Hello and welcome. This is our introductory article on the topic of Jesus mythicism. By the end of this article, we will have covered the primary methodologies of Jesus mythicism, key figures in the historical development of mythicism, and summary statements of the position from contemporary sources that affirm this theory. This article will not unpack and deal with specific arguments for Jesus mythicism. We will address various arguments in future articles.
WHAT IS JESUS MYTHICISM?
Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and mainstream critical skepticism all affirm that Jesus was a historical person but dispute the content of what's historical. This position is called Jesus historicism. On the other hand, Jesus mythicism (often called the Christ myth theory) asserts that the historical Jesus did not exist. Much like mainstream critical skepticism, the belief system of Jesus mythicists is usually atheist or agnostic; but unlike mainstream critical skepticism which sees Jesus as a historical person who was later mythicized, mythicists see Jesus as a mythical person who was later historicized.
Jesus mythicism is a minority position among potential frameworks for Jesus and the truth about him. However, the primary methodologies of the Christ myth theory have been advanced in recent years by various documentaries garnering millions of combined views Zeitgeist: The Movie, The Pagan Christ, Caesar's Messiah, Jesus Christ Never Existed, The God Who Wasn't There, Religulous, and more which can be found on Youtube and other media platforms. Additionally, Jesus mythicism has been further advanced in recent years by various books and internet apologists.
WHAT ARE THE METHODOLOGIES OF JESUS MYTHICISM?
Three primary methodologies for Jesus mythicism are normally affirmed in unison with various degrees of emphasis for each. They are as follows:
1. The Literary Revisionism Methodology - This methodology utilizes various New Testament and early Christian documents about Jesus to argue that they do not support the idea that Jesus was a historical person. Therefore, Jesus was not initially believed to be a historical person.
2. The Source Criticism Methodology - This methodology utilizes a high degree of textual skepticism about early Christian documents. Most early sources about Jesus are either seen as not authentic or written far too late after the fact to be reliably credible historical texts about a historical Jesus. When it comes to the dating of New Testament books, this methodology almost always sides with proposed "late dates" for when a book was written.
3. The Comparative Religion Methodology - The central points for the story of Jesus are largely copied and borrowed as an amalgamation of ideas belonging to mythical characters from prior religions and cults. In light of everyone agreeing that these prior characters are mythical and not historical, it stands to reason that Jesus is also mythical. By extension, this also makes the primary sources about Jesus increasingly unreliable as historical texts.
We have enumerated these methodologies in order of their use and dependence on Christian texts for the substance of the arguments. Methodology #1 relies the most on Christian texts while methodology #3 relies on them the least. When engaging with the arguments for Jesus mythicism this is the order of priority Christians and others should have.
THE THREE METHODOLOGIES IN CONTEMPORARY SOURCES
We will now look at these three methodologies in action from a small sample of recent contemporary sources arguing for Jesus mythicism.
“Jesus Christ is said to have lived this life here in the first three decades of the century; dying somewhere around the year 33. The gospels all came later. Mark was the first one written and the other three are clearly derived from Mark. Mark mentions the destruction of the Jewish temple which happened in the year 70. So the gospels all came later than that; probably much later.” - The God Who Wasn’t There, 11:28-11:54
“There’s a gap of four decades or more. Most of what we know about this period comes from a man who says he saw Jesus Christ come to him in a vision. He was the apostle Paul formerly known as Saul of Tarsus.” - The God Who Wasn’t There, 11:58-12:12
In these two statements, we see the source criticism methodology. The gospels are argued to be essentially just one source all deriving themselves from Mark. Furthermore, it's briefly stated that these gospels were written "much later" than 70 AD and that our primary source for early Christianity immediately following the years after 33 AD is Paul. This argument sets us up for another methodology.
“Paul wrote lots of letters about Christianity. In fact, he wrote 80,000 words about the Christian religion. These documents represent almost all we have of the history of Christianity during the decades long gap. And here’s the interesting thing; if Jesus was a human who had recently lived nobody told Paul. Paul never heard of Mary, Joseph, Bethlehem, Herod, John the Baptist. He never heard about any of these miracles. He never quotes anything that Jesus was supposed to have said. He never mentions Jesus having a ministry of any kind at all. He doesn’t know about any entrance into Jerusalem. He never mentions Pontius Pilate or a Jewish mob or any trials at all. Paul doesn’t know any of what we would call the story of Jesus except for these last three events, and even these Paul never places on Earth. Just like the other savior gods of the time, Paul’s Christ Jesus died, rose, and ascended all in a mythical realm. Paul doesn’t believe that Jesus was ever a human being. He’s not even aware of the idea. And he’s the link between the timeframe given for the life of Jesus and the appearance of the first gospel account of that life.” - The God Who Wasn’t There, 13:11-14:39
This book was written by Canadian author Earl Doherty who has published multiple books defending Jesus mythicism.
“[3] The early epistles, such as Paul and Hebrews, speak of their Christ Jesus (Messiah Savior) as a spiritual, heavenly being, one revealed by God through scripture, and do not equate him with a recent historical man. Paul is part of a new salvation movement acting on revelation from the Spirit. [4] Paul and other early writers place the death and resurrection of their Christ in the supernatural/mythical world based on Platonic and Semitic cosmology, and derive their information about these events, as well as other features of their heavenly Christ, from scripture.” - Doherty, Jesus: Neither God nor Man, p. 15
In Doherty's work, we see more of the same with the literary revisionism methodology where it's argued that early epistles didn't indicate that Jesus was a recent historical person but was a mythical being instead.
“The pagan “mystery cults” of the period worshiped savior deities who had performed salvific acts. Under the influence of Platonism, these acts came to be interpreted by the cults as taking place in the supernatural/mythical world, not on earth or in history. The Pauline Christ was similarly regarded as undergoing death and resurrection in the heavenly realm. This new Christ belief also shared other mythological concepts current in the ancient world.” - Doherty, Jesus neither God nor Man, p. 15
Doherty also argues with the comparative religion methodology when he says Christianity shared mythological concepts from earlier mystery cults.
Jesus Mythicism: An Introduction, 2015 AD
“The gospel descriptions, which cannot be considered history but texts of faith, are dated decades later. Additionally, some subsequent references by historians, such as Flavius Josephus, Tacitus, and Suetonius have been severely contested and they are considered as forgeries or later Christian additions. Hence, they are not deemed reliable enough to prove the existence of an historical Jesus. Moreover, mythicists believe that even the mere fact that there have been attempts to forge these texts in order to prove the historicity of an event have raised many questions regarding the event’s validity. Another questionable point is also the differences between the figure of Jesus in Paul’s letters and the Jesus of the Gospels. Mythicists claim that Paul does not seem to refer in his work to an historical Jesus, but rather he imagined him as a heavenly figure, whereas his references to crucifixion and resurrection are equally symbolical within the context of the religion he was preaching. It seems that the first Christians considered Christ as a symbolical figure, which is also evident from the conflict generated between the Church and the movement of the Christian Gnostics in the next decades. As a final word, the numerous archetypical similarities that Jesus shares with other pre-Christian deities or historical figures of the Mediterranean Basin or other places must also be noted. To mention only a few: Dionysus-Bacchus, Horus, Mithras, Attis, Apollonius of Tyana, Julius Caesar, Judas of Galilee, Krishna, Buddha, and many others. The stories of these gods are extremely similar to the stories of the Gospels.” - Papageorgiou, Jesus Mythicism: An Introduction, Chapter 1
In Papageorgiou's work, we see all three methodologies when he summarizes the arguments for mythicism. We first see the source criticism methodology when he says the gospels are unreliable because they are not history and are dated decades after the fact. After this, we see the literary revisionism methodology where it's argued that Paul's letters talk about a different Jesus than in the gospels and that Paul didn't believe in a historical Jesus. Lastly, we see the comparative religion methodology where Jesus is seen as archetypically similar to other deities from other religions.
This book was written by American ancient historian Richard Carrier. He is perhaps the foremost apologist for Jesus mythicism so far in the 21st century.
“Our earliest source, Paul, repeatedly says the gospel and teachings of Jesus were known only by revelation and scripture—meaning the ancient Jewish scriptures. There is actually no clear evidence anywhere in Paul that anyone had ever seen Jesus during his incarnation or death.” - Carrier, Jesus from Outer Space, p. 247
“Indeed, in Romans 10:14–16, Paul appears to say those teachings were preached to no one but apostles, that the only way any Jews can ever have heard Jesus is by apostles communicating what has been mystically revealed to them. Which rules out a real ministry.” - Carrier, Jesus from Outer Space, p. 50
Carrier's case for Jesus mythicism heavily utilizes the literary revisionism methodology through various texts within the Pauline corpus to argue that Jesus was not initially believed to be a historical person.
“We know there were Christians who thought the Gospel stories were “cleverly devised myths” and not witnessed events (as attested in the forgery of 2 Peter 1:16–2:3); but we are not allowed to hear anything from or about them.” - Carrier, Jesus from Outer Space, p. 56
“By comparison, the one passage damning the Jews for killing Jesus (1 Thessalonians 2:15–16), which would be the only clear reference to a genuinely historical Jesus in all the letters of Paul, is not credibly authentic. Few scholars believe Paul wrote it, and the evidence is pretty heavily against his having done so.” - Carrier, Jesus from Outer Space, p. 50
We also see the source criticism methodology in this book where Carrier argues that some early Christians rejected the authenticity of the gospels. Furthermore, he rejects the authenticity of 1 Thessalonians which contains clear references to a historical Jesus in Paul's corpus.
“Distilling all of this down to its most basic principles we get the following set of propositions: 1.At the origin of Christianity, Jesus Christ was thought to be a celestial deity much like any other. 2.Like many other celestial deities, this Jesus ‘communicated’ with his subjects only through dreams, visions and other forms of divine inspiration (such as prophecy, past and present). 3.Like some other celestial deities, this Jesus was originally believed to have endured an ordeal of incarnation, death, burial and resurrection in a supernatural realm. 4.As for many other celestial deities, an allegorical story of this same Jesus was then composed and told within the sacred community, which placed him on earth, in history, as a divine man, with an earthly family, companions, and enemies, complete with deeds and sayings, and an earthly depiction of his ordeals. 5.Subsequent communities of worshipers believed (or at least taught) that this invented sacred story was real (and either not allegorical or only ‘additionally’ allegorical). That all five propositions are true shall be my minimal Jesus myth theory.” - Carrier, On the Historicity of Jesus, p. 73
There is another book from Carrier titled "On the Historicity of Jesus" which gives a succinct summary of his Jesus mythicism view. His set of propositions can be largely identified as either the literary revisionism methodology or the comparative religion methodology. However, the source criticism methodology is implicitly included here as how Carrier determines which New Testament books belonged to the "originally believed" view and which belong to the "subsequent communities" as he calls them.
HISTORICAL FIGURES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF MYTHICISM
We've now gone over what Jesus mythicism is, the main methodologies used by those advocating for this view, and briefly covered their usage by recent sources. But these recent sources did not appear out of nowhere. These arguments and methodologies for Jesus mythicism have been developing over the last two to three centuries. In this section, we will trace the main historical figures who have contributed to the development of this view and its methodologies up to the end of the 20th century while providing a brief summary of each person.
Comte de Volney, a French historian and philosopher, was one of the early figures associated with the Jesus myth theory, which suggests that Jesus Christ was not a historical figure but rather a mythical or allegorical one.
In Meditation on the Revolutions of Empires, Volney argued that religious beliefs, including Christianity, emerged from earlier mythologies and astrological traditions. He suggested that Jesus was a symbolic figure derived from solar myths and ancient deities, particularly drawing parallels between Jesus and figures like Osiris, Horus, and Mithras. Volney posited that Christian doctrines evolved from earlier pagan traditions and that Jesus’ story was an amalgamation of prior mythological themes.
Godfrey Higgins was an English antiquarian and mythologist whose work contributed to the Jesus myth theory by arguing that Christianity was largely derived from earlier religious traditions, particularly those of India and Egypt. His most notable work, Anacalypsis, is an extensive and speculative study of the origins of religion, linking Christianity to older mythologies.
Unlike earlier mythicists such as Charles-François Dupuis and Volney, Higgins placed special emphasis on the influence of Indian religious traditions on Christianity. He proposed that figures like Krishna and Buddha were prototypes for Jesus and that Christianity inherited many of its doctrines from Hinduism and Buddhism.
_b_143.jpg/440px-Die_Gartenlaube_(1874)_b_143.jpg)
David Strauss was a German theologian and historian whose work profoundly influenced the study of the historical Jesus, though he was not strictly a Jesus mythicist in the sense of denying Jesus' existence outright. His most significant contribution came through his book The Life of Jesus Critically Examined, in which he applied historical and critical analysis to the Gospels.
Strauss argued that the Gospel accounts were not literal historical records but mythological narratives created by early Christian communities to express theological beliefs. He suggested that many miraculous elements such as the virgin birth, resurrection, and Jesus walking on water were legendary developments rather than factual events.
While Strauss did not explicitly argue that Jesus never existed, his work laid the groundwork for later critical skeptics, including those who would deny Jesus' historicity altogether. His skeptical approach to the Gospel narratives influenced later thinkers such as Bruno Bauer, Arthur Drews, and modern proponents of the Jesus myth theory.
.jpg)
Bruno Bauer was a German philosopher, historian, and theologian who played a crucial role in the development of the Jesus myth theory. Unlike earlier scholars such as David Strauss who argued that the Gospel stories were mythological embellishments of a historical Jesus, Bauer took a more radical position by denying the existence of Jesus entirely. His work challenged the authenticity of the Gospels and laid the groundwork for later mythicist arguments.
Bauer was one of the first scholars to explicitly argue that Jesus never existed as a historical figure. He contended that Christianity was not founded by an individual named Jesus but was instead a literary and ideological creation of early Christian writers.
Kersey Graves was an American writer best known for his book The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors, in which he argued that the story of Jesus Christ was not unique but rather a retelling of earlier myths about dying and rising gods.
Graves was deeply critical of the New Testament’s historical reliability, arguing that the Gospels were filled with legendary material rather than factual history.
Graves claimed that at least 16 pre-Christian figures, including Krishna, Mithras, Horus, and Osiris, shared striking similarities with Jesus. He argued that many elements of the Christ narrative such as the virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection, and miracles were borrowed from these earlier myths.
Robertson believed that Christianity was primarily shaped by Paul rather than by an actual historical Jesus. He argued that the earliest Christian writings, particularly Paul’s epistles, lacked references to a historical Jesus, which he saw as evidence that Jesus was originally a mythical or allegorical figure.
Robertson critically examined the New Testament and concluded that the Gospel stories were literary creations rather than historical records. He suggested that early Christian writers constructed the life of Jesus by weaving together elements from Jewish scripture, pagan myths, and existing religious motifs.
Arthur Drews was a German philosopher and scholar who became one of the most prominent advocates of the Jesus myth theory in the early 20th century. His most influential work, The Christ Myth, argued that Jesus Christ was not a historical figure but a mythological construct shaped by early Christian communities.
Drews contended that the Jesus narrative was constructed from pre-existing mythological and religious traditions, particularly Greco-Roman mystery cults, Jewish messianic expectations, and earlier dying-and-rising gods like Osiris, Mithras, and Dionysus.
Like Bruno Bauer and J.M. Robertson before him, Drews emphasized that the letters of Paul—the earliest Christian writings—contain almost no references to a historical Jesus. He suggested that Paul’s Christ was originally a celestial, mythical savior figure rather than a real person who had lived on Earth.
Wells contended that the Gospel accounts of Jesus' life were written much later than commonly believed and were filled with legendary material. He argued that they were not eyewitness accounts but theological narratives shaped by religious communities decades after the supposed events.
“I think the fundamentals of the Christ Myth theory have long been understood and remain firm. What has been refined or modified since the nineteenth century are the various explanations for the Gospels and Christian beliefs. If you look at the Christ Myth arguments of Robert M. Price, G. A. Wells and Earl Doherty, you find the fundamentals were established at least as early as the mid nineteenth century by the likes of Bruno Bauer.” - Papageorgiou, Jesus Mythicism: An Introduction, Chapter 3, Interview with Neil Godfrey
In Papageorgiou's introduction to Jesus Mythicism, prominent mythicist Neil Godfrey summarizes the development of mythicism in agreement with what we've laid out. The nineteenth century is roughly the starting point of the theory as a coherent view and it's been "refined or modified" since then. Bruno Bauer is also mentioned as one of the primary historical figures who established the fundamentals of Jesus mythicism.
CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY
We've now looked at what Jesus mythicism is, the methodologies behind this theory, the usage of these methodologies in contemporary sources, and the key historical figures. In the future, we will unpack and interact with various arguments for Jesus mythicism. For now, we hope this has been an insightful introduction to the topic.
Thanks for reading. That concludes this article.
No comments:
Post a Comment