Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
assumes jesus mythic, May 4, 2004
I liked this book, or at least I liked the first chapters which were specifically about the christian myth. The later chapters were less interesting to me. What I most valued in this book was that it assumes Jesus was a mythic figure and that was the thesis I was trying to research. So many scholarly books on this subject are willing to say that the main figures of religions no longer practiced are mythic but when they get to Christianity they won't step up to the plate and say Jesus was mythic too.I thought the idea that the gospels were a morality play originally dramatised, rather than read narratively, was helpful. It's a little book. It's a good place to start if you want to start somewhere where the author isn't afraid of his controversial position.
|
|
|
9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Superb Introduction to Comparative Religion, September 6, 2007
`Pagan Christs' is actually a more approachable (simplified) version of another work, `Pagan Christs: Studies in Comparative Hierology' (1928) and should be viewed in that context. Indeed, the explanatory scholarship and arguments are detailed in the earlier book, and it is logical to assume one would have read it before coming to `Pagan Christs'.
Having said that, I believe the more natural step is to read `Pagan Christs' FIRST - then go to the more compendious volume for the scholarly details, logical arguments etc.
The key or core theme exposed in this book - and Robertson's other effort- is that Christianity is not a unique God-man religion. Many others preceded it and there is solid evidence that Christianity's scribes (who put together the New Testament) liberally copied from the earlier efforts. Some common themes, commonalities include: Jesus was born of a Virgin ("Anahita") like his predecessor Mithra (Mithras), also - like Mithra- Jesus suffered a public execution, was buried, and "ascended" into heaven.
Followers of Mithra consumed a sacred meal ("Myazda") which was completely analogous to the Cathololic Eucharist. In addition, those who refused to partake of the body and blood of Mithras were condemned to everlasting perdition. This is not amazing or astounding since "theophagy" (eating the god) dates far back into antiquity (p. 33). In any case, the eucharist, burial and resurrection are all Mithraic in origin (p. 53).
In his excellent expose article (`How Jesus Got A Life', The American Atheist, June, 1992, p. 46) author Frank Zindler notes even more comparisons, such as: Mithras was born on December 25th (the Winter Solstice, according to crude computations of the time); he was also worshipped on SUN-days (being a solar deity), and the leader was called "papa" (pope) and ruled from the "mithraeum" on Vatican Hill in Rome. In addition, the hat for Catholic bishops - the "mitre" - is derived directly from a similar hat worn by Mithraic priests.
Much controversy surrounds whether there was in fact a "Book of Mithras" - but the evidence seems to be there wasn't. Instead, there were likely excerpted teachings, doctrines that migrated into many other sources, such as the Zendavesta (and specifically the "Izeds" within).
Robertson's thesis, which is plausible, is that Christianity suppressed outward Mithraic teachings when it "absorbed it" (p. 114). He also points to "elaborate treatises" from ancient scholars such as Porphyry setting forth the religion of Mithra in detail, but "every one of these has been destroyed by the care of the Church" (ibid.) Robertson believes as much narrative as didactic material was extirpated. Clearly, it would need to be - since if it remained extant - skeptics might deduce the Christians stole their themes from the Mithraists.
As it is there is more than ample evidence to show they did! (But readers are again referred to Robertson's earlier book)
Of more immediate concern, perhaps, is exactly how a limited Jewish cult led by a fiery Galilean preacher or rabbi, evolved into a world-wide cult of Gentiles - all subscribing to a divine "Savior" myth. Robertson provides a good account in his Chapter Six: `The Quest for the Historical Jesus' (p. 63) but I strongly urge readers - when they go through it - to also have in hand Oxford scholar Geza Vermes' superb book, `The Authentic Gospel of Jesus'.
As Vermes notes (p. 402, Epilog) Jesus "never chose to call himself `Messiah' or `son of God' and "even when others questioned him about his alleged Messiahship he usually declined to give a straight answer". Vermes adds that as for the epithet `Son of God'- disallowing the combined expression "Messiah, the Son of God" in Matt. 26:63 (where the two are obviously used as synonymns) it is NEVER spoken by Jesus himself. Vermes adds: "One has to be foolish to believe the mockery of the chief priests and scribes, taunting Jesus to get down from the cross because he claimed to be the `Son of God' (Matt.27:43) . Indeed, "only demons or people possessed by demons addressed Jesus with this title" (Matt. 4:3, Luke 4:3, Matt. 3:11, Luke 4:41 etc) The "only example in which the disciples call Jesus the `Son of God' and `worship him' comes from a LATE LEGENDARY ADDITION by Matthew to the story of Jesus walking on the water "(Matt: 14:33). Meanwhile, in the parallel passage in Mark (6:51-52) the astonishment of Jesus' companions is caused not by walking on water but the earlier feeding of the five thousand.
Vermes shows from his passage-by passage textual analysis, that the syncretic later additions and embellishments to the basic initial writings were probably a result of increasing skepticism and boredom among disillusions Christians (Vermes, p. 384) After all, over a century had passed since the days of Jesus and the church- which had NO role to play during his life- had by then become institutionalized. It thus had become an entity to serve no other purpose than to perpetuate the teaching of Jesus in an indefinitely postponed "Parousia". This in turn, led to the impetus to add to, further embellish and reinforce the Savior -Redeemer myth. The easiest way to do so was to copy select legendary tales from earlier pagan sources and insert them into later translations. This mightily helped church leaders in their constant exhortations to the faithful to not lose sight of the goal.
Thus, there came new and revised parables and more "Son of God" sayings to encourage the need for quiet optimism and hopefulness, and to simplify a formulaic salvation. E.g. "John 3:5 and 3:16 are perfect examples of later syncretic additions. By the time of the 2nd Council of Constantinople - with flocks being pulled away by many other sects, the time had come to get more forceful to preserve integrity and "Hell" was inserted into doctrines. (Before that, reincarnation- as metempsychosis- was accepted by more than half the original Church's flock - following teachings by Origen of Adamantius and Clement of Alexandria.)
All of this will be of great benefit in helping the reader to understand Robertson's explanation of the transformation of "Jewish Jesuism" into a formidable Gentile-based salvation faith - in which the central figure has attained the status of a god. The Vermes book will also help readers better understand the salvation basis of Christianity - in terms of the payout of a "ransom" for humankind, compliments of the expiation of the divine victim. In fact, this Christian version is merely the most recent of a fashion that goes far back into the past with the sacrificial death assuming all manner of variety (cf. p. 29)
This ransom notion is key, especially to many current "fundagelical" sects. In their thinking, once one "believes on the Lord Jesus Christ as personal Savior" - the magic deed has been accomplished and the person is "saved". His soul has been instantly purchased via the ransom template - with Christ as the purchaser, via his "infinite" sacrifice. Never mind the one saved may be the world's worst beast, a serial killer or rapist - once he professes the magic words, all is well. Meantime, the most singular humanitarian who gives her whole life to helping the poor in Calcutta, India or the Sudan will surely go to "Hell" unless she also professes the magic mantra.
In this light also, Robertson's chapters 9, 10, 11 and 12 will also hold key interest for the religious skeptic. Chapter 9 compares Apollonius to Jesus. Apollnius lived in the first century CE, and by the third had quite a legend assimilated around him (p. 96- 97). Miracles of all sorts were attributed to him, all of which Church Fathers accepted without question (ibid.) As Robertson notes "No one ever thought of testing whether Apollonius was a real person", as opposed to an artifact. People DO think of doing it today (e.g. John Dominic Crossan, in his 'Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography') but of course, all the orthodox minions go ballistic when any such effort materializes. (Some Christians in some forums I have been have gone so far as to argue that "the issue of the Historical Jesus" is bogus. Er....ah, no it isn't.)
Chapter 10, `The Evolution of Mithra' shows how the concept of the "Savior God" commenced in the Mithraic mysteries and narratives. Chapter 11, "Mithraism and Christianity' discloses how Church Fathers such as Tertullian and Justin Martyr became incensed at the impudence of the Mithraists to "copy" the Christian mysteries for their own.
Most interesting, in the face of claims for Mithraists doing the copying, is Robertson's referencing of Church Father Justin Martyr who expressly argues that: "the demons anticipated the Christian mysteries and prepared parodies of them beforehand".(p. 118) He notes this also underlies the arguments of Tertullian and Julius Firmicus. (ibid.)
Clearly, the term "anticipated" must mean the Mithraists' featured those mysteries BEFORE the Christians arrived on the scene. Why else "anticipate" them? As Robertson sarcastically notes "Nobody pretends the Perseus myth is LATER than Christianity". While adding that "Justin Martyr is perhaps the most foolish of the Christian fathers". (ibid)
Thus, it seems far more probable that the Christians stole from the Mithraists, rather than vice versa.
Chapter 12, `The Transformation of Mithra", basically details the process of incorporation of Mithraic themes, mysteries, and doctrines into Christian lore. As Robertson observes (p. 124) the assimilation took place because "the features imitated were found by experience to be religiously attractive". This is also a plausible explanation for the rapid benediction of Christianity compliments of the Emperor Constantine - and the fact his Sol...
Read more ›
|
|
|
2.0 out of 5 stars
Pagen Christs, June 30, 2009
In Pagen Christs John M Robertson is too verbose in explaining his opinion and too brief in providing proof. Reading this book was like searching for needles in a hay stack, though some significant information can be found.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
If you need help or have a question for Customer Service, 