(20 votes, average: 4.65 out of 5)
Loading...Lots of people (esp. on the Internet!) say that the stories of Jesus’ death and resurrection were modeled on widespread beliefs in the pagan world of “fertility” gods, whose life-cycle dictates the fertility of the earth. They are born (spring); they become productive as the earth becomes fertile (summer); they become ripe for harvest (autumn); and then they die (winter). But they “rise again” (spring) and the pattern then repeats itself. Wasn’t Jesus like that?
That is the question I was asked in this final segment in my interview with Ben Witherington, a prominent evangelical biblical scholar. Ben and I don’t agree about a lot when it comes to religion, and have crossed academic swords in public contexts. But we have an amicable relationship and agree on some very basic things. For example: Jesus existed! Hey, it’s a start.
And we agree a lot on the relationship of Jesus to Judaism and the need to situate him in his own Jewish context (rather than some mythical pagan context). And so, here is the final question and answer of the interview..
Q. In what way is the Jewish notion of a resurrection a different idea than either the fertility crop cycle idea, or what is sometimes said about pagan deities that either disappear or die?
A. One of the reasons for thinking that the belief in Jesus’ death and resurrection is not exactly like what you can find in pagan myths about their gods is that it is solidly rooted in Jewish apocalyptic beliefs of the first century. This should come as no surprise, since Jesus and his followers were not pagans with pagan views of the divine realm, but first-century apocalyptically minded Jews. In some pagan circles, there was a belief in fertility gods, who would spend some time in the underworld and some time in this world, alternating year after year. These gods were closely connected to the crops: they (both the crops and the gods connected with them) die in the winter and come back to life in the spring. And they do that year after year. That obviously is not like the early Christian belief in Jesus, who does not
Tired of conspiracy theories about Jesus and early Christianity on the internet? Want some actual historical information? Join the Blog! Doesn’t cost much, every penny goes to charity, and you’ll learn so much your friends and neighbors won’t be able to stand it… Click here for membership options
Mr. Ehrman, I would like to ask you if we know where did the apocalypticists of ancient Judaism inherit this idea, that our world is controlled by the forces of evil, from.
My view is that ideas are not always inherited. Sometimes they are invented. I think the apocalyptic view was an internal Jewish Jewish development. I explain about that a bit in my book Heaven and Hell.
Is this apocalyptic view – that people will be resurrected – why people rise from the dead in Matthew? Or did Israel suffer a zombie invasion?
Yes, it appears to be showing that Jesus inaugurated the resurrectino with his death. A very peculiar passage!
Do you think the “zombie jnvasion” passage in Matthew is original or was it added later? It would almost have to be original – why would someone add it?
There is nothing to suggest it was not originally part of the Gospel, andit coincides well with Matthews emphasis on the apocalyptic significance of Jesus’ death.
Could it be possible the author saw them as just being raised from the dead, like Lazarus, instead of being transformed into an immortal being?
Yes, I think that’s a strong possibility.
Why do you think that the belief that a fallen leader was resurrected by God did not happen for someone like John the Baptist? I like the idea of historical contingency. Nothing is inevitable. The direction that history takes us could be influenced by certain chance events. Depending on a different set of chance events things could move in a different direction. I am thinking that something may have nudged the Jesus movement in a different direction from the John the Baptist movement when it came to picking up the pieces of its leader being executed by the state?
I”m afraid I don’t know!
Really informative on the Jewish understanding of ‘resurrection”, Bart.
But taking the common modern understanding of fertility gods;
“They are born (spring); they become productive as the earth becomes fertile (summer); they become ripe for harvest (autumn); and then they die (winter). But they “rise again” (spring) and the pattern then repeats itself.”
This associates the annual cyclical pattern of ‘being active’/’being inert’; with the life-course pattern of ‘being alive’/’being dead’. For us; ‘inert’ and ‘dead’ are synonyms. But that is not universal; the Ancient Egyptians, for example, expected their existence when dead to be one of vigorous activity – which is why they took so much stuff with them from life into death.
So we cannot assume that the fertility cycle was always a life-cycle; a fertility divinity who was inert in the winter and actively frutful in the summer might well remain ‘dead’ (or ‘alive’) throughout.
Moreover, fertility divinities do not routinely double as hero-divinities.
All in all; the thing that pagan fertility divinities have in common is their subsequent interpretation by mythicists as being sources for a Christ myth. Take that away, and there is little, if any, commonality
Dr. Erhman,
I understand that the Jewish idea(s) of a dying and rising god is relatively unique from what came before, but isn’t the distinction here that it’s not original to Judaism? I don’t understand how it can’t be considered “rooted” in pagan ideas of dying and rising gods as well as a Jewish apocalyptic worldview? Doesn’t this idea precede Abrahamic, monotheistic religions? e.g. with Horus, Osiris, etc.
I’m also inclined to mention a site like Göbekli Tepe which is speculated to be a ritual site that predates the mentioned Egyptian gods by thousands of years. If true, wouldn’t it be fair to say these ancient religions influenced ideas to come?
Best,
Josh
Yes, Jewish ideas about such things did come from non-Jewish roots; but they developed then in distinctively Jewish ways before being taken over by the followers of Jesus who developed them in *their* own ways….
I can see given Jesus’ apocalyptical message, a posterity-driven biography would seem absurd with links to other fertility Gods. If the Kingdom was at hand, then there would be no future generations to read anything that was codified in the present. Thus, the oral tradition preserved Jesus’ teachings in pericopes and Jesus’ followers gave little thought to writing them down at first because of the very nature of the apocalyptic movement around them. But….As time went by it could be seen that the Kingdom of God was delayed. Do you think among the Hellenized Jews and the Greek pagans who were considering conversion to Christianity, this delay posed more questions than answers?
These Greeks had to pick and choose among the dozens of mystery cults and gods that had sprung up, each promising riches and eternal bliss in a heavenly afterlife. Jesus had little to offer these Greeks. The Marcan Jesus shared none of the attributes of the time-honored moral-savior deities of Dionysus or Herakles. Early Christians had no choice but to turn away from Palestine and Hellenize Jesus to the Gentiles (i.e. pagan virgin birth narratives, and other myth-making elements to liven up the gospels ).
I wish we knew! Those who didn’t convert for this reason haven’t left us any wriings.
What is your sense concerning the idea that the historic Jesus not only believed the Kingdom of God was imminent but that he and his followers should assist in changing things in the present? To what extent did he and his followers believe they should engage in social justice actions, healing others, etc in the here and now rather than just passively waiting for God to put things right or fatalistically thinking it was pointless until the Son of Man shows up?
My view is that Jesus himself was a pacifist who thought GOD would bring the massive destruction to come. There were other apocalypsticists who thought they would be participating in the future war.
So it appears that your view is that the confrontation with the money changers is not historical then or not linked with ushering in the Kingdom of God?
Do you believe that the historical Jesus attempted to engage in healing others and if so, is this not linked with trying to usher in the Kingdom of God?
I think he may have made a ruckus in the temple, overturning tables and so on, an d that this is eventually what led to his oppositiohn by the leaders in Jersualem. I don’t think he was intersetd in attacking his enemies with the sword though. And no, I don’t think JEsus was a healer.
Ok, you have convince me that the dying and rising of Jesus Christ (1 time!) was uniquely Judean apocalypticism at work. But I am not convinced Jesus would have been the first for Judeans to rumor was resurrected and brought back to life. Wasn’t Jesus confused with a resurrected John the Baptist and again with a returned Elijah (since Elijah never died).
Mark 6:14. Mark 8:28
Wouldn’t this indicate that Jesus was not the first to be believed to die and come back? Then the “firstfruits” might be firstborn child sacrificed – like the Moabites did to the firstborn son of the Moabite king to turn the wrath of Chemosh – in the days of Elisha from which many of the Jesus stories are taken from.
Dr. Ehrman. I think the vast majority will agree that the suffering story has been colored by excerpts from the prophets and from the Psalms.
The question is whether a historical person, Jesus, constitutes the framework for the suffering history.
In my mind the answer is: Yes and No!
Yes. There was a historical context on which the evangelists built their story, or rather; this was a “historical” context.
This historical context was the books of Deuteronomy, especially the book of Exodus and the book of Numbers, where we find the story of the rock that was struck. This Rock was pointed out by Paul as Christ Himself.
When the Israelites did not find water in the wilderness, they lost both Hope and Faith in the Lord. Hope and Faith is what separates Christianity from Judaism. The Israelites began to complain about the condition and wished they had never left Egypt.
It was the Hope and the Faith in the Lord that were meant to save the Israelites. But the Israelites failed the test – and so the law was passed.
This event happened in the first month, which is the month of Easter.
Numbers 20:1
The events surrounding the water coming from the rock were crucial not only for the Israelites but also for Moses and Aaron.
Numbers 20:12 You (Moses and Aaron) did not believe me!
Moses and Aaron had failed, they had sinned. They did not recognize the Lord and were not allowed to bring the Israelites to the Promised Land.
What had happened?
Moses was to gather the elders around the Lord and talk to Him. Moses had done that, but something went wrong. Moses had taken the credit for the miracle himself. Moses had exalted himself and not the Lord.
The same staff that had made him turn water into blood in Egypt, Moses now used to strike the Rock. The elders stood as witnesses around the Lord.
John 19:34 Immediately water and blood came out.
1 John 5: 6 Not only water, but water and blood.
I think this is the background for the story of Annas and Caiaphas. Aaron as Annas and Moses as Caiaphas. As a Parallel figure we find Moses as Cephas/Peter denying Jesus. Identifying Moses as both a hero and a villain. Caiaphas and Cephas are two names with the same origin.
Dr. Ehrman. What I am trying to do is imagine how this story was developed.
After the episode where Moses hit the rock with the staff, Jethro met them. Jethro praised the Lord and said that the Lord was greater than all gods. Exodus 18:11 The LORD was King over kings. “Are you the King of the Jews?” “You say so,” Jesus replied.
Then Jethro offered a burnt offering before God. Exodus 18:12
According to Leviticus 1:4, the burnt offering was to make atonement for the one offering it. In this case Jethro, who with this “washed his hands clean”.
Then in Lev 6: 25-29 “In the place where the burnt offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed before the LORD; it is most holy.” (…) “Every male among the priests may eat of it; it is most holy.”
In this way the Lord took upon Himself our sins, and was led as a lamb to the butcher.
Other parallelt events occur in the book of Exodus and the book of Numbers.
In Numbers 20:20, the king of Edom came out against the Israelites with an armed force.
In Exodus 17:8, the Amalekites went out against the Israelites.
Moses – as high priest – had even offered to pay money to the king of Edom to pass through.
Amalek, the king of the Amalekites, was considered synonymous with Esau, as was Edom.
To make the symbolism of this event clearer, Jacob’s clash with Esau in Genesis was typified in a form of Pesher. Jacob became a type of Christ in this event.
One form of midrash around the meal when Jacob was blessed by Isaac (the one who eats my bread, lifts his heel towards me), and another form of midrash from when Jacob and Esau met and kissed each other.
Most likely, Judah’s sale of Joseph also influenced the story.
Dr. Ehrman. I’m humble about the fact that I’m spamming your blog and that you let me do it.
The most crucial parallel between the book of Exodus and the book of Numbers is “The Crucifixion”. In Numbers He was as a Bonze Snake sat on a pole. In Exodus as a staff raised above the heads of Moses, Aaron and Hur.
In Gnostic writings, Jesus was described as having a form that varied according to the spiritual capacity of anyone who observed him.
Christ was not only meant to take upon himself the sin that Adam brought into the world, as a Sacrificial Lamb. He was also to save mankind from the old serpent. That was when the Lord appeared as a bronze serpent.
Christ became a serpent so that he could “become one of us” – we who were evil by nature. Christ was seen in “the likeness of sinful flesh” and “He was numbered with the transgressors”.
Christ, who had the likeness of evil, was a serpent because He became man.
If you were spamming nor otherwise a nuisance (!) I wouldn’t publish your posts. I see you as giving alternate interpretations, most of which I don’t agree with but about which I don’t find anything objectionable per se to the purposes of the blog. So no problem so far!
Psalm 22: 4-6 “In you our fathers trusted; they trusted, and you delivered them. To you they cried and were rescued; in you they trusted and were not put to shame. But I am a worm and not a man, scorned by mankind and despised by the people.
The Israelites were attacked by the ancient serpent, they were bitten on the heels, but the crucified Christ saved their lives. The power of the life-giving cross was felt by Moses. Moses did not have the strength to bear the weight of it himself, but was in need of help to bear the burden.
The burden was to have Hope and Faith in salvation through the Lord and through the Cross, and not through the works of the law.
2 Cor 3:6 He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant — not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
Dr. Ehrman. Allow me to give an alternative account of Christ’s birth in the flesh.
In Christ, two different natures were united – God and Man! This is an important Christian dogma.
Christ was the Son of God, He was our High Priest, Light of Light, From eternity to eternity. This was His Divine nature.
But Christ was also the Son of David, the Suffering Servant, Born and Crucified. This was His Human nature.
Isaiah had prophesied that Emanuel would be born of a woman (a virgin). Who could fit that description?
Well, there was another prophecy that would come true if theologians chose the right virgin.
Genesis 49:10 The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until he to whom it belongs shall come and the obedience of the nations shall be his.
Apparently there had been no ruler’s staff between Judah’s feet until King David many generations later, and that was in stark contrast to Jacob’s prophecy, where the scepter was said to never leave Judah. The son of Judah must therefore have been a King.
The story of Judah and Tamar fulfilled both prophecies. Judah and David were of the same tribe.
Tamar gave birth to twins – two natures united in Christ. God and Man.
The midwife tied a scarlet band – a swaddling band – around Zarah’s hand. The Swaddling band was the sign that was to show that Christ was born. The Swaddling band is mentioned three times as a sign of Christ in the Gospel of Luke. Luke 2: 7, 2:12, 2:16.
Tamar was married to Judah’s sons in turn, but she remained a virgin. Then came the incident with Judah. Was this an adultery?
Ambrose describes it this way: It was to deceive the prince of this world, who seeing her united into a husband, could not be worried about her birth.
The meeting between Tamar and Judah was only perceived as fornication, at least the Jews and the Devil thought so. The Christians knew better. Tamar was conceived by the Holy Spirit.
Tamar stayed away for three months, but then she could no longer hide her pregnancy, and Judah wanted to send her away.
This story comes from one of the last chapters of Genesis, and prepares for the Lord’s entrance in the book of Exodus.
Dr. Ehrman. The triumphant entry into Jerusalem seems to stem from two events in the Torah. The Lord’s entry into Egypt and Jacob’s entry into Haran in Genesis.
The Lord sent Aaron and Moses to Egypt to tell the Israelites that the time had come for the Lord to save them from the yoke of the Egyptians. The message was first met with joy and rejoicing, but was turned to sorrow and resistance when the Israelites understood the consequences.
The Israelites had fallen into deception and worshiped Egyptian gods. The Israelites were intoxicated with vain distractions and plunged themselves into useless pleasures.
The Israelites were not at all ready to put behind them their Egyptian gods, their Egyptian joys and customs to follow the Lord, no matter how many miracles He performed.
The entire generation that had been in Egypt was not allowed to enter the Promised Land – only the children.
Matt 21:15-16 (…) the children crying out in the temple, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” they were indignant, They asked Jesus, “Do you hear what these children are saying?” “Yes,” Jesus replied. “Haven’t you ever read the Scriptures? For they say, ‘You have taught children and infants to give you praise.’”
The scribes had noted all the similarities between Jacob’s stay in Haran and the Israelites’ stay in Egypt.
Like Moses, Jacob had met the Lord (in a dream) before he arrived in Haran. Like Moses, Jacob met his future bride at a well.
Just as Jacob had to be a slave to Laban, so the Israelites had to be a slave to Pharaoh.
Jacob was greeted with joy when he arrived but was soon tricked into slave labor.
What is important here is that Jacob married two of Laban’s daughters. Leah symbolized the Jewish synagogue while Rachel symbolized the Christian Church – represented by a donkey and a colt.
Matt 21:5 Say to the Daughter of Zion, ‘See, your King comes to you, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.’
The two animals were then dressed in robes after which Jesus rode into the city as into a wedding. Jabob – as a type of Christ – performs miracles and leaves Laban in a form of Exodus.
After Jacob left Haran, he was confronted by Esau. We find this parallel pattern in Exodus in the Israelites’ encounter with Alamek.
Dr. Ehrman. There are other parallels between Genesis and Exodus that give the story of Jesus a deeper theological meaning, such as the story of the Anointing of Jesus.
This story seems to be a composition of parallel themes between Zipporah and Rebekah, the latter as a type.
The hair was seen as a superfluous part of a woman, just as the foreskin was seen as a superfluous part of a man.
Zipporah met the Angel of the Lord on her way to Egypt. She circumcised her son and fell at “His” feet and said, “you are truly a bridegroom of blood to me.” The predicate of this verse is unclear. To whose feet did Zipporah fall? It could be interpreted as being at the feet of the Lord.
In this way, the Lord’s encounter with Zipporah was given the theological opportunity to signify an Anointing of the Lord. It was Zipporah’s Faith and Love that saved her in this encounter with the Lord. Nothing more, nothing less.
The Lord’s destiny seemed to be decided even before He came to Egypt.
As is often seen, there were typifications of these events in the book of Genesis.
Rebekah was also an upcoming bride who was first met at a well. Rebekah came carrying a jar with which she generously shared her water.
Rebekah was the mastermind behind the anointing of Jacob. She had dressed Jacob in hairy clothes that both smelled and felt like Esau. The jar-bearing Rebekah brought both the hair and the smell that deceived Isaac into anointing Jacob instead of Esau.
Esau complained, but it was too late. The fate of Jacob was decided. He had to flee to Haran. Jacob – as a type of Jesus – had to become a slave under Laban.
Phil 2: 7 but He emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant
Interesting. Perhaps tangentially related, what are your thoughts on the verses of the transfiguration originally being in the end of the Gospel of Mark, but edited and placed backwards into the narrative?
I’ve never heard it put quite that way, to my recollection. The argument that *used* to be made is that the transfiguration story was originally a story of a resurrection appearance that was transposed back into the time of Jesus’ life. (Not that Mark himself ended his Gospel with it). I think it’s a very interesting theory, but unfortunately it is difficult to establish or refute. It certainly does sound like a post-resurrection story though!
What do you think about the dating of the Pentateuch?
I don’t have *firm* views, other than that it is made up of a group of sources (I have no problems with the traditional four-course JEDP theory, though I realize the matter was far more complicated than that). I don’t see how the earliest source could be (much) before the 10th century; though I’m open to all of them being post-exilic.
The point about Jesus and his disciples being Jewish is obvious, but since Paul preached so often to later exclusively to the Pagans, doesn’t it seem likely that they would process who Jesus-pbuh was through the lens of their pagan “dying-and- rising gods” belief?
They would if they had dying and rising gods the believed in! But as I’ve argued, I don’t think that was a dominant pagan view. They *certainly* understood Jesus in light of the views they had coming in to the faith, to *some* extent.
Do you think apocalypticism as a whole was originally a Jewish concept, or just the concept of the resurrection? I’ve read that apocalypticism was probably originally a Zoroastrian concept. That seems to fit, because of the similarities between apocalypticism and dualism, but the exact elements of a Zoroastrian apocalypticism may be just speculation at this point.
I used to think apocalypticism derived from Zorastrianism, but I no longer think so. I think it was an internal Jewish development. I explain all that in my book Heaven and Hell.
Bart,
The core of your ideology on who Jesus was — failed apocalypticist — is mistaken. Based on crappy translations and centuries of massaging by clueless interpreters has yielded a completely flawed view of what the Olivet Discourse really was. Just adding two commas and two quotation marks in Matthew 24:5 illustrates the orthodox corruption. Jesus was warning that dangerous characters would come claiming that HE was the Christ and would mislead, not that THEY were Christ! Masters come only for those given to them (John 13:1), and not those given to other Saviors (like James). He was forecasting PAUL, the Spouter of Lying.
The destruction of physical things may have been external, but the apocalypse was not. It DID come — but within the disciples, spiritually!!! The destruction prediction was only to give comfort and a time frame, so for them not to lose heart. I keep trying to tell you, I can explain these things. I have EXPERIENCED them with a real Master. Remember what you said in Orthodox Corruption about JB and and Matt. 17:12-13? JB WAS a savior! Page 196.
This isn’t difficult. Don’t criticize what you can’t understand (remember what Bob Dylan said).
My view is that we cannot legitimately interpret the Gospels based on a prior view about what Masters would or could do. We have to interpret what the author says by careful analysis. It’s not a matter of adding or taking away commas here and there It’s a matter of studying the Greek syntax.
I believe you think I am the one doing the adding! I’m not. This is another language, and you were surely on the right track in Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: the scribes changed the syntax completely — always, ALWAYS, to a particular view that Jesus Christ was sole all-time (‘universal’ or ‘one-for-all’) savior, not of A LINE of Masters (saviors) — the case in reality.
This is a monumental revelation, and there is no reason to discount other evidence — such as other independent teachings such as the Gnostics, and even modern Sant Mat, which sheds light on Gospel interpretation. I wrote a book of my own about orthodox corruptions that derailed the truth, always away from things Jesus supposedly said that made him out to be sole savior but were in fact only corruptions. John 9:4 in Codex Sinaiticus is another example (you missed!). ‘US’ changed scribally to ‘me’ completely took out Christ’s meaning that HE TOO worked only while living!
John 1:1-13, and all of chapter 3, for example, including famous 3:16, is about JB, not Jesus! The ‘Son’ ISN’T JESUS. The Son is Holy Spirit. It was ‘given’ to JB and OTHERS before Jesus.
First to be raised? What about Lazarus? What about the widow’s son at Nain? What about Jairus’ daughter?
For that matter, what about the people raised by Elijah, Elisha, and Elisha’s bones?
These did not have a resurrection. They were resuscitated. That is, they were brought back to life, and then were to die again later. A “resurrection” involves being back from the dead and being made then immortal.
Bart, that’s the most ridiculous thing I think you have said yet. What sort of self-respecting man of God would bring someone “back to life” ONLY TO DIE AGAIN?
I have enormous respect for you, Bart, but please try to look at some of the views you hold with a little more circumspection. You have mentored a lot of students of theology and history, including me, a college science dropout who lost his way after my father died when I was a high school freshman. Saying things like this makes me more than ever determined to mainstream publish my findings against the enormous obstacles an unletttered author faces, and I know you could help with advice. I wish you would focus on what I have tried to show you, but have dismissed as somehow irrelevant to the status of biblical studies. These findings are pivotal to it. I could show you solutions to things you never dreamed possible. But unless I get some help I’m going to go nowhere.
What advice do you have for breaking through the academic roadblock you and peers have thrown up before me? I’m not going back to college at 68.
THe issue for getting published in an academic journal is not the author’s c.v., but the quality of their argument. There are always “independent researchers” who publish in top journals (i.e., not those teaching in the field) Editors want to publish the most compelling articles, that are thoroughly researched and powerfully argued — even if they think the conclusions are flat-out wrong. So it’s not about bias against authors or, necessarily, their views. It’s about whether a powerful, compelling case can be made based on serious research rooted in a thorough familiarity with the primary texts in their original languages and with the massive scholarship on the issues among scholars whose work has appeared in English, German, French and to a lesser degree Italian and other European languages)
Dr. Ehrman,
Golden Ass and so forth; Do you think he is overly intertwining cultures?
Me: Paul’s view of the afterlife would have precluded him from believing in a separation of body and soul?
Prof.: “Try reading the Homeric Hymn to Demeter (the main mythic text behind the Eleusinian Mysteries) and notice how the bodies of both Demeter and her daughter Persephone operate. Or try reading the novel, The Golden Ass by Apuleius (2nd cent. CE), a piece of religious propaganda for the Isis Cult, where he tells many stories of how dead bodies behave through the operation of magic.”
I”m not sure what you mean about overly intertwining cultures. As to your second question, in my book on Heaven and Hell I argue that at the end of his life Paul did indeed come to think that he would go to be in Christ’s presence before he was raised from the dead bodily at the end of itme, and I try to explain how he thought there might be an interim period between death and resurrection.
Bart, I’m off topic, sorry. But could you point me to material that gives context to the ever expanding role of Mary? I can’t imagine her role was nearly as significant pre-constentine as now especially in the Catholic Church. But think it would be very interesting reading of this development. Thank you.
It’s a great question, and I bet there are lots of books on this. But unfortunately I don’t know what to recommend. It was a post-constantinian development and I’m not up on the development of mariology after that point (except the highly scholarly works of Steven Shoemaker)
Dionysius is sometimes referred to as the “dying and rising god” but I think he is one of those who don’t really die, but descends to Hades before being reborn. In some of the myths he is ripped apart (maenad-like) but it strikes me that he simply sheds his body before his descent. That was one of the christological views wasn’t it – that Jesus simply shed his mortal body before the crucifixion so he didn’t really suffer and die. Do you think there is any relationship between the Dionysius myth and that particular early christological view?
It’s probably a bit hard to say. MOst of these authors appear to be influenced mainly be developments internal to the Xn tradition; DIonysus, e.g., is never said to have been a divine spirit temporarily inhabiting a human body, which is the grounding for the later Xn views sometimes attested for the Passion of Jesus.
When did Jews come to see Yahweh as all-powerful, all-knowing, etc
The first solid evidence comes in the part of Isaiah called 2nd Isaiah (chs. 40-55), written in the 6th c BCE. But of course Jews have never had just one view of much of anything. (nor have Xns or others!)
Wouldn’t the epithet El-Shaddai show that the Jews thought Yahweh was all-powerful in the Pentateuch? But I also heard that Shaddai might have used to mean something different.
YEs, “GOd Almighty” does get used interchangeably, it seems, with Yawheh. But “almighty” probably means something different to us who understand that there are a 100 billion stars in teh galaxy and at least 100 billion galaxies in the universe. (!)
Which is why you have to go directly to one of the living Masters for the true teachings, not writings of any kind! Rssb.org
Please comment. This response is given in all seriousness.
As you know, my view is that modern spiritual insight does not explain ancient texts; scholarship based on an intimate understanding of the ancient languages, literatures, culture, and history does.
Do you have any thoughts on whether or not Isis was an influence for the Virgin Mary?
I personally don’t think so, but it cannot of course be ruled out. My sense is that a “mother goddess” developed in numerous cultural settings, possibly without much need of direct outside influence.