The Jesus myth - an interesting take on Christianity [LONG]
Posted: Thu 06 Jan, 2005 16.22
I'm not saying that I necessarily believe any of this (I don't know that much about Christianity anyway), but it makes interesting reading. Enjoy...
[START]
The notion of a god-man named Jesus as saviour of humanity is central to Christianity. Jesus on the cross is the icon of Christianity. Jesus is considered the most holy man in the Christian tradition.
Without belief in Jesus, the Christian religion loses all justification for its existence. As such, it becomes of vital importance to examine what is claimed about the Biblical Jesus and to evaluate these claims. Compounding this ideological importance, recent events in theology like the Jesus Seminar have put into question the deeds of the Biblical Jesus.
What exactly does the Bible claim that Jesus did? The most striking feature of Jesus' life is the incredible scope of the miracles he is said to have participated in. He is claimed to have turned water into wine and materialized loaves and fishes to feed thousands after thousands, to have walked on water and tamed the storm, exorcised demons and cured the masses, and raised the dead; and he was publicly judged, crucified, and resurrected (for a complete list with verses, see The Miracles of Jesus Christ). He was born of a virgin, was entombed and rose from the dead after three days, and ascended to Heaven.
The story of Jesus has many exact parallels to earlier god figures
One problem of these claims is that they are far from original. All of Jesus' attributes and miracles were already present in earlier myths. Mithraism, a religion that co-existed with Christianity but began much earlier, is the best example of this. Mithra was born of a virgin, his birth was celebrated on December 25th, performed miracles with 12 disciples, held a last supper, resurrected after three days on the spring equinox, and ascended to Heaven.
Also, Zoroaster, Horus, Krishna (member of the Hindu trinity), Bacchus, Prometheus, Indra, and a great deal of other deities or legendary characters were born by virgin birth and shared many other attributes with Jesus. Empedocles was reported as preaching, curing illnesses, controlling the storms, and raising the dead. Dionysus had a last supper. Bacchus turned water into wine. Osiris died and was resurrected. And so on and so forth. In fact, some early Christians condemned the idea of the crucifixion because it was considered pagan !
These other myths are a strong indication of the origins of the Jesus myth, if it is indeed a myth. But if Jesus did exist, then these claims would be irrelevant. Therefore we must examine the evidence.
Where is the evidence that Jesus existed?
But the problem here is that there is no evidence. No contemporary evidence (let alone credible contemporary evidence) has ever been proposed for the existence of Jesus.
Even the Gospels are widely admitted to having been written after Jesus' death. According to the evidence we have within the text itself, the earliest gospel - the Gospel of Mark - was probably written between 70 and 75 CE, although Catholic sources claim the date was closer to 50 CE. Either way, it was clearly written after Jesus died, supposedly 33 CE.
As for historical sources, only one of them is reported to have been written during the first century - Josephus' "Antiquities", in 90-95 CE. His two short mentions of a man named Jesus who had disciples and did good works are under heavy controversy, and recently, the discovery of the probable original of "Antiquities" shows that one of the two passages was an interpolation. Even if all these objections are false, Josephus cannot be a contemporary source.
Thallus is also reported as having talked about the crucifixion of Jesus, but this is only known second-hand, and critics claim that he said nothing about Jesus.
Such a deafening silence on the existence of any other historical figures would be extremely suspicious. In the case of an earth-shaking messiah who raised the dead and fed the multitudes, clearly we should find masses of testimonies and evidence, but we find none. It is clearly an argument for the non-existence of Jesus.
But the clinching evidence is that even Christian leaders considered Jesus purely as a mythical figure and did not know anything about his life.
Early Christian thought on Jesus
"In the first half century of Christian correspondence, including letters attributed to Paul and other epistles under names like Peter, James and John, the Gospel story cannot be found. When these writers speak of their divine Christ, echoes of Jesus of Nazareth are virtually inaudible, including details of a life and ministry, the circumstances of his death, the attribution of any teachings to him. God himself is often identified as the source of Christian ethics. No one speaks of miracles performed by Jesus, his apocalyptic predictions, his views on any of the great issues of the time. The very fact that he preached in person is never mentioned, his appointment of apostles or his directive to carry the message to the nations of the world is never appealed to. No one looks back to Jesus’ life and ministry as the genesis of the Christian movement, or as the pivot point of salvation history."
The Jesus Puzzle, by Earl Doherty (Journal of Higher Criticism, Fall 1997)
We may add that Paul himself didn't know about the virgin birth. In Romans 1:1-3, he claims that Jesus was the son of Joseph, who was established as a descendant of David.
Considering all these facts, the truth is clear: there never was a Jesus who did these miracles and was resurrected. Jesus started as a myth and later became an object of worship. Regardless of whether we believe in God or not, the religion of Christianity, insofar as it is based on the existence of Jesus, is pure historical absurdity. The doctrine of Jesus' existence is a Big Lie (i.e. an absurdity repeated again and again to enforce belief).
How come these people had never heard of Jesus?
Here is a short list of writers and historians who lived within the same century as the Jesus myth. Remember that of all these, only one (Josephus) is said to have written anything about it, and it is decried by most scholars as an interpolation :
Caius Suetonius, Josephus, Philo-Judæus, Seneca, Pliny Elder, Arrian, Petronius, Dion Pruseus, Paterculus, Juvenal, Martial, Persius, Plutarch, Pliny Younger, Tacitus, Justus of Tiberius, Apollonius, Quintilian, Lucanus, Epictetus, Hermogones, Silius Italicus, Statius, Ptolemy, Appian, Phlegon, Phædrus, Valerius Maximus, Lucian, Pausanias, Florus Lucius, Quintius Curtius, Aulus Gellius, Dio Chrysostom, Columella Valerius Flaccus, Damis, Favorinus, Lysias, Pomponius Mela, Appion of Alexandria, Theon of Smyrna, Justus of Tiberias
(John E. Remsburg, "The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence", pp. 24-25)
Numerous objections have been raised to such a radical conclusion. The most common one is, "Who would die for a lie?". If Jesus was a myth, then why did the early Christians sacrifice their lives to propagate his words? Why did Christianity persist if Jesus never existed?
Actually, a great number of people die for lies. If we look only at Christians, Jehovah's Witnesses die for their doctrine on blood transfusions, a doctrine which has no basis in Biblical facts.
Outside of Christianity, many cults have used suicide to die for their beliefs. The people of Heaven's Gate died for a lie. The people of Jonestown died for lies. People die because of charismatic leaders, attractive beliefs and social power, all things which have nothing to do with truth. The claim that no one would die for a lie is hypocrite at best.
This objection can be formulated in a more subtle manner. One can claim that Jesus cannot be a myth because the disciples would have known if it hadn't happen, and they wouldn't have died for an absurdity. This is a much stronger argument, but still unconvincing. People can believe things that are reported to have happened near them even if they are false. The Mormons are a good example of this.
Even today, urban legends about specific individuals propagate even though there are obviously people who would have been witnesses to the rumoured events. Besides, this objection would mean that the testimonies of all religions are automatically true, which is clearly unacceptable to the Christian.
An atheistic interpretation
The atheistic objection about the possibility of a human Jesus is much more interesting. Given that the Jesus of the Bible did not exist, they say, a human Jesus could have existed and inspired the myth.
There were plenty of godmen at the time of Jesus, and a great number of them were called Jesus. Only in the New Testament we have Jesus Bar Abbas (in later manuscripts called Barabbas) and Bar Jesus. Josephus identifies a few of these messiahs: Jesus son of Danmeus, Jesus son of Sapphias, Jesus son of Ananus, Jesus the high priest and son of Onias, Jesus son of Gamaliel, Jesus son of Gamala, Jesus son of Saphat, Jesus son of Thebuthus. Couldn't Jesus have been inspired by some of these messiahs?
The most obvious reply to this argument is that we went from a myth to a history, not the reverse. If a human Jesus existed, then the early Christian leaders would have started from those mundane events and built a myth around it. But they did precisely the reverse.
A more fundamental reply is the following: without the Bible, we have no definition of who Jesus was. The Bible is our only source to analyze the existence or non-existence of Jesus. Even if other Jesii did inspire the Jesus myth, it would be completely irrelevant to the fact that the Jesus character as portrayed in the Bible did not exist.
Furthermore, the Gospels contradict themselves on details of Jesus' life, thus making the very definition of Jesus dubious at best. In his book "Losing Faith In Faith", Dan Barker has an Easter Challenge, in which he asks Christians to submit a consistent report of Jesus' last day, according to the Gospels. No one has been able to complete that challenge. The Gospels contradict themselves on such basic things as who visited the tomb, whether it was opened or not, who was at the tomb, the people to whom Jesus appeared, how long he stayed, and where he ascended.
Pagan origins of Christian celebrations
Easter itself is rooted in Pagan origins. The very name "Easter" comes from the pagan goddess "Eostre", the Great Mother Goddess of the Saxons. The bunny (Easter Bunny) was the sacrificial companion of Eostre. Lent, the "hot cross bun" and "Good Friday" are also pagan. The spring equinox had been celebrated long before Christianity existed. In the Mediterranean, at the same time than Christianity existed, the cult of Attis celebrated the spring equinox also.
"About 200 B.C. mystery cults began to appear in Rome just as they had earlier in Greece. Most notable was the Cybele cult centered on Vatican hill... Associated with the Cybele cult was that of her lover, Attis ([the older Tammuz, Osiris, Dionysus, or Orpheus under a new name). He was a god of ever-reviving vegetation. Born of a virgin, he died and was reborn annually. The festival began as a day of blood on Black Friday and culminated after three days in a day of rejoicing over the resurrection. [Christians] used to celebrate the death and resurrection of Jesus on the same date; and pagans and Christians used to quarrel bitterly about which of their gods was the true prototype and which the imitation."
Gerald L. Berry, "Religions of the World" (1956)
[END]
Very interesting stuff indeed.
[START]
The notion of a god-man named Jesus as saviour of humanity is central to Christianity. Jesus on the cross is the icon of Christianity. Jesus is considered the most holy man in the Christian tradition.
Without belief in Jesus, the Christian religion loses all justification for its existence. As such, it becomes of vital importance to examine what is claimed about the Biblical Jesus and to evaluate these claims. Compounding this ideological importance, recent events in theology like the Jesus Seminar have put into question the deeds of the Biblical Jesus.
What exactly does the Bible claim that Jesus did? The most striking feature of Jesus' life is the incredible scope of the miracles he is said to have participated in. He is claimed to have turned water into wine and materialized loaves and fishes to feed thousands after thousands, to have walked on water and tamed the storm, exorcised demons and cured the masses, and raised the dead; and he was publicly judged, crucified, and resurrected (for a complete list with verses, see The Miracles of Jesus Christ). He was born of a virgin, was entombed and rose from the dead after three days, and ascended to Heaven.
The story of Jesus has many exact parallels to earlier god figures
One problem of these claims is that they are far from original. All of Jesus' attributes and miracles were already present in earlier myths. Mithraism, a religion that co-existed with Christianity but began much earlier, is the best example of this. Mithra was born of a virgin, his birth was celebrated on December 25th, performed miracles with 12 disciples, held a last supper, resurrected after three days on the spring equinox, and ascended to Heaven.
Also, Zoroaster, Horus, Krishna (member of the Hindu trinity), Bacchus, Prometheus, Indra, and a great deal of other deities or legendary characters were born by virgin birth and shared many other attributes with Jesus. Empedocles was reported as preaching, curing illnesses, controlling the storms, and raising the dead. Dionysus had a last supper. Bacchus turned water into wine. Osiris died and was resurrected. And so on and so forth. In fact, some early Christians condemned the idea of the crucifixion because it was considered pagan !
These other myths are a strong indication of the origins of the Jesus myth, if it is indeed a myth. But if Jesus did exist, then these claims would be irrelevant. Therefore we must examine the evidence.
Where is the evidence that Jesus existed?
But the problem here is that there is no evidence. No contemporary evidence (let alone credible contemporary evidence) has ever been proposed for the existence of Jesus.
Even the Gospels are widely admitted to having been written after Jesus' death. According to the evidence we have within the text itself, the earliest gospel - the Gospel of Mark - was probably written between 70 and 75 CE, although Catholic sources claim the date was closer to 50 CE. Either way, it was clearly written after Jesus died, supposedly 33 CE.
As for historical sources, only one of them is reported to have been written during the first century - Josephus' "Antiquities", in 90-95 CE. His two short mentions of a man named Jesus who had disciples and did good works are under heavy controversy, and recently, the discovery of the probable original of "Antiquities" shows that one of the two passages was an interpolation. Even if all these objections are false, Josephus cannot be a contemporary source.
Thallus is also reported as having talked about the crucifixion of Jesus, but this is only known second-hand, and critics claim that he said nothing about Jesus.
Such a deafening silence on the existence of any other historical figures would be extremely suspicious. In the case of an earth-shaking messiah who raised the dead and fed the multitudes, clearly we should find masses of testimonies and evidence, but we find none. It is clearly an argument for the non-existence of Jesus.
But the clinching evidence is that even Christian leaders considered Jesus purely as a mythical figure and did not know anything about his life.
Early Christian thought on Jesus
"In the first half century of Christian correspondence, including letters attributed to Paul and other epistles under names like Peter, James and John, the Gospel story cannot be found. When these writers speak of their divine Christ, echoes of Jesus of Nazareth are virtually inaudible, including details of a life and ministry, the circumstances of his death, the attribution of any teachings to him. God himself is often identified as the source of Christian ethics. No one speaks of miracles performed by Jesus, his apocalyptic predictions, his views on any of the great issues of the time. The very fact that he preached in person is never mentioned, his appointment of apostles or his directive to carry the message to the nations of the world is never appealed to. No one looks back to Jesus’ life and ministry as the genesis of the Christian movement, or as the pivot point of salvation history."
The Jesus Puzzle, by Earl Doherty (Journal of Higher Criticism, Fall 1997)
We may add that Paul himself didn't know about the virgin birth. In Romans 1:1-3, he claims that Jesus was the son of Joseph, who was established as a descendant of David.
Considering all these facts, the truth is clear: there never was a Jesus who did these miracles and was resurrected. Jesus started as a myth and later became an object of worship. Regardless of whether we believe in God or not, the religion of Christianity, insofar as it is based on the existence of Jesus, is pure historical absurdity. The doctrine of Jesus' existence is a Big Lie (i.e. an absurdity repeated again and again to enforce belief).
How come these people had never heard of Jesus?
Here is a short list of writers and historians who lived within the same century as the Jesus myth. Remember that of all these, only one (Josephus) is said to have written anything about it, and it is decried by most scholars as an interpolation :
Caius Suetonius, Josephus, Philo-Judæus, Seneca, Pliny Elder, Arrian, Petronius, Dion Pruseus, Paterculus, Juvenal, Martial, Persius, Plutarch, Pliny Younger, Tacitus, Justus of Tiberius, Apollonius, Quintilian, Lucanus, Epictetus, Hermogones, Silius Italicus, Statius, Ptolemy, Appian, Phlegon, Phædrus, Valerius Maximus, Lucian, Pausanias, Florus Lucius, Quintius Curtius, Aulus Gellius, Dio Chrysostom, Columella Valerius Flaccus, Damis, Favorinus, Lysias, Pomponius Mela, Appion of Alexandria, Theon of Smyrna, Justus of Tiberias
(John E. Remsburg, "The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence", pp. 24-25)
Numerous objections have been raised to such a radical conclusion. The most common one is, "Who would die for a lie?". If Jesus was a myth, then why did the early Christians sacrifice their lives to propagate his words? Why did Christianity persist if Jesus never existed?
Actually, a great number of people die for lies. If we look only at Christians, Jehovah's Witnesses die for their doctrine on blood transfusions, a doctrine which has no basis in Biblical facts.
Outside of Christianity, many cults have used suicide to die for their beliefs. The people of Heaven's Gate died for a lie. The people of Jonestown died for lies. People die because of charismatic leaders, attractive beliefs and social power, all things which have nothing to do with truth. The claim that no one would die for a lie is hypocrite at best.
This objection can be formulated in a more subtle manner. One can claim that Jesus cannot be a myth because the disciples would have known if it hadn't happen, and they wouldn't have died for an absurdity. This is a much stronger argument, but still unconvincing. People can believe things that are reported to have happened near them even if they are false. The Mormons are a good example of this.
Even today, urban legends about specific individuals propagate even though there are obviously people who would have been witnesses to the rumoured events. Besides, this objection would mean that the testimonies of all religions are automatically true, which is clearly unacceptable to the Christian.
An atheistic interpretation
The atheistic objection about the possibility of a human Jesus is much more interesting. Given that the Jesus of the Bible did not exist, they say, a human Jesus could have existed and inspired the myth.
There were plenty of godmen at the time of Jesus, and a great number of them were called Jesus. Only in the New Testament we have Jesus Bar Abbas (in later manuscripts called Barabbas) and Bar Jesus. Josephus identifies a few of these messiahs: Jesus son of Danmeus, Jesus son of Sapphias, Jesus son of Ananus, Jesus the high priest and son of Onias, Jesus son of Gamaliel, Jesus son of Gamala, Jesus son of Saphat, Jesus son of Thebuthus. Couldn't Jesus have been inspired by some of these messiahs?
The most obvious reply to this argument is that we went from a myth to a history, not the reverse. If a human Jesus existed, then the early Christian leaders would have started from those mundane events and built a myth around it. But they did precisely the reverse.
A more fundamental reply is the following: without the Bible, we have no definition of who Jesus was. The Bible is our only source to analyze the existence or non-existence of Jesus. Even if other Jesii did inspire the Jesus myth, it would be completely irrelevant to the fact that the Jesus character as portrayed in the Bible did not exist.
Furthermore, the Gospels contradict themselves on details of Jesus' life, thus making the very definition of Jesus dubious at best. In his book "Losing Faith In Faith", Dan Barker has an Easter Challenge, in which he asks Christians to submit a consistent report of Jesus' last day, according to the Gospels. No one has been able to complete that challenge. The Gospels contradict themselves on such basic things as who visited the tomb, whether it was opened or not, who was at the tomb, the people to whom Jesus appeared, how long he stayed, and where he ascended.
Pagan origins of Christian celebrations
Easter itself is rooted in Pagan origins. The very name "Easter" comes from the pagan goddess "Eostre", the Great Mother Goddess of the Saxons. The bunny (Easter Bunny) was the sacrificial companion of Eostre. Lent, the "hot cross bun" and "Good Friday" are also pagan. The spring equinox had been celebrated long before Christianity existed. In the Mediterranean, at the same time than Christianity existed, the cult of Attis celebrated the spring equinox also.
"About 200 B.C. mystery cults began to appear in Rome just as they had earlier in Greece. Most notable was the Cybele cult centered on Vatican hill... Associated with the Cybele cult was that of her lover, Attis ([the older Tammuz, Osiris, Dionysus, or Orpheus under a new name). He was a god of ever-reviving vegetation. Born of a virgin, he died and was reborn annually. The festival began as a day of blood on Black Friday and culminated after three days in a day of rejoicing over the resurrection. [Christians] used to celebrate the death and resurrection of Jesus on the same date; and pagans and Christians used to quarrel bitterly about which of their gods was the true prototype and which the imitation."
Gerald L. Berry, "Religions of the World" (1956)
[END]
Very interesting stuff indeed.
