• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The Christ Myth Theory

As I note in the comment section of the Hoffmann post I mentioned above, it's now more mainstream to acknowledge that the NT writers were rewriting OT scripture to flesh out the biography of Jesus, and so we have Mark create his crucifixion narrative out of Psalms and Isaiah since Paul doesn't record any details. Matthew presents Jesus as the New and greater Moses.

Spong had actually written about this for years prior. Mark says “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ ; as it is written in the prophets.” Mark immediately interprets John the Baptist as a forerunner of the Messiah (a la Elijah in II Kings 1:8). Mark then clothes John similar to Elijah (Mark 1:6. II Kings 1:8.) He then says John ate locusts and wild honey,the food of the wilderness in which Elijah lived (and so on and so on).

Dr. Kipp Davis recently noted the Dead Sea Scrolls writers did the same thing to flesh out a biography of their Teacher of Righteousness (who obviously existed) rewriting scripture because they saw their Teacher of Righteousness as realizing them.

How did the Christians do it? Again, I think Spong is on the right track:

In the synagogue people heard scriptures read, taught, discussed, or expounded. The vast majority of first century people could not read. So people didn`t own bibles. The Jews had access to their sacred stories in the synagogue. The memory of the historical Jesus could have been recalled, restated, and passed in the synagogue. And the gospel stories may also be shaped in terms of Jewish liturgy. The crucifixion may be shaped against the passover. The transfiguration echoes Hanukkah. Many things are reminiscent of Rosh Hashanah.. So as it says in Acts, they would read from the Torah, then from the former prophets (Joshua through Kings), and finally from the latter prophets (Isaiah through Malachi). At that point the synagogue leader would ask if anyone would like to bring any message or experience that might illumine the readings. So followers of Jesus may have then recalled their memories of him which that Sabbath elicited. This could be where all the midrash/imitation/mixing is coming from. This is what Paul does in Acts (13:16b-41). They went through this process for about forty years before the gospels were written (Spong, Reclaiming the Bible for a Non-Religious World).
Click to expand...

We see mainstream acceptance of the NT writers rewriting scripture to describe Jesus such as in the Jewish Annotated New Testament, though back when Spong was writing these ideas he was considered a radical.
 
Last edited:
One last thing I wanted to say about how the gospels imitate older Jewish (and sometimes Greek) writings is that this process doesn't suggest mythicism but rather is actually exactly the kind of thing we would expect to see if Jesus was a real historical figure the gospel writers wanted to proselytize (convert) you to. I just wrote this short argument up as a quick blog post HERE. Check it out! I think the analogy I use in the post with Donald Trump and the current election cycle is helpful. Bradley and I really appreciate it when you visit us at Secular Frontier, which is the official blog of Internet Infidels / Secular Web. This is also Internet Infidels donation season so if you like what we are doing please consider a small donation! :cool:
 
Screenshot 2024-11-03 12.09.13 PM.png
[...]
“We have absolutely no information, no evidence for communities that stand behind the Gospels, for example,” says Braun. Nonetheless, scholars posit that there are communities behind the gospels for little reason beyond blind assumption.

Stan Stowers’ “The Concept of ‘Community’ and the History of Early Christianity,” which appeared in the journal Method & Theory in the Study of Religion in 2011, offers a convincing critique of the gospel communities hypothesis. I attempted to build upon Stowers’ thesis in my own recent book The Origins of Early Christian Literature (CUP, 2021).
--Response essay by Robyn Faith Walsh "A Jesus Before Paul?". The Religious Studies Project.
Click to expand...
Cf. Willi Braun & Andie Alexander discuss the importance of critical approaches in the study of religion. www.religiousstudiesproject.com?powerpress_p...
 
GakuseiDon said:
The theory of evolution doesn't have to engage with, say, peer-reviewed works supporting intelligent design (they exist!)...
Click to expand...
Like Ehrman's non engagement with peer-reviewed works published by an academic press? (they exist!)...
 
Challenging the consensus understanding of early Christianity
By reexamining the relationship between Paul and the Gospel writers, one can hypothesize a novel perspective on the formation of the New Testament.

Robyn Faith Walsh challenges the traditional narrative of early Christianity and challenges scholars to consider alternative explanations for the origins of the Gospels.

Walsh argues that the Gospel writers may have drawn significantly from Paul's letters, rather than relying solely on oral traditions or other sources.

Key points:
  • **Central Role of Paul** Traditional scholarship often positions Paul as a pivotal figure in early Christianity, leading a diverse and expansive movement. Walsh questions this portrayal, suggesting that Paul's influence may have been overstated.
  • **Gospel Writers and Paul's Influence** Walsh proposes that the Gospel writers may have utilized Paul's letters as a source for information about Jesus. This challenges the common assumption that the Gospels were primarily based on oral traditions or eyewitness accounts.
  • **The Last Supper Narrative** The similarities between Paul's account of the Last Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:23-25 and the Gospel accounts hint at a potential connection. Walsh suggests that the Gospel writers may have incorporated elements from Paul's narrative into their own accounts.
  • **A Simplified Approach** Walsh advocates for a more straightforward interpretation of early Christian literature's origins, focusing on available written sources rather than complex theories of oral transmission and community development. She argues that by overcomplicating the process, scholars often overlook the simplest and most likely explanation.
 
pood said:
I misread this thread as the Crystal Meth Theory. :sadcheer: Now I’ll give it a read.
Click to expand...
Well, check out Acts 9 and tell me if Saul/Paul didn't have a hit off of something when he got religion. He fell over and couldn't stand up (codeine, opioids), heard a disembodied voice (opioids, antidepressants, Ambien, Zyprexa), had temporary vision loss (poppers, heroin, cocaine.) And Acts 9:11 has him recovering on...Straight Street (no, I didn't make that up; consult scripture.) This was one hopped up doper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom