Kapyong's Jesus Myth Theory

[Kapyong]

Gday gmx and all,

For a couple of centuries, critics of a certain persuasion have been convinced that Jesus Christ is a myth, a pure work of fiction. Despite the truly massive application of human labor and resources, for a couple of centuries, no one has been able to prove them right or right.

Well, it's ancient history - I doubt we will ever have proof.

But we might reach a reasoned conclusion.

Many ancient figures who were thought historical have been concluded as not so :
Adam and Eve, Noah, Moses ...
Hercules, Robin Hood, King Arthur, William Tell, Ned Ludd,
Odysseus, Achilles etc.
Demeter, Dionysus etc.

If Jesus wasn't OURS, then he would be as real as Krishna or Hercules or Adam and Eve.

BTW -
My Paradise theory does not posit Jesus Christ as a pure work of fiction. Rather as a 'real' spiritual being, later mythologized from existing works (Tanakh, Greek mysteries) into a work of literature.


Kapyong

[Kapyong]

Gday Giuseppe and all

I am suggesting something like this :
Marcion wrote the first Gospel in 148 CE.
In reaction to Marcion, heretical and proto-catholic Christians wrote all the other Gospels. Heretical and proto-orthodox people share a common reaction against Marcion: they harmonize in some way the Stranger God of Marcion with the Jewish God.
The result is that the Stranger God of Marcion is not more so 'Stranger', in the hands of all other Christians.

Marcion first in 148 ?
How does everything fit ?

G.Marcion 148
G.Mark
G.Luke, G.Matthew
G.John
Papias, Barnabas, Didakhe, Polycarp.Phil, EpistlesApostles, et al
Justin c.150 knows several Gospels

All that in 2 years ?


Kapyong

[Giuseppe]

All that in 2 years ?

Precisely.

When you say 'surprise'.

[Kapyong]

Gday all

I have slightly updated my maintained online version of my theory :
http://kapyong.5gbfree.com/KapyongsTheory.html

I acknowledge Doherty and Carrier, and point out what I think is new or different in my theory :

• Several distinct phases of growing Jesus Christ belief :
  1. Before Paul - a purely spiritual heavenly being seen in visions,
  2. Paul's crucified and resurrected son-of-God - a real spiritual being,
  3. The Gospel of Mark - being mythical literature, copied and spread and increasingly mis-understood as historical,
  4. A historical Jesus of Nazareth becomes the popular view.
• Crucifixion in Paradise in the Third Heaven - according to Paul.
• The docetics' ('seemers' or 'illusionists') belief in a phantom Jesus is the direct consequence of the conflict between the early belief in a spiritual Jesus, and the later details of the Gospels.
• The historicisation of Jesus Christ was the natural result of the increasing historical detail of the phases in belief.

Kapyong

[Giuseppe]

Very thanks, Kapyong, a good synthetic source of information on your mythicist views.

I'm waiting next academic book on Ascension of Isaia to see if a case may be made that that text was behind 1 Cor 2:6-8. If not, then you are right that Paul introduced the crucifixion element on the original belief.

[iskander]

Gday all

I have slightly updated my maintained online version of my theory :
http://kapyong.5gbfree.com/KapyongsTheory.html

I acknowledge Doherty and Carrier, and point out what I think is new or different in my theory :

• Several distinct phases of growing Jesus Christ belief :
  1. Before Paul - a purely spiritual heavenly being seen in visions,
  2. Paul's crucified and resurrected son-of-God - a real spiritual being,
  3. The Gospel of Mark - being mythical literature, copied and spread and increasingly mis-understood as historical,
  4. A historical Jesus of Nazareth becomes the popular view.
• Crucifixion in Paradise in the Third Heaven - according to Paul.
• The docetics' ('seemers' or 'illusionists') belief in a phantom Jesus is the direct consequence of the conflict between the early belief in a spiritual Jesus, and the later details of the Gospels.
• The historicisation of Jesus Christ was the natural result of the increasing historical detail of the phases in belief.

Kapyong

The life of Jesus reminds me of the life , death and later history of Jan Hus.

Several distinct phases of growing Jesus Christ belief :

Before Paul . A Jewish reformer preaches
The Jewish reformer is legally murdered ,
The Gospel of Mark - being an account of the life of the Jewish reformer.
The reforms proposed by the reformer gain support .

[Peter Kirby]

The Gospel of Mark - being mythical literature, copied and spread and increasingly mis-understood as historical,

The docetics' ('seemers' or 'illusionists') belief in a phantom Jesus is the direct consequence of the conflict between the early belief in a spiritual Jesus, and the later details of the Gospels.

I wonder how long it will take mythicists to put 2 + 2 together here and conclude that the Gospel of Mark wasn't a misunderstood mythical-ist; its author was, essentially, a type of docetic (or, if you prefer, an adoptionist), to the extent that it identified as "Christ" and the "Son of God" that spirit which entered into Jesus the Nazarene at baptism.

[Secret Alias]

So says Irenaeus. It's not a modern view per se. Irenaeus actually condemns the heretics who hold this view but they represent the earliest interpretation of Mark. Good place to start

[Kapyong]

Thanks for contributing gents

(G.Mark is) essentially, a type of docetic (or, if you prefer, an adoptionist), to the extent that it identified as "Christ" and the "Son of God" that spirit which entered into Jesus the Nazarene at baptism.

Yes, an intriguing clue.
But there seems to be a bit of a stretch from adoptionist to docetic ?

I guess I'll go read some heretics next...



Kapyong

[Giuseppe]

(G.Mark is) essentially, a type of docetic (or, if you prefer, an adoptionist), to the extent that it identified as "Christ" and the "Son of God" that spirit which entered into Jesus the Nazarene at baptism.

If Christ is the spirit, then In that case who introduced 'Jesus the Nazarene' ?

Was he introduced because he was historical?

Or was he introduced because an adoptionist Mark represents already a timid reaction against Marcion's Gospel ?


The trend would be that, then:

a mythical Jesus Christ in the archontic sub-lunary realm (to condemn that realm) . Evidence: Paul + Hebrews.

a docetical Jesus Christ on the terra firma (to condemn both this world and his creator god) . Evidence: Marcion's Gospel

Jesus the Nazarene distinct from the spirit of Christ (to save the creator god of this world, but not this world) . Evidence: Mark, Cerinthus, Apelles, Basilides, Valentinus, Carpocrates, Gospel of John.

Jesus the Nazarene strictu sensu Christ (to save both the creator god and this world). Evidence: Matthew and Luke-Acts.