Jesus as Myth
History of the theories
The term Jesus as myth covers a broad range of ideas, but most share the common
premise that the narrative of the Gospels portrays a figure who never actually
lived.[citation needed] Current theories arose from 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 mythic beliefs in the idea of a "sacrificial king",
associated with the sun as a dying and reviving god and its connection to the
regeneration of the earth in springtime.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. Most recently Timothy
Freke and Peter Gandy have popularized the Jesus-Myth concept int their book The
Jesus Mysteries.
Some, including Freke and Gandy, have suggested that the idea itself is as old
as the New Testament as the Second Epistle of John warns of "many deceivers
[who] are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in
the flesh." This view was shared by Marcion (110-160 A.D.), who compiled the
first version of the New Testament as early as 144 A.D., and whose followers,
the Marcionites, continued until the 4th Century.
Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, in 115 A.D. in the "Epistle to Mary at Neapolis,
near Zarbus," urged her: "Avoid those that deny the passion of Christ, and His
birth according to the flesh; and there are many at present who suffer under
this disease." The Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians in chapter 7 says: "For
anyone who does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is an
antichrist," apparently quoting 1 John 4:3.
Proponents argue that, had Jesus been a true historical figure, there would not
have been such a large number of prominent people who denied his existence, or
an even larger number who defended him. Such controversies never developed over
other contemporary religious figures (e.g., John the Baptist, Paul, James the
Just, Hillel, Honi the Circledrawer). Scholars of the period, however, believe
that these early quotes refer to docetism, the belief that Jesus mystically
appeared to people but lacked a genuinely physical body, rather than a belief
that Jesus was a completely fabricated figure.
Early proponents
The first scholarly proponent of this theory was probably nineteenth century
historian 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. Bauer's 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 Dutch 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 in reality fictions 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 godhead.
By the early twentieth century a number of writers had published arguments in
favour of the Jesus Myth theory, ranging from the highly speculative to the more
scholarly. In Why I Am Not a Christian, Bertrand Russell stated that even if
Jesus existed, which he doubted, the public does not "know anything" about him.
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 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.
While aspects of the theory were influential, most mainstream scholars at the
time rejected the notion that "Jesus" was little more than a fiction, arguing
that the Gospels, Pauline epistles and Acts of the Apostles contained some
reliable information about the events they describe. Since Frazerian theories
about myth have been largely debunked, and the priority of Gnosticism seriously
questioned, the Jesus Myth theory has dwindled in importance.
Recent scholarship
In recent years, the Jesus Myth has had few proponents in academia but has been
advanced by William B. Smith and George Albert Wells (The Jesus Legend and The
Jesus Myth), as well as by Timothy Freke, philosopher and expert on mysticism,
and Peter Gandy, a scholar of mystery religions (co-authors of The Jesus
Mysteries and Jesus and the Lost Goddess), and the noted humanist Earl Doherty
(author of The Jesus Puzzle), a scholar of ancient history and classical
languages.
There are many different views regarding the nature of the early texts. Earl
Doherty argues that Jesus is a historicized mythic figure created out of the Old
Testament, whom the early Christians experienced in visions, as Paul says he
did. Joseph Atwill, on the other hand, argues that Jesus is the deliberate and
malefic creation of powerful Romans of the family of Vespasian, who sought to
divide and destroy Judaism. Hence in Atwill's version, there really is a
historical Jesus, but he is Vespasian's son Titus, and the gospels are a complex
allegory of his conquest of Judea.
Advocates of the Jesus Myth theory do not agree on the dating and meaning of the
early Christian texts, with recent advocates like Doherty holding to traditional
scholarly dating that puts the gospels toward the end of the first century, and
others, like Hermann Detering (The Fabricated Paul), arguing that the early
Christian texts are largely forgeries and products of the mid and late second
century.
Presently, most New Testament scholars and historians consider the question as
resolved in favour of Jesus' historicity. Nevertheless, Earl Doherty has infused
the Jesus Myth theory with fresh vigour with his website and publication of his
book, The Jesus Puzzle. Doherty's treatment of the issue has received much
attention on the internet from both sides of the debate, including favourable
reviews by skeptics Dr. Robert M. Price and Richard Carrier .
Many other scholars also take this position, although it is a minority position
among New Testament scholars. This list includes but is not limited to biblical
scholar Thomas L. Thompson, Theologian and Anglican priest Tom Harpur, Biblical
scholar and historian Randel Helms, Biblical Scholar Robert J. Miller,