A brief explanation of how the Jesus myth was created
Here’s a brief explanation of the subject of mythicism as it applies to Jesus and others. It is well known that, upon contact with the Greek culture as it spread east, into Persia, etc., during the first centuries surrounding the common era, many cultures began applying attributes of Greek gods and goddesses to their local deities. These cultures also increasingly depicted their deities as anthropomorphized, represented in art as human beings, as had been done by the Greeks, Romans and Egyptians in particular. In this way, their gods – mythical beings – while acquiring greater and more supernatural attributes also became further personalized, to the point where they were depicted as men and women having adventures on Earth.
The same process occurred with the Jewish god Yahweh, who acquired attributes from the Greek gods: For example, the Jerusalem temple was shared by Yahweh and Zeus during the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (c. 215-c. 154 BCE). As this pantheon of anthropomorphized gods increased with the expansion of the Roman Empire, which reached from Great Britain to the Near East and included an enormous amount of deities, the Jewish priesthood (and others) did the same thing that everyone else was doing: It anthropomorphized its god, turning the long-awaited messiah of the Old Testament into “God’s son,” just as Zeus had a supernatural son, Hercules. This fictional Jewish godman then served as a “historical” competitor with these other gods, acquiring their various attributions, in order to reign supreme.
Hopefully, that explanation clarifies the process by which the mythical composite figure of “Jesus Christ” in the New Testament came to be. The mythical, spiritual and allegorical was made into the “historical,” not the other way around.
16 thoughts on “A brief explanation of how the Jesus myth was created”
Comments are closed.
Messiah
I have no doubt that the process you describe was widespread.
I do have difficulties with describing a figure as “The Old Testament Messiah” because, although it is said that a greater part of the world expected a savior, I do not see any clearly spelled out references to this figure in that group of books that we call the “OT”
However, in these seperate quotes, such as in Isaiah (Emmanuel = Aryaman, Hermund,…) 50-53, it seems to be stressed that the hero is flesh and blood, familiar with suffering, etc…
The author of “The angel Messiah of Buddhists, Essenes and Christians” believed that the the Jews started to anthropomorphize Yahweh after they made contact with Buddhism.
It may be that the name of the first Darius included Yahweh. (Indra and Soma are called Yahva, or “mighty and swift” (the Pali Buddhist Yakkha); Sans. ‘yajus’, Heb. ‘yhwh’, Per. ‘yavaus’, seen in the name Darius, or, Darayavaus; ‘holding (dar[m]) the law (-jus, P.I.E. -IOUS, Sans Yajus = sacred formula/sacrifice) firmly” and so the meaing of the name Darius may signify something like “Firm Justice”, though it must be noted that the Sanskrit ‘yaj’ most often has the meaning of ‘sacrifice’, ‘to consecrate’, ‘to make hallowed’.
Here a quote from Acharya S that I saw on Facebook that made a load of sense to me:
[quote]”What I demonstrate through thousands of pages put together over a period of almost 17 years online is simple:
The “Jesus Christ” of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and historical. A composite of multiple people is no one. When the mythological and midrashic layers are removed, there remains no “historical” core to the onion.
The “kernel” you are looking for – the nonexistent “historical” core to the onion – is a handful of sayings that are part of a genre called “Logia Iesou” or “Logia Kuriakou.” These “Sayings of Jesus” existed BEFORE the common era and are attributable to many individuals. If we are to hang the gospel story on a handful of pre-existent sayings, we are in some slippery territory indeed. What percentage, then, of the gospel story is supposedly based on a “historical” figure? 10%? How is that stripped figure of relative nothingness a “real person?” As I have demonstrated in my books, practically the entire story can be explained by the stringing together of Old Testament scriptures, Pagan mythological motifs and pre-existent sayings that are part of an ancient genre of “logia.”
I maintain that there remains nothing “historical” under these layers. That’s not an “obsession,” that’s a position based on ALL the evidence and facts, in multiple languages from antiquity into the modern era, which I have spent countless hours bringing to the forefront, despite the constant calumny and misrepresentations of my work.”
– Acharya S[/quote]
It’s all because of nature
:cheer: Because folks from the past can’t explain why such things are happening like why does crops die when the sun is out or why is it my kid is having violent shaking and bleeding in the eyes, they will attribute such to something they can’t see. Of course, the sun (son of god) died on the cross and that made the plants die. But today, plants die when the sun is out because they can’t perform photosynthesis whereas the violent shaking of the kid with red eyes is not caused by a demonic possession but because of Wolf-Parkinson White Syndrome. I don’t really get it why people cling so much to their religions and they got pissed when you proved that the narcissistic carpenter born by a virgin girl didn’t existed. Or sometimes they will dig up to any false evidence and claim that pagan gods didn’t exist but this control-seeking narcissistic carpenter from bethlehem did even all they’ve got is their silly faith.
Ah most reputable experts agree that Jesus existed so you are wasting your time with this crap. And there is plenty of secondary evidence for the existence of the almighty unlike for Zeus, dark matter, and other some such. One has to merely read some Abrahamic religious texts to see how things work and then finding the secondary evidence is a piece of cake. Any Lash La Rue can do it provided he can keep his spurs from jingling and jangling so that means even you bozos can do it. And won’t you future weepers and gnashers ever quit? I mean, I hate NASCAR and think it is fake like the WWE but I don’t spend all my time trying to disparage NASCAR online. Obsession is a terrible affliction.
The mythicist case is not “crap,” but thanks for the ignorant driveby.
What most “reputable experts” think about the subject is irrelevant. In the first place, the debate is framed incorrectly – you didn’t even read the post that’s the subject of this thread, did you? If you did, you apparently did not understand it at all.
The mythical, mystical, spiritual and allegorical existed FIRST, and the history was made AFTERWARDS, just as was the case with these other gods and goddesses, dating back thousands of years.
No amount of special pleading for Christianity, handwaving dismissals born out of ignorance, or personal attacks will serve to negate the scientific facts as I have outlined them above.
The correctly framed debate is not whether or not a “Jesus” person existed – there have been plenty of historical Jesuses ([url]http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/surfeit.htm[/url]) – but whether or not the “Jesus Christ” of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. The bottom line is that, according to the scientific evidence, the answer to this latter question is YES, period. If “experts” have not considered that notion, they are not “experts,” reputable or otherwise.
All the rest of the rambling “crap” you’ve tossed out here is just that – and entirely dismissible in and of itself.
Cheers.
Here is a link for you before you continue your nonsense:
Religion and the PhD: A Brief History ([url]http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=18805[/url])
People have said your objections innumerable times without good reasons.
Obsession, like the one you show here? Why are you commenting – are you obsessed with us nonbelievers?
“Bundle tares and burn them” – is that a threat against us? Do you want to burn us alive?
What a great religion!
I think that quote from Acharya is great and there can be no doubt that the logia sayings came first. However, if the gospel authors could have collected such sayings one would expect that a person could have also repeated these sayings. This would make them unoriginal but not necessarily unhistorical.
Although endless evidences support the conclusion that there is no reliable source testifying to the existence of Jesus, I don’t know that there is a method by which we could deny that a figure very similar to that of the character of Jesus as portrayed in the four gospels, and in other sources, has ever existed or not, but I do believe that Acharya’s work does nail down, or kharax, the fact that there was nothing remotely original about his words or deeds.
Thanks, Dan.
If one is still framing the debate as to whether or not a “Jesus” existed, one hasn’t really read what I wrote in the post above.
There have been plenty of Jesuses ([url]http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/surfeit.htm[/url]), including those who said sayings many before the common era. Many of these sayings were evidently part of mystery schools and brotherhoods, and no single speaker of them is necessary or indicated to have had anything to do with the Jesus of the New Testament.
The correct debate is whether or not the “Jesus Christ” of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple “people” is no one.
As I say, the mythical, mystical, spiritual and allegorical were first, and they were historicized afterwards, just as happened with Mithra and others. There is no “historical” core to the onion, so let us proceed to discussing what the Christ [i]myth [/i]truly represents.
Bundle, aren’t you being slightly (monumentally) hypocritical here? After all, you are the one here harassing Acharya and the rest of us “heathens” and “bastages” with your diatribe. Nobody mentioned you nor is anybody twisting your arm forcing you to post here. You are giving readers of this blog an example of your own bigotry and discrimination with every post you make.
“I could understand if you were doing this because the religious were looking down upon you and forcing you to become religious like in the old days.”
Are you kidding me? We are still the most discriminated against minority even though we are the largest minority of all. Isn’t that precisely what you’re doing here now with your bigotry and biases – discriminating against us?
Study: Atheists Most Discriminated Minority ([url]http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=391[/url])
“bundles them tares and burn them is not a threat. It is a reality.”
The burning of unbelievers during the Inquisition was based on the words of Jesus:
John 15:6 “If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.”
Written by a former preacher of 20 years:
Why Jesus? ([url]http://ffrf.org/publications/nontracts/Why-Jesus/[/url])
Pagan Destruction Chronology ([url]http://www.freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2128[/url])
Here’s a good video giving a basic introduction into the Christ Myth:
Zeitgeist part 1 ([url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZgT1SRcrKE[/url])
Stuck a nerve did I, eh heathens? Well good cause you bastages have been striking nerves left and right for no good reason. I mean, I could understand if you were doing this because the religious were looking down upon you and forcing you to become religious like in the old days. But nowadays you are free to do whatever you like so really there is no reason to do what you do.
And bundles them tares and burn them is not a threat. It is a reality. When everyone dies then the reapers put the fruit of the good seed in the barn while the fruit of the bad is bundled up to become fuel for the fire. Or something like that. I don’t know, read the parable of the tares.
Thanks for the wonderful example of a loving Christian!
Jesus must be very proud.
Another reason to love Christianity, since it produces such lovely people!
I wasn’t talking about burning heathens in this verse. I was talking about what the good master does with heathens in the next verse. In any case, you heathens started it. Jesus came and preached the good word, and him and his followers were persecuted by unbelievers of all sorts for it. And when the followers of Jesus got the upper hand, naturally they turned the tables. So cry me a river with that we are being discriminated against. And why are the worst line steppers always playing the victim? I mean, in Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany, it is not like you atheists treated the religious well.
Heil! or is it Hiel!?
Anyway, bundle, just like you, Hitler was a Christian. At least, according to Hitler, given that Adolf himself would probably be the best spokesman for himself. He stated that he was doing God’s work by exterminating the Jews and all the other niceties he perped on the world. Acharya has written extensively on this. For instance, starting at 5th paragraph, Page 2, Introduction, The Christ Conspiracy. I can really never understand people who say they believe in God and Jesus or whatever deity [i]du jour[/i] is on the menu and ALSO believe that their Deity wants them to be ignorant of the truth. Why do you believe your deity gave you a brain? So you could stay stupid and believe only what hillbilly preachers tell you to believe? Don’t you get it that you are nothing but another victim of the clergy scam, by your own choice? Peck your way out of that shell, dude. There’s a big old world out there waiting to be discovered.
Religion poisons everything …
Anyone interested in seeing a couple of very good theatrical takes on the ancient and somewhat ancient poison of Christianity, the movies Black Death and Agora will make you bleed from your ears.
I wish somebody like David Lynch or Quentin Tarantino had the guts to do a movie about Islam and show it for what it is.
What rock did Bundle crawl out from?
Bundle, you’re sick. The most that anyone has ever proven about the existence of jesus christ is that the myth exists. The best you and your ilk can do is to attempt to bully others with your man-made myths and monsters. You and your position are an offense to humanity. Claims are not realities unless they are supported by verifiable evidence. Show us the verifiable evidence of your claims. Until then stop embarrassing yourself you Cretin.
http://www.christplagiarized.com