Dr. Robert Eisenman
My friend Dr. Robert Eisenman, a well-known Bible scholar, has just scored a major coup—albeit one that may not be immediately recognized—in his article for the Huffington Post entitled, "Redemonizing Judas: Gospel Fiction or Gospel Truth?" In this essay, Dr. Eisenman—a main mover behind getting the Dead Sea Scrolls released to the public—explores the propensity of scholars, journalists and other writers to simply accept a priori the story of Jesus Christ in the New Testament as factual and to proceed from there. His analysis—"castigation" may be a fairer term—is prompted by a recent New Yorker article regarding the Gnostic text "The Gospel of Judas," which created such a brouhaha some years ago when it was given a great deal of publicity.
The Gospels as "history?"
In his article, Eisenman approaches to the heart of the issue—one that I have been writing about for almost two decades—in describing his eloquent outburst at a National Meeting of The Society of Biblical Literature, which he terms "the premier organization in this field." Rising at the end of a discussion of the Gospel of Judas by various scholars, Eisenman remarked:
What makes you think any are historical and not just retrospective and polemical literary endeavors of a kind familiar to the Hellenistic/Greco-Roman world at that time? Why consider one gospel superior to the another and not simply expressions of retrospective theological repartee of the Platonic kind expressed in a literary manner as in Greek tragedy? The Gospel of Judas was clearly a polemical, philosophical text but, probably, so too were most of these others. Why not consider all of them a kind of quasi-Neoplatonic, Mystery Religion-oriented literature that was still developing in the Second Century and beyond, as the Gospel of Judas clearly demonstrates?"
Eisenman next relates:
A sort of hushed silence fell on the three hundred or so persons present in the audience, because there was a lot of interest in this Gospel at that time, as I continued: 'Why think any of them historical or even representative of anything that really happened in Palestine in the First Century? Why not consider all Greco-Hellenistic romantic fiction or novelizing with an ax-to-grind, incorporating the Pax Romana of the earlier Great Roman Emperor Augustus, as other literature from this period had and, of course, the anti-Semitism and anti-Jewish legal attachments which were the outcome of the suppression of the Jewish War from 66-73 CE?'"
As if that estimation were not enough, Eisenman continued:
The Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans were masters of such man/god fiction and the creation of such characters as Osiris, Dionysus, Asclepius, Hercules, Orpheus, and the like as the works of Hesiod, Euripides, Virgil, Ovid, Petronius, Seneca, Apuleius, et. al. demonstrate. Why not consider all of this literature simply part of this man-God/ personification literature, in this instance incorporating the new Jewish concept of 'Salvation'— 'Yeshu'a'?"
Bravo, Dr. Eisenman! In these three pithy paragraphs, you have epitomized what I call, "The Christ Conspiracy," the title of my first published book, subtitled, "The Greatest Story Ever Sold."
Jesus Mythicism in a nutshell
This thesis, which is called "Jesus Mythicism," evinces that the Christ myth was created by various factions in the Roman Empire, based on certain mythical motifs concerning the numerous gods and goddesses of antiquity, and largely for the purpose of uniting Judaism and Paganism.
Horus and Set
As concerns the issue of Judas specifically, when the subject is studied in depth, factoring in not only the Jewish scriptures but also Pagan writings and traditions, it is obvious that the Judas character is fictional, based on the Jewish people as a whole and designed to play the "heavy" in an old mythical drama predating the common era for centuries. For example, "Judas" takes the role of the Egyptian god Set/Seth in the Horus-Set battle, as outlined in the Egyptian texts as well as the writings of Greek historian Diodorus Siculus (90-27 BCE). In his Antiquities of Egypt, Diodorus recounted that Horus was killed by Set in the form of a scorpion, after which the Egyptian solar deity was resurrected from the dead. As I discuss in my book Christ in Egypt, Diodorus uses the Greek verb anastesai to describe Horus's resurrection—the very same word used in the later Christian texts to describe Jesus's resurrection.
It is highly obvious from Eisenman's comments that this first-rate professional scholar is well aware of the "Christ Conspiracy" thesis, so to speak, and has worked it out quite well. The question is will other academicians follow suit by pursuing this most rational explanation of the origins of Christianity? Eisenman's motivation for expressing this unpopular but logical viewpoint is clear: Jews over the centuries have been unfairly targeted and persecuted by being called "Christ-killers," when in fact the entire story smacks of a fictionalized rehash of the myths of earlier gods, goddesses, heroes and so on. In the end, to continue this fallacious perception of the gospel story as "history" represents a disservice to all peoples, as such a position not only deludes but also prevents us from knowing the true meaning behind the myths.
Sources & Further Reading
Redemonizing Judas: Gospel Fiction or Gospel Truth?
"Gospel of Judas" gives new view of Jesus' betrayer?
The Christ Conspiracy Anthology
Comments
Jesus is an historical character. There is no "conspiracy" for Christ. Historically, man has sinned. Historically, man has offered up sacrifices to atone for sin. Historically, Jesus Christ came as the perfect sacrifice, and as a gift for my sins and yours. It is a gift that you can reject with your own "philosophies" and "great thinking," or you can, out of faith, accept the gift. The only conspiracy is darkness' attempt to deceive. Unfortunately, you have been duped.
you are absolutely right.God bless you.
Ms. Murdock...
Now I remember why you seem so familiar! I didn't put you together with the book until now. I'm glad you chose to sign up with Examiner.com. Welcome!
As always, deeply thought provoking, and I might add to readers such as Monique that one call have 'faith' and still recognize the historical forces that shaped 'religion.'
Monique, there is not a shred of evidence in the historic or literary records for a biblical Jesus. Not a single contemporary ever mentions him, as if he never existed. The mountain of evidence that Jesus is based on a myth may be found in numerous other pre-xian Pagan religions such as Egyptian, for example.
You should view part 1 of Zeitgeist stellarhousepublishing. com /videos. html
If there were any evidence to substantiate the claims by Christians, FAITH, would not be the main requirement. The people being "duped" here are Christians for taking the bible literally and seriously.
So, when will the Huffington Post be interviewing D.M. Murdock aka Acharya S?
stellarhousepublishing. com /videos. html
Her work is fantastic & more people need to be made aware of it as it has much to offer.
Jerri, I'm not sure if you are a historian, but if you were, you would know that the Bible itself is considered one of the greatest historical documents. Scientists and historians have studied it, and in so doing have discovered great things. Dr. William Albright and Craig Blomberg both estimate that all the books of the New Testament were written within 30-50 years after the death of Christ. Every major religion has written evidence of the life of Jesus Christ.
TinaMarie, true enough that we can have faith, even those who do not believe in the One True Living God; however, what your faith is in will make all the difference when you leave this earth. In the book of John, Jesus tells us that there is one way to God, and that is through Jesus Christ. I challenge you each to read the book of John in the bible. It begins with "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and Word was God." Friends, this is not about being right or wrong, it is a matter of eternal lif
Please read, "The Case for Christ," by Lee Strobel. There is evidence outside of the bible for the existence of Christ.
Teramasue, you don't need to rely on a (rather poor) journalist to look at the evidence for Christ outside of the bible. Simply head to the local library, or check out Project Gutenberg for copies of the ancient manuscripts Strobel discusses.
If you do this, instead of relying on some (rather poor) journalist to do the work for you, you may be surprised at what you find. It's a far more complicated and nuanced field than Strobel makes it out to be. You do a disservice to yourself to simply accept his writing at face value.
Monique "the Bible itself is considered one of the greatest historical documents"
Well that's a bold claim considering the fact that even Christian biblical scholars disagree with you on that.
"The Gospels are neither histories nor biographies, even within the ancient tolerances for those genres."
- Dr. John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus
- "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ" (WWJ) (24)
"The gospels are in fact anonymous"
- Dr. Craig L. Blomberg
- WWJ 59
The claims that Mark, Matthew, Luke or John were written in the 1st century CE has never been substantiated by valid evidence.
The 4 gospels aren't mentioned in the literary or historical records until the late 2nd century - that is what the evidence shows. No corroborating evidence Christian or non-Christian mentions the 4 gospels - not even when it would've benefited them. For example, Justin Martyr as late as 150 knew nothing about them. That's because they didn't show up for another 30 years
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.
Yes Monique, as a former saved, baptized Christian of many years I'm fully aware of the bigotry & superiority issues in religion. No thank you.
God/Jesus is suppose to be the creator of the universe, omniscient, omnipotent etc yet, he is incapable of leaving behind credible evidence of his existence which would 1. save Christians from needless persecution & 2. convince billions more non-believers thus, saving more souls. So, either god/Jesus doesn't give a crap about you, or he just doesn't exist.
I apologize, Jerri, apparently I struck a chord. It sucks to be hurt by religion. I know firsthand. I am into the relationship that I have with Jesus. I am into the love that He has always shown me. I am not into man-made religion. Neither was Jesus.
He did leave evidence, my friend. only 30 years after the crucifixion of Jesus, the gospels were written. I'm probably not saying anything you haven't "heard" before. You may already know the facts, but perhaps you just choose to believe in something you can see with your eyes? I'm not judging you.I appreciate the dialogue, as heated as it can be. I don't want to offend you by saying that I will pray for you, but I will lift your name up in prayer to a living God that I know has saved my life and replaced brokenness with love.
By the way, after studying the bible, I have found a "thread of redemption" that exists in every book. A message to foretell of a savior, spoken by several different authors, the same message: Jesus is Lord.
Jesus is a man-made solar allegorical myth.
Monique "He did leave evidence, my friend. only 30 years after the crucifixion of Jesus, the gospels were written."
I'm sorry to be the one to have to tell you that highly respected biblical scholars disagree with you:
"The only definite account of his life and teachings is contained in the four Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. All other historical records of the time are silent about him. The brief mentions of Jesus in the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations; in Jewish writings there is no report about Jesus that has historical value. Some scholars have even gone so far as to hold that the entire Jesus story is a myth…"
- The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (v. 6, 83)
- Who Was Jesus? page 84
The imaginary friend you call Jesus is just the adult version of Santa Claus.
I have researched, as you have. The claims you make are quite debatable. In fact, the historicity of Jesus is accepted by almost all Biblical scholars and classical historians, Mark Allan Powell, Walter Weaver, James Dunn, and Robert Voorst. The New Testament scholar, James Dunn describes the mythical Jesus theory as a 'thoroughly dead thesis'.
Believe what you will, it is your choice. You have known the truth, Jerri, but you traded the truth about God for a lie. "He will use every kind of wicked deception to fool those who are on their way to destruction because they refuse to believe the truth that would save them."
I won't be giving credit to this page any longer, so what you write will be for your own pride. One day the words you write will come back to haunt you.
"The New Testament scholar, James Dunn describes the mythical Jesus theory as a 'thoroughly dead thesis'."
Hoo-wee! That's impressive. What a loopy world where people believe ridiculous things but they laugh at the idea that a guy who was born of a virgin, walked on water, raised the dead and flew into heaven is a MYTH.
What's "thoroughly dead" is the idea that this guy really existed. you have got to be kidding me. Monique, if you'd been around in Egypt, you'd be saying the same things now about Osiris. It's just your conditioning.
But, of course, when that fails, you'll make all kinds of menacing comments. Your "savior" sounds like a mobster.
HORUS IS LORD.
"I am into the relationship that I have with Jesus. "
I guess in your case, Monique, that's better than being into the relationship you have with Xena, warrior princess.
It's nice to have an imaginary friend you can turn to, eh? You sure can't count on the intelligence of real humans, because they don't seem to have a lot. That's obvious from all the religious kooks who think their imaginary friends are real.
Monique "the historicity of Jesus is accepted by almost all Biblical scholars and classical historians"
Yes, Christians love to say those things even though a cursory check shows it to be false. Did you even read this article here above? Comments by Christian biblical scholars:
"One would naturally expect that the Lord Jesus Christ would be sufficiently important to receive ample notice in the literature of his time, and that extensive biographical material would be available. He was observed by multitudes of people, and his own followers numbered into the hundreds (1 Cor. 15:6), whose witness was still living in the middle of the first century. As a matter of fact, the amount of information concerning him is comparatively meager. Aside from the four Gospels, and a few scattered allusions in the epistles, contemporary history is almost silent concerning him."
- Merrill C. Tenney
- WWJ 85-86
* Dr. Tenney is a conservative evangelical Christian who was a professor of Theol
* Dr. Tenney is a conservative evangelical Christian who was a professor of Theological Studies and the dean of the school of Theology at Wheaton College. Tenney was also one of the original translators of the NASB and NIV editions of the Bible.
Monique "One day the words you write will come back to haunt you."
Fear tactics & guilt trips no longer work on people who utilize critical thinking skills.
Thank you, Acharya! A friend from New York spoke glowingly of the article in the New Yorker about gospel Judas. Eisenmann put the author in her place quite convincingly.
I forwarded to her the article in the Huffington Post.
Wow, this really is big news. I wonder if people realize the significance & gravity of a very well respected biblical scholar giving a speech at the National Meeting of The Society of Biblical Literature, which Dr. Eisenman terms "the premier organization in this field" and flat out telling them that he takes the mythicist position. The ramifications of where that could lead is infinite.
freethoughtnation. com /forums/viewtopic. php?t=2160
It's about time the mythicist position be taken seriously and given it's due recognition.
this is good artical but i want to ask you about the last studies about hellenistic literature from 2006 to 2010, please answer me
Monique should read Eisenman. That's the best antidote to mythic ideas surrounding a real figure of history -- Jesus. The Gospel of Judas is not in the same genre. It is based on the correct mystical understanding of Christ: Judas sacrificing HIMSELF to become his Master internally -- spiritually. The misunderstanding of that generated the betrayal myth. SO, one can't lump all these ancient texts together as Eisenman does. Reading modern Sant Mat is the antidote for that: http://rssb.org/
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!