeared to people but lacked a genuinely physical body, rather than a belief that Jesus was a completely fabricated figure.

The first proponent of this theory was probably nineteenth century historian Bruno Bauer, a Hegelian thinker who argued that the true founder of Christianity was the Alexandrian Jew Philo, who had adapted Judaic ideas to Hellenic philosophy. His arguments made little impact at the time. Other authors included Edwin Johnson, who argued that Christianity emerged from a combination of liberal trends in Judaism with Gnostic mysticism. Less speculative versions of the theory developed under writers 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 in reality fictions to justify compilations of pre-existing liberal Jewish sayings. Bolland developed the theory that Christianity developed from Gnosticism and that "Jesus" was a symbolic figure representing Gnostic ideas about godhood.

Jesus-Myth theories often draw on nineteenth century scholarship on the formation of myth, in the work of writers such as Max Müller and James Frazer. Müller argued that religions originated in mythic stories of the birth, death and rebirth of the sun. Frazer further attempted to explain the origins of humanity's beliefs in the idea of a "sacrificial king", associated with the sun, vegetation, or a "year-daemon" as a dying and reviving god. According to his major book on the subject, The Golden Bough, the king's death and rebirth was connected to the regeneration of the earth in springtime and was often required for the continuity of a ritual-based community. A critic of the religious beliefs of his contemporaries, Frazer wrote The Golden Bough partly to discredit Christianity by illustrating its similarity to the beliefs and rituals of other cultures.

By the early twentieth century a number of writers had published arguments in favour of the Jesus-Myth theory. These treatments were sufficiently influential to merit several book-length responses by traditional historians and New Testament scholars. The most influential of the books arguing for a mythic Jesus was Arthur Drews's The Christ-Myth (1909) which argued 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.

While aspects of the theory were influential, mainstream scholars at the time rejected the notion. Since Frazerian theories about myth have been largely debunked, and the priority of Gnosticism seriously questioned, the Jesus-Myth theory has dwindled in importance.

In recent years, the Jesus-Myth has had few proponents in academia but has been advanced by William B. Smith, George Albert Wells (The Jesus Legend and The Jesus Myth), and John Marco Allegro (The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross and The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth), as well as by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy (co-authors of The Jesus Mysteries and Jesus and the Lost Goddess), and Earl Doherty (author of The Jesus Puzzle), and Larry Wright, author of Christianity, Astrology & Myth.

Influences on the earliest Christianity

According to conservative Christian apologists, the earliest Christianity developed directly from the ministry of Jesus and his Twelve Apostles, without much in the way of external influences. Conservative Christian apologists also assert that the New Testament is an accurate historic record of Jesus. More critical and secular approaches argue that the earliest Christianity did not develop in a religious vacuum, but in the cosmopolitan and many-religioned world of a hellenised Judea under the auspices of the Roman Empire. Consequently critical approaches, including those associated with the theory of Jesus as myth, argue that it remains plausible for early Christianity to have developed under the influence of external religions, and that it would be unusual for the New Testament narratives to not even have been remotely touched by such a cosmopolitan background.

The influence of the Old Testament

It is widely accepted that the Gospel accounts were influenced by the Old Testament. In particular, many quotations attributed to the Q document, which the Gospels attribute to Jesus, find parallels in several places of the Old Testament. Some scholars believe that certain elements of the gospels are not history but a type of midrash: creative narratives based on the stories, prophecies, and quotes in the Hebrew Bible.

The Gospel of Matthew is widely considered the most "Jewish" of the canonical Gospels, and in the small amount of material unique to the Gospel of Matthew (i.e. not mentioned by the other canonical Gospels), Jesus is presented in a way that often has strong parallels with significant Old Testament figures. Most noticeable are the similarities with Moses, whose birth narrative and sojourn in the wilderness as a youth are alleged by textual critics to have been the basis from which Matthew derived its account of the nativity of Jesus, rather than Matthew basing it on the actual events of the birth of Jesus.

Though conceding that the gospels may contain some creativity and midrash, scholarly opponents of the Jesus-as-myth stance argue that the gospels are more akin to ancient Graeco-Roman biographies. Although scholars do not agree on the exact nature of this genre, associated works attempted to impart historical information about historical figures, but were not comprehensive and could include legendary developments. Nevertheless, as ancient biographies, proponents of Jesus' existence believe they contain sufficient historical information to establish his historicity.

Although there are many types of midrash, the Toledot Yeshu jumps out as being the most similar to the proposal that characters and situations were invented wholesale according to religious dogma and Old Testament prophecy. However, those opposed to the existence of such strong Old Testament influences have argued that the closest parallels, to potential Moses-based embellishment of the Jesus narrative, are inapplicable. Although agreeing that there are many examples of ancient Jewish and Christian literature that shaped their stories and accounts according to Old Testament influence, such opponents argue that even under this influence there is nevertheless often some accurate historical information at the core; for example, in 1 Maccabees, Judas and his battles are described in terms which parallel those of Saul's and David's battles against the Philistines in 1 and 2 Samuel, but nevertheless 1 Maccabees has a degree of respect amongst historians as having a reasonable degree of historical reliability.

Gnostic themes

Although there are occasional references in the disputed group of Pauline Epistles to a flesh-and-blood Jesus, the undisputed epistles contain only limited mention of Jesus as a historic figure. Even though Paul's letters are widely regarded as the earliest Christian documents, they contain very few references to Jesus' actual life and ministry, which only appear in detail in the later Gospels. Christian apologists claim that Paul's letters were written in response to specific problems unrelated to the details of the life of Jesus, and so the occasional and epistolary nature of Paul's correspondence are sufficient explanations for the lack of detail of Jesus' life. However, proponents of the theory that Jesus has a basis in myth counter that there are an abundance of missed rhetorical opportunities in his epistles to reinforce points by quoting statements that the Gospels later claim that Jesus said, or citing events in his life mentioned later by the Gospels that were directly relevant to the topics Paul was discussing, and presumably must have been known about in the period between the events happening and the Gospels being written.

Several commentators, from writers whose theories have not received widespread acceptance, such as Earl Doherty, to widely respected academics and experts in the field, such as Harvard professor Elaine Pagels, have argued that the Pauline epistles, or at least the genuine ones, should be interpreted as gnosticism. Christianity arose under a heavy Hellenic culture, Paul himself growing up in Tarsus, the centre of one of the major mystery religions of the time, and Pagels and Doherty (and others) believe that Paul's writing should be viewed in the context of the Hellenic culture which formed his background. One consequence of parts of the New Testament being written as Gnostic documents is that the narratives involved would not have been intended as descriptions of historic events but as non-historic allegory and metaphor.

Gnosticism, an umbrella term for a diverse set of groups within early Christianity (that were ultimately suppressed), frequently used allegory and metaphor to guide its initiates towards an esoteric salvation, which Gnosticism viewed as a form of knowledge (gnosis), not unlike Buddhist enlightenment. Many of the most prominent strands of Gnosticism interpreted the Gospels as Gnostic documents, and their narratives as allegorical rather than historic, often drawing profound meaning from the events in Jesus' life. Many Gnostic groups even regarded Jesus himself as an allegory, rather than historic, and docetism was rife in Gnostic groups. Thus whether or not parts of the New Testament were written as Gnostic documents, is a matter of substantial impact on the question of the historicity of Jesus, and on what elements can be considered to be based on a historic figure.

How much influence gnosticism had on Christianity, and how much Christianity originated in gnosticism, are thus questions which have historically been quite volatile. Advocates of a position arguing that many elements of Jesus are derived from myth hold that those references in the undisputed epistles that appear to refer to events on earth, and a physical historic Jesus, should instead be regarded as allegorical metaphors. Their opponents, often but not always conservative Christians, regard such interpretations, of for example Galatians 1:19, Galatians 3:16, Galatians 4:4, Romans 1:3, Romans 3:1, Romans 15:8, and 1 Corinthians 11:23–25, 1 Corinthians 15:4, as based on forced and erroneous translations.

Parallels with Mediterranean mystery religions and other non-Abrahamic sources

The question of what connection Christianity has to Mediterranean mystery religions has been a controversy since the early centuries of Christianity. Although such questions subsided and were suppressed as the power of the Church grew, they have returned as the knowledge about the mystery religions was rediscovered. Whether this connection exists, and who copied whom, is at the core of the question of Jesus as myth.

Most of the mystery religions of the Mediterranean in the time of early Christianity were centred on a single divine figure (in the case of Orphism, the central figure is essentially an avatar of his own master, Dionysus), who had in most cases originally been a minor deity, whose mythology contained a narrative involving the deities death. In several cases, the original mythology seems to have been completely hijacked and abruptly altered, often bearing very little relation to the original myth; this is particularly noticeable in the way that Mithra somehow became Mithras. A number of the Mediterranean mystery religions of the period contain several similarities to each other, such as a prominent life-death-rebirth narrative, and the central deity being semi-human; this group (including the religions of Osiris-Horus, Dionysus, Mithras, Aion, Adonis, and Attis) were identified as connected in early times, and as a group were named Osiris-Dionysus after the two earliest groups.

Modern scholars have argued that most of these Osiris-Dionysus religions evolved when earlier Osiris-Dionysus religions spread into a new region and localised themselves by hijacking convenient local deities; this is most evident in how Sabazios, originally a Phrygian deity, became another name for Dionysus, as did Bacchus, originally a Roman deity of wine; it is also evident in how Orphicism developed with the central figure of Orpheus, supposedly a priest of Dionysus, but essentially Dionysus himself. Most scholars that have an opinion on the matter argue that the earliest form of this religion was the Osiris-Horus form of ancient Egyptian religions, and that the others developed from there, having been transferred by merchants. Notably, although a form of Osiris-Dionysus was present in most nations around the Mediterranean, particularly in the east, at first glance no such form appears to have existed in Roman Palestine. A central contention of the Jesus-as-myth argument is that Jesus, or at least much of the Gospel narrative about him, and early Christian tradition concerning him, is the form of Osiris-Dionysus localised for Roman Palestine.

Pythagorean elements

Enough has survived from the comments of their enemies (for example, Origen and Irenaeus), and a few relics of their own, for scholars to be fairly certain that many of the mystery religions were, at least by the first century, Pythagoreanist and Neo-Platonic reinterpretations of earlier myths; i.e. earlier myths became, in the mystery religions, allegory and metaphor, concerning universal truths, rather than something considered literally true. Exactly what connection exists between Gnosticism and the Mediterranean mystery religions is an unsolved question, but it is certain that they would have shared considerably similar teaching methods, soteriology, and mysticism. Thus to approach the question of whether Christianity borrowed from mystery religions (and vice versa), comparisons should be made not only between early Christianity and Mediterranean myths, but also between early Christianity and Pythagoreanism.

Aside from potential parallels with Gnosticism, which can be investigated more directly, other significant features of Pythagoreanism might have entered into early Christianity, and their presence would add support to a position advocating that significant parts of early Christianity, or all of it, derived from mystery religion. Pythagoreans were vegetarian, so much so that until the 18th century all vegetarians were not called vegetarian but Pythagorean. Many scholars and theologians believe that the earliest Christians were vegetarian, as the Desert Fathers almost definitely were, and some significant early Christian groups even had versions of the Gospel of Matthew that clearly point to Jesus being vegetarian - the Gospel of the Ebionites differs from the now traditional version of Matthew in places referring to meat by using similarly spelt vegetarian friendly terms; there is no academic consensus as to which version has the more original wording. As the canonical New Testament seems to argue that vegetarianism is a personal choice, and many early Christian writers also stated that it was, the early Christians would seem to have taken this position without a New Testament based theological motivation for doing so. Modern Christian vegetarianism argues that passages from the Old Testament and Book of Enoch assert that vegetarianism was God's ideal, but there is no evidence either for or against the idea that early Christians used the same argument, and there is the alternative possibility that early Christian vegetarianism originated due to the influence of Pythagoreanism.

Pythagoreanism also saw deep value in mathematics; geometry was seen as having a high spiritual significance in and of itself, as well as being a mechanism to encode mystical teachings. The Feeding of the 5000 and of the 4000 have long been thought to encode some deeper meaning; more mainstream interpretations regard the numbers involved as references to the Torah feeding the Jews and Jesus' ministry feeding the Gentiles, but it has also been argued that they encode instructions for a mystical diagram. The use of numbers as cryptic references to deeper teaching could be argued to demonstrate Pythagorean influence in and of itself, but the encrypted presence of mystical diagrams would be a much stronger argument in favour of the existence of such influence. The Catch of 153 fish is one of the most notable situations where a diagram can be derived from the text following basic consistent rules; using the Isopsephia of the text to dictate sizes, the account of the event can be described geometrically - the resulting diagram not only describes the event, but simultaneously has another, more mystical, interpretation as described in Plato's Timaeus. 153 itself is a significant number in Pythagoreanism, and had a strong connection to fish, as it was one part of the 'measure of the fish - a reference to the Vesica Piscis (whose name means flesh of the fish) and the square root of 3.

Parallels with non-Christian myths from the first century

Parallels between Jesus and the various religions of the Osiris-Dionysus group are a popular topic for internet sites sceptical of Christianity. A more constrained set of parallels have also been proposed by various scholars advocating the Jesus-as-myth theory. The most powerful groups in early Christianity were the Christians centred in Alexandria (in Egypt) and those in Rome, and so the form of Osiris-Dionysus at these two locations could reasonably be expected to have had the greatest influence. In Alexandria it was Osiris-Horus, a partial merging of the identities of Osiris and Horus (usually seen as fairly separate in more traditional ancient Egyptian religion); Osiris dying and being resurrected as Horus. In Rome, it was originally Dionysus, but by the third century the state religion was that of Sol Invictus, originally just a standard Solar Deity, but by then had formed a syncretism with Mithraism, which also continued to exist separately among males in the military of the Roman Empire.

File:LuxorAmenhetep.gif

According to the hieroglyphs, this image of Horus' nativity depicts annunciation (frame 1), impregnation by the holy spirit (frame 2), and the birth and receipt of gifts from 3 visitors (frame 3)

The most prominent narratives in Christianity alleged by advocates of the Jesus as Myth theory to be copied from traditions of Osiris-Horus are mostly centred around the earlier part of Jesus' life:

• Christ as a title - when treated as a partial merge of Osiris and Horus, Osiris-Horus was sometimes referred to as the embalmed Horus, describing Horus taking the place of Osiris in the death parts of the narrative. The embalmed Horus was written in Egyptian as HR KRST (probably pronounced har karast), and although Christ has a highly plausible etymology making it a cognate with Chrism (ointment), as a Greek attempt at translating the Hebrew term Messiah, a number of advocates of the Jesus as myth theory, including theology professor Tom Harpur, argue that this was just a happy co-incidence, and the term is actually derived from the Karast title of Horus. Use of this title, rather than directly copying any of the other titles of Horus, is argued by advocates of the Jesus myth, to be due to the convenient implications of its false cognate Chrism. If this is true, rather than covered in ointment, i.e. anointed, the literal meaning of Christ would really be covered in balm, i.e. embalmed.
• Parentage
  • By the first century the identity of Osiris had absorbed that of Ptah (with early stages of this absorption being known as Ptah-Seker-Osiris), the great creator deity. In traditional egyptian religion Osiris had become seen as the father of Horus, and hence Horus was the son of the creator deity, like Jesus was seen as son of God the Father.
  • By the first century Isis was seen as the mother of Horus. She was traditionally known as Meri, meaning beloved, which is phonetically near-identical to Mary, the name of the mother of Jesus, and was the most common recipient of the epithet - if Meri was used without a particular deity being mentioned it usually referred to Isis.
  • Pharaohs sometimes portrayed themselves or their children as an incarnation of Horus. The mother involved was usually referred to as Meri (i.e. beloved), and was human, hence giving a semi-human incarnation of Horus a human mother called Meri.
• The Nativity of Jesus - some of the more detailed versions of the birth of Horus have been argued to parallel the Nativity of Jesus, namely the versions of Horus' birth that derive from when Horus' mother was said to be Neith (whose identity later became absorbed into that of Isis). This is most obvious in a set of pre-Christian carvings from a temple in Luxor portraying Akhenaten as an incarnation of Horus, according to which:
  • The future birth of Horus was announced in advance (an annunciation) by Thoth, whom the Greeks identified as Hermes and was in the first century seen as the messenger of the Gods, a role taken by the Archangel Gabriel in Jewish thought.
  • The mother became pregnant by virtue of the breath of life being sent into her. The breath of life in question was Kneph, a concept depicted anthropomorphically (like Mediaeval depictions of death) rather than a deity, which Plutarch states had the same meaning to the Egyptians as Pneuma had to the Greeks. Pneuma translates as spirit, so one can argue that the mother is being depicted as becoming pregnant by the holy spirit, which Christians usually argue is how Mary became pregnant.
  • The mother became pregnant while remaining a virgin (particularly as Neith was believed to have given birth to the first males, and hence existing before them). The doctrine of Virgin Birth is prominent in early Christianity.
  • The mother is human (at least in the Luxor carving)
  • There is a star which signifies his birth. In the Jesus narrative this is the Star of Bethlehem, which isn't identified very clearly and there is much debate as to what it was meant to refer to. In the Osiris-Horus narrative this is Sothis, a not-completely identified star generally thought to be the same as Sirius. Sirius gained its importance in relation to Osiris-Hours as its first appearance each year co-incides with the date of the annual Nile flooding. Sirius reaches its highest Zenith on January 6th, the day that some ancient Christian traditions (including modern Eastern Orthodox churches) believe Jesus was born.
  • Three visitors aim for a star, indicating where the birth is, and after the birth the three visitors each give gifts; in the Jesus narrative there are three gifts and an unidentified number of visitors (who are Magi), the number of visitors simply being a very long-standing tradition; in the Osiris-Horus narrative the three visitors are anthropomorphisms of the three stars in the belt of the constellation Orion, which point directly towards Sirius, and were named Mintaka, Anilam, and Alnitak (more accurately, consonant-only records name them as MNTK, ANLM and ALNTK, and Egyptologists estimate the full spelling).
  • Being placed in a manger - according to luke 2:7 Jesus rested in a manger shortly after his birth. Horus was also said to have been placed in a manger as a baby, though in earlier times the feature had been attributed to Ra instead, having transferred to Horus when the identities of Horus and Ra merged as Ra-harakhty; the belief originated due to the Egyptian word for manger, Apta, being a homonym for the Egyptian word for mountain peak, a location that Ra, as a solar deity, was considered to have been born at. The Egyptian belief concerning Horus/Ra's birth in a manger was so prominent that mangers were for a time annually paraded around the streets in a festival celebrating the Sun.
• Birth town - Horus was, by the first century, considered to have been born at Heliopolis, the main centre of his cult. Heliopolis had been the Egyptian capital and winter grain store, and hence was regarded as the house of bread (several copies of the Book of the dead refer to it by this name). In Hebrew, house of bread is Bethlehem, the same name as the town that Jesus was said to have been born in. The narratives explaining why Jesus came to be born in Bethlehem but didn't grow up there are often regarded by critical scholars as peculiarly contrived (and don't seem to agree), suggesting non-historicity, particularly as a number of archaeologists think that the Palestinian Bethlehem didn't even exist during the first century.
• The feeding of the multitude - a similar narrative is told of Horus in some versions of the Book of the Dead, as Horus was the patron deity of Heliopolis, at one point the Egyptian capital, and hence grain store, the source of bread in winter and poor harvests.
• The raising of Lazarus - many versions of the Legend of Osiris and Isis see Horus as having raised Osiris from the dead. However, Elijah raised a child from the dead according to an account in Kings, so such an event also had origins in Judaism.
  • In Egyptian Osiris was named A-S-R (as a consonantal language, vowels were not written down), thought to be pronounced Aser or Asar (Osiris is the Greek version of the name), and by merely adding Hebrew theophory to convert it to a normal Hebrew name, and adding a standard Greek suffix to then convert it to the Koine Greek of the New Testament, one arrives at Elazaros; by a standard Elision this turns into Lazaros (Lazarus is how this was translated into Latin for the Vulgate, on which early English translations were based)
  • The location of the resurrection of Osiris is Heliopolis (a Greek name), which the Egyptians called Annu (and the Hebrew Bible refers to as On). Treating Annu as a proper name, and regarding house of Annu as the place, this becomes BethAnnu in Hebrew. This is phonetically near-identical to Bethany in first century Hebrew (u and y being difficult to distinguish, in the same way as modern Japanese speakers find r and l difficult to distinguish), which is where Jesus is said to have raised Lazarus.
• The divine opponent - the similarity in name between Satan, the adversary of Jesus in the narrative of his temptation, and Set, the adversary of Horus, has not been lost on advocates of the Jesus as myth position. Among the narratives describing the contest between Horus and Set for the crown of all Egypt (thought to be based on the historic rivalry between Upper and Lower Egypt) are a number of narratives in which Set tempts Horus to renounce his claim in return for various gifts. Although conservative Christians and Jews argue that Judaism, and hence the idea of Satan, developed completely independently of Egyptian religion, the fact that the ancient Egyptian Empire extended into the Levant during the New Kingdom has lead a number of scholars to argue that a total lack of influence on Judaism from the Egyptian religion is implausible.

The most prominent narratives in Christianity alleged by advocates of the Jesus as Myth theory to be copied from traditions of Dionysus are, conversely, centred on later aspects of Jesus' life:

• The Marriage at Cana, during which the New Testament states that Jesus turned water into wine, is similar to a narrative concerning Dionysus, who was originally the god of wine. In the pre-Christian Dionysus version, priests attending to a wedding at which Dionysus is present bring vessels of water to a building, which is then sealed, and when later reopened the water has been turned to wine. As the earliest surviving record of this miracle of Dionysus is from the late first century writings of Tatius, Christian apologists have argued that it was copied from Jesus' actions. However, as Jesus' miracle is only reported by the Gospel of John, which is dated by most scholars to 95-115 AD, advocates of the Jesus myth counter that the earliest surviving evidence, of a water into wine at a wedding miracle, concerns Dionysus not Jesus. In the case of Dionysus it is his own marriage to Ariadne, which differs from the traditional explanation of Jesus simply being a guest at the Cana wedding, though a minority of modern scholars (and a few notable fiction writers) have suggested the Cana marriage was actually that of Jesus to Mary Magdalene.

File:Dionysus Crucifixion.gif

Amulet which depicts the crucifixion of Dionysus dated to the 3rd century CE, although it authenticity is questioned by many modern archeologist.

• The Passion of Jesus has a number of features which are argued by Jesus-Myth-theory advocates to be borrowed from Dionysus. Just before his actual crucifixion, the narrative portrays Jesus as being tortured - during which his captors make him wear a purple robe and crown of foliage, both of which were said to be ordinarily worn by Dionysus (due to being imperial symbols). According to Christian apologists the temporary similarity is co-incidental and due to universals, but advocates of the theory that Jesus was derived from myth contend that although temporary, the similar appearance during the torture scene was a deliberate reference by the early gospel writers to Dionysus, in a similar manner to plays and dramas when an actor breaks the fourth wall and reveals their disguise to the audience.
  • Apologists would argue that the resurrection of Dionysus/Bacchus was different than that of Jesus, because Bacchus had the help of Pegasus to escort him to heaven.
• In nearly all Christologies, Jesus is a mortal man, but in some way also divine (the most popular Christologies in modern Christianity, including Trinitarianism, argue that he was also fully a deity, while even docetism and adoptionism argues that the divine possessed the mortal). In the play, Dionysus, a deity, comes to earth as a fully mortal man, claiming to have done so in order to make his Godhead manifest to the mortals.
• The return to Jerusalem, subsequent Trial of Jesus before Pilate, and execution, have supposed parallels with an account of Dionysus in a pre-Christian play named The Bacchae. In both the Gospels and the play, the central character (Jesus/Dionysus) rides into the royal town on the back of a donkey and is greeted by crowds waving foliage, is soon after arrested by the authorities, put on trial before the ruler, during which he mostly avoids answering the questions, and is condemned and executed, before returning from the dead. Unlike the later Gospels, the play argues that Dionysus willingly let these things happen in order to later humiliate (and ultimately kill) Pentheus, the ruler who tried him; though some Christian apologists argue that this purpose invalidates the parallel, it is perfectly possible for the Gospel writers to simply have dropped this purpose in order to adopt the narrative for their own aims. It is also possible that Euripides, the author of the play, based his narrative on stories from the Dionysus mystery religion, but, in order to keep the actual teachings of the mystery religion a mystery, and to improve the dramatic appeal, changed the reasoning behind it.

Christian apologists have also argued that since the foliage waved during entry into the town (in Jesus' case being Jerusalem) were palm fronds, rather than the ivy of The Bacchae, this is merely a universal narrative, especially as ivy are plants of religious significance to the Dionysus mysteries, while palms are of national significance to Judaism; their opponents contest that the intertwining of religion and nation in Judaism has meant that the palms are simply the plants which Judaism gives the same religious significance to as the Dionysus religion gave to ivy. Donkeys, and mules, also were strongly associated with Dionysus, in particular due to the Sileni, but they have very little significance to Judaism, and are merely a form of transport.

Mithraism, according to the Jesus-as-myth theory, adds to these further elements of the nativity. While the alleged Osiris-Horus parallels mostly concern the nativity according to the Gospel of Matthew, the alleged Mithras parallels mostly concern the version of the nativity in the Gospel of Luke; this somewhat reflects the groups who appear to be these Gospels' intended audiences - Matthew's audience being closer to Egypt (where Osiris-Horus was prominent), and Luke's being the Hellenic world (where Mithras was more significant):

• Birth in a cave - although modern traditions depict the event happening in a free-standing structure, in early Christian tradition Jesus was depicted as being born in a cave, and the official location of his birth in Roman Catholicism, Islam, and Eastern Orthodoxy, remains the particular cave which lies at the heart of the 4th century Church of the Nativity. This early tradition is thought to derive from the Bible, which does not mention a stable, but instead only refers to the location with a term ambiguously meaning either gathering room (which was an upstairs room) or cave. In Mithraism, Mithras was said to have been born in a cave, which scholars think was an allegory for the universe, as well as a meta-reference to Plato's Allegory of the cave.
• Birth in a stable - though the Bible does not specifically mention an inn or a stable, Jesus is traditionally depicted as having been born in a stable. Though it would be odd for a stable to be placed in a gathering room (an upstairs meeting-room), in Roman Palestine, caves (which are common in the region) often housed stables, and it is plausible that the association between caves and stables lead to the tradition of Jesus being born in a stable. An alternative origin for the tradition is that advocated by supporters of the Jesus-as-myth theory, namely that it originates with the belief that Mithras was born in a stable. Mithras was considered, allegorically, to be a solar deity, and hence was said to have been born during the winter solstice (the darkest point of the year); in the classical era the winter solstice occurred when the sun was in the constellation that was then known as the Augean Stable (and is now named Capricorn). Early Christian apologists admitted the parallel involved, Justin Martyr, for example, stated that Jesus was born when the sun had its birth in the Augean Stable.
• Ox and Ass - Traditionally Jesus' birth is depicted as being accompanied by an ass and an ox, and though this is not mentioned in the canonical Gospels, the tradition is long-standing and has its first written mention in the Arabic Infancy Gospel. Mithras was also, metaphorically, said to be born in the company of an ass and an ox, as aside from Capricorn, the Augean Stable, Auriga was also known as a stable, since in classical times this was the constellation in which the sun reached the summer solstice (the other point on the ecliptic at which the sun's zenith appears to rest for about 3 days); either side of Auriga are constellations that the classical world named Taurus, meaning bull, which in a more feminine scene is depicted as an ox, and Ass of Typhon (now known as Ursa Major). In Mithraism they had a greater significance - the bull was the one which Mithras was destined to slay (and was considered to be a meta-reference to Mithras himself), and Typhon was the closest figure in Greek mythology to Satan, hence his Ass was seen as a sort-of spy.
• Burial in a cave, and subsequent resurrection. The Gospels state that after his death, Jesus was buried in a cave, and subsequent narratives state that after this tomb was found to be empty, Jesus was seen to be resurrected. Mithraism also sometimes held that after the death of Mithras, he was buried in a cave, from where he was resurrected; this is thought by scholars to derive from the earlier idea that Mithras had been born from a rock, an allegory for the universe as seen from outside it, while the cave represented the universe from the inside, hence the death in the cave being the in-universe equivalent to the birth from the rock - thus birth coming from death.

Priorities and Practices

If Christianity had originally evolved as a localised mystery religion, then not only should there be parallels between the scriptural narratives of Christianity and myths from the mystery religions, but there should also be parallels with more outwardly things such as religious rituals, and imagery. The existence of such parallels has been admitted by prominent Christian apologists since ancient times, for example, Tertullian, arguing that the devil had founded the mystery religions, wrote

The devil, whose business is to pervert the truth, mimics the exact circumstances of the Divine Sacraments. He baptises his believers and promises forgiveness of sins from the Sacred Fount, and thereby initiates them into the religion of Mithras. Thus he celebrates the oblation of bread, and brings in the symbol of the resurrection.

Many art historians acknowledge that early Marian Iconography was heavily influenced by Egyptian depictions of Isis and Horus as a baby, veneration of Mary having first rose to prominence among the Alexandrian Christians (Christians based in the see of Alexandria, Egypt); the Jesus-as-myth position goes one step further and argue that this is due to Mary herself deriving from worship of Isis. Historians in general have often argued that many religious rituals, images, and festivals associated with Christianity, are a result of Christianization of elements from earlier non-Christian religions; this has historically lead to some of these features being criticised by certain Christian groups, particularly protestants, as being heathen superstitions, with, for example, the Puritans banning Christmas for this reason. It is the contention of the Jesus-as-myth theory that certain of these parallels (such as the date of Christmas, importance of Sunday, and use of the labarum) are not borrowings, as many historians see them, or co-incidences, as Christian apologists see them, but instead are due to Christianity being just another form of the mystery religions and thus sharing a common source.

The question ultimately comes down to priority - who copied from whom. Although a few modern Christian apologists argue that such parallels as do exist were copied by the mystery religions from Christianity, ancient Christian apologists openly acknowledged that the mystery religions had got there first; however, to the early apologists such as Tertullian and Justin Martyr, this wasn't evidence that Christianity was derived from the mystery religions, but that the mystery religions had been an evil-hearted prophecy of Christianity:

Having heard it proclaimed through the prophets that the Christ was to come and that the ungodly among men were to be punished by fire, the wicked spirits put forward many to be called Sons of God, under the impression that they would be able to produce in men the idea that the things that were said with regard to Christ were merely marvellous tales - Justin Martyr, First Apology

The opponents of early Christianity suggested that Christianity was a result of failure to correctly interpret the mystery religions, and the attempts to circumvent the fact that the beliefs of the mystery religions pre-dated it, by claiming that they were simply prophecies, were cases of simply ignoring the obvious (i.e. ignoring Ockham's Razor). Celsus, a second century anti-Christian writer, wrote that Christianity:

continues to spread amongst the vulgar, nay one can even say it spreads because of its vulgarity, and the illiteracy of its adherents. And while there are a few moderate, reasonable, and intelligent people who are inclined to interpret its beliefs allegorically, yet it thrives in its purer form among the ignorant

More recently, advocates of the Jesus-as-myth theory have argued that the ease with which Christianity was abruptly imposed by the Theodosian decree - the lack of anti-Christian riots, and the smooth change of mithraeums (and other pre-Christian holy places) into Churches - points to a high degree of similarity between Christianity and its main rival at the time (Mithras Sol Invictus). Many historians argue that this similarity was partly due to the influence of Constantine I, life-long chief priest (pontifex maximus) of the Sol Invictus religion, and, according to Christian legend, a convert to Christianity on his death-bed; Constantine viewed variety as a dangerous political risk, and spent a great deal of time standardising things, including convening the First Ecumenical Council in order to resolve a dispute within early Christianity over the nature of Jesus. According to Christian apologists, Constantine was secretly a Christian for much longer than his last breath, and his influence was mostly one way, remoulding the religion of Mithras Sol Invictus to closely mirror Christianity. According to advocates of the Jesus-as-myth position, Constantine did very little remoulding, the two religions had always been similar, due to Christianity being based on that of Mithras Sol Invictus; as Thomas Paine put it: The Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the Sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ in the place of the Sun, and pay him the same adoration which was originally paid to the Sun.

Parallels with Astrology

The Great Year

The Great Year (or Astrological Age) is measured by the Sun's apparent backward movement or precession through the Zodiac. (Note: The Gregorian Calendar ignores the precession of the equinoxes and determines that the Sun enters the first degree of Aries at every vernal equinox.) The sign which represents the current age is determined by the constellation of the zodiac that the sun actually occupies at the vernal equinox. The rate at which the Sun progresses through each of these signs is thought to have first been measured by the Greek astronomer Hipparchus, in the 2nd century BCE. The discovery of the precession of the equinoxes was a revelation that some interpreted as being the act of a powerful new god moving the entire universe.

It has been proposed that the cult of Mithraism was inspired by Hipparchus' discovery of precession. The centerpiece of this theory is the tauroctony an image of Mithras sacrificing a bull. According to David Ulansey, the tauroctony is a star chart. Mithras is the constellation Perseus, and the bull is Taurus, a constellation of the zodiac. In an earlier astrological age, the vernal equinox had taken place when the Sun was in Taurus. The tauroctony, by this reasoning, commemorated Mithras-Perseus ending the "Age of Taurus" about 2000 BCE.

In turn it has been suggested that Christianity was inspired by the dawning of the Age of Pisces, which is symbolized by the fish. The fish has also been used as a symbol used in Christianity. The use of the fish to symbolize Christianity actually predated the use of the crucifix. In Matthew 14:17, Jesus is said to have fed the multitudes with only two fishes. The constellation of Pisces is symbolized by two fishes.

This comparison of Jesus' life to the Astrological Ages continues even further, all the way into the age which follows Pisces, the Age of Aquarius. Chapter 22 of the Gospel of Luke describe the events which occur prior to Jesus' arrest and subsequent crucifixion. The disciples ask Jesus where they shall meet him to prepare for his final Passover (The Last Supper). In Luke 22:10 Jesus responds, "Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher of water; follow him into the house where he entereth in." Some proponents of the Jesus Myth interpret the "man bearing a pitcher of water" to be a direct reference to the symbol of Aquarius, the water-bearer. And furthermore, Jesus' instructions to his followers that they follow this man "into the house where he entereth in" seems to strengthen the connection to astrological symbolism. Proponents claim that Jesus is literally stating that at Jesus' last Passover (the end of the Age of Pisces) that his followers should continue on and follow the man with the water pitcher (Aquarius) into the “house where he entereth” (the next Astrological Age).

The very last line of the Gospel of Matthew alludes to this idea that Jesus is the ruler of the Age of Pisces (and that this reign will eventually end and lead to a "New age") when he states in verse 28:20, "I am with you always, even to the end of the age". The are several other references to the "end of the age" and the "coming age" spread throughout the gospels -- two in Mark, six in Matthew, and three in Luke (depending on the translation). Some proponents of the Jesus Myth theory interpret these phrases as a reference to various Astrological Ages. However these passages have traditionally been interpreted as referring to "The end of the world" and the Second coming of Christ.

Twelve Apostles

The Twelve Apostles, according to Jesus Myth proponents, represent the twelve signs of the zodiac, although attempts to relate all their names to particular signs have not been very successful.

However, the standard explanation among scholars is that "The Twelve" is not a coincidental name for the number of apostles that were part of Jesus' disciples. According to biblical scholar Dennis C. Duling, "The number twelve symbolizes a new Israel." Most scholars concur that the Twelve Apostles represent the new twelve tribes of Israel. But even if this is the case, the connection to astrology is not completely lost since some scholars believe that the legend of the twelve tribes was originally derived from the twelve signs of the zodiac.

Astrological Houses

In the King James Version of the Bible, John 14:2 states, "In my Father's house are many mansions". The proponents of the Jesus myth point out that, taken from a literal interpretation, this makes little sense. How can a house contain many mansions? They claim that the correct translation should be rendered as "In my father's abode are many houses", which they interpret as being a direct reference to the houses of the zodiac.

Timeline of Jesus' Life

Jesus in said to have started his ministry at the age of 30, which some have connected to the fact that each sign of the zodiac occupies 30 degrees of the elliptic. Jesus' ministry is said to have lasted for one year, similar to the Sun completing its circuit of the Zodiac in a year. The story of Jesus' life is circular, in that he is said to have been born in a cave, and then is finally laid to rest in a cave. This tradition of Jesus being born in a cave is preserved in several of the apocryphal Infancy Gospels, such as the Protevangelion of James and the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew. However, neither of the canonical accounts of Jesus' life mentions him being born in a cave. Matthew says he was born in a house, and Luke claims he was born in a stable (which may or may not have been in a cave). However, near Bethlehem there are many natural caves. It was easier, safer and more economical to block off a cave’s entrance to shelter animals than to build a freestanding stable. The tradition of Jesus being born in a cave is so strong that in the fourth century, St. Helena built the Church of the Nativity over the cave said to be the birthplace of Jesus.

Resurrected after three days

Jesus is said to be resurrected after 3 days in the cave. We celebrate Jesus' birthday on December 25, three days after the Winter Solstice of December 22. The Sun "dies" on December 22, the Winter Solstice, the shortest day of the year. As the sun's declination shifts from a southerly direction to a northerly direction at the time of the solstice, it appears to nearly halt completely. Three days after the solstice the Sun rises 1/10 of a degree further North, just barely detectable by observing shadows. It can then be said that the Sun has been resurrected after being "dead" for three days, and has now been reborn to begin the next year.

It should be noted that no early records mention the date of Jesus' birth and that the date was agreed upon during the third century CE. At the time, it was believed that Jewish prophets lived in a life cycle that began and ended at their death. Because it was believed Jesus died on March 25th, Christians asserted this was also the date of Jesus' conception (see: Annunciation.) They then added nine months to the date of the Annunciation to determine roughly the day Jesus was born-- December 25th.

Criticism of the theory

The the idea of Jesus as simply a religious meme based on non-Abrahamic myths has recieved strong criticism from biblical scholars and historians. The points below highlight some of these critisisms, but to what degree the dispute is grounded in historical accuracy versus Christian apologetics is unclear.

• The majority of scholarship, including historians, believes there was a historical Jesus The reason scholars give is that for an ancient person and event, there are a relative plethora (by ancient historical standards) of sources from the same century. According to JP Holding, "Support for the "Jesus-myth" comes not from historians, but usually from writers operating far out of their field."
• Most scholars, such as Michael Grant, do not see significant similarity between the pagan myths and Christianity. Grant states in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels 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."
• Parallels between Christianity and Mystery Religions are not considered compelling evidence by most scholarship. According to a Christian apologist, Michael Licona, has summed up the viewpoint of this era's historiography:

Most scholars have abandoned the religionsgeschichtliche or what was known as the “history of religions” school that regarded parallels as conclusive signs that Christianity was cut from the same cloth as ancient myth. Further research has revealed that many of the parallels to which they refer postdate the Gospels.

• Celsus, a first century critic of Christianity, accused Jesus of being a bastard child and a sorcerer. He never questions Jesus' historicity even though he hated Christianity and Jesus. He is quoted as saying that Jesus was a "mere man." Furthermore, there is debate whether Suetonius, who wrote in the second century, made reference to Christianity existing in 41 CE, though the majority of scholars believe that the reference cannot be interpreted in this fashion. Lastly, there are passages of debatable significance from the historian Tacitus and satirist Lucian of Samosata, which credit "Christ" as the founder of Christianity.
• Proponents of the Jesus Myth disagree with the notion that the Apostle Paul did speak of Jesus as a physical being. This is largely an argument from silence. Furthermore, it is slightly a distortion, because the Apostle Paul contradicts this viewpoint. He claims that Jesus "descended from David according to the flesh", took "the form of a slave, being born in human likeness, And being found in human form,". Paul also states that " God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law." and "the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being." Furthermore, he invokes the "command," "charge," or "word" of Jesus four times in the Epistles. Scholars believe that the apostle Paul did not quote Jesus more often, because he took for granted that Christians knew what Jesus said. Jesus Myth proponents believe this is a weak argument from silence.
• The Epistle to the Hebrews is debatably an early source, which some, but not all, scholars put before 70 CE. 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 and even speaks.

See also

• Jesus and history
• Historicity of Jesus
• John of Gamala
• Jus Asaf
• Radical Criticism
• life-death-rebirth deity
• Harrowing of Hell

References

• Allegro, John M.. 1970. The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross. Hodder and Stoughton. ISBN 0-340-12875-5
• Allegro, John M. 1992. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth. Prometheus Books; 2nd revised edition. ISBN 0-87975-757-4
• Atwill, Joseph. 2005. The Roman Origins of Christianity.
• Atwill, Joseph. 2005. Caesar's Messiah.
• 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, MN: The Liturgical Press.
• Doherty, E.,The Jesus Puzzle (1999; revised edition 2000) ISBN 0-9686014-0-5
• Ellegard, Alvar. 1999. Jesus: One Hundred Years Before Christ. London: Century.
• France, R. T. The Evidence for Jesus.
• Freke, T. and Gandy, P. The Jesus Mysteries, by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, ISBN 0-609-80798-6
• McDowell, Josh & Wilson, Bill. He Walked Among Us, Evidence for the Historical Jesus. San Bernardino, CA, Here’s Life Publishers, Inc. 1988, ISBN 0-89840-230-1
• Meier, John P., A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, New York: Anchor Doubleday,

v. 1, The Roots of the Problem and the Person, 1991. ISBN 0-385-26425-9

v. 2, Mentor, Message, and Miracles, 1994. ISBN 0-385-46992-6

v. 3, Companions and Competitors, 2001. ISBN 0-385-46993-4

• Price, Robert. 2004. New Testament Narrative as Old Testament Midrash. In Neusner, J., Avery-Peck, A., eds. The Encyclopedia of Midrash: Biblical Interpretation of Formative Judaism.
• Price, Robert. 2003. The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man. Amherst, NY: Prometheus.
• Price, Robert. 2000. Deconstructing Jesus. Amherst, NY: Prometheus.
• Sanders, E. P. 1995. The Historical Figure of Jesus. Penguin.
• Sherwin-White, A. N. 1963. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. Oxford.
• Theissen, G., and Merz, A. 1998. The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide. Minneapolis: Fortress
• Thompson, Thomas L. 2005. The Messiah Myth. New York: Basic Books.
• Van Voorst, Robert E. 2000. Jesus Outside the New Testament. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
• Wells, G. A. 1999. The Jesus Myth. Peru, IL: Open Court (Carus Publishing)
• Wells, G. A. The Historical Evidence for Jesus.
• Whealey, Alice. 2003. Josephus on Jesus: The Testimonium Flavianum Controversy from Late Antiquity to Modern Times. Peter Lang Publishing.
• G.L. Borchert, "Docetism" in Elwell Evangelical Dictionary; Catholic Encyclopedia, 1909/2003; D.C. Duling & N. Perrin, The New Testament: Proclamation and Parenesis, Myth and History, 1993; "Docetism", Encyclopædia Britannica, 2006; J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines. "Book 24 - John's Second Letter". J.B.Phillips, "The New Testament in Modern English", 1962 edition.

External links

Supporting a Jesus-Myth theory

• Earl Doherty's Website
• POCM: Pagan Origins of the Christ Myth
• "The Origins of Christianity and Search for the Historical Jesus Christ" by Acharya S
• "Earliest Christianity" by G.A. Wells
• "Did Jesus Exist? Earl Doherty and the Argument to Ahistoricity" by Richard Carrier
• Jesus never existed by Kenneth Humphreys
• Forgery In Christianity (1930) by Joseph Wheless
• "Refuting Missionaries" by Hayyim ben Yehoshua
• Jesus (was) is a Fictional character (not "historical") Rt. Rev. Lino Sanchez
• The Non-Historicity of Jesus Michael Hoffman
• Hermann Detering's RadikalKritik (partially in German)
• Debunking the Historical Jesus by Dan Barker
• Did Jesus Really Rise From The Dead? by Dan Barker - Why the Jesus Myth is respectful of the first Christians.
• "The Jesus Mysteries" by Freke/Gandy
• CNN interview Freke and Gandy on "The Jesus Mysteries"
• "The Jesus Mysteries" - book summary/excerpt
• Debunking the "Da Vinci Code" Debunkers and the Jesus Myth Overview of the case against a historical Jesus, including many pictures
• Christian Objections Similarity of Christian myths to Pagan religions
• Origins of Christianity Reinventing the pagan godman
• Wilson's Almanac Comparison of Pagan Gods to Jesus Myth

Supporting a historical Jesus

• Historical Jesus A logical reconstruction Argues that Jesus was a Guerilla chieftain opposed to Rome.

Critical of the Jesus-Myth theory

• "A History of Scholarly Refutations of the Jesus Myth" by Christopher Price (A Christian apologetic website)
• "Did Jesus Exist" a page devoted to the issues raised by the Jesus Myth
• Walk Like an Egyptian A comparison of Osiris, Horus, and Jesus.
• "Shattering the Jesus Myth" by J.P. Holding
• "Answering Acharya S" by Mike Licona
  • Acharya rebuttal to Licona
• Critique of Two Major Points of The Jesus Puzzle by Bernard D. Muller - Argues against the crucifixion in heaven and Jesus as not an earthly human.