URL: http://www.secularhumanism.org/libra...price_20_1.htm

Robert Price suggests that the stories of the Buddha, Moses, Jesus Christ, and Mohammed were more-or-less mythical, with little trace of historical individuals behind them; here's some of his argument about JC:

Though there have been no shortage of attempts to seek the historical Jesus Christ, many of them have tended to make JC in the likeness of the seeker. However, most of the Gospels' biography has a strong resemblance to the very widespread mythic-hero archetype. Here is Lord Raglan's consensus plotline of mythic-hero stories:

1) The hero's mother is a royal virgin, while (2) his father is a king, and (3) the father is related to the mother. (4) The hero's conception is unusual or miraculous; hence (5) he is reputed to be a son of a god. (6) Evil forces attempt to kill the infant or boy hero, but (7) he is spirited away to safety and (8) reared by foster parents in a foreign land. Besides this, (9) we learn no details of his childhood until (10) he journeys to his future kingdom, where (11) he triumphs over the reigning king and (12) marries a princess, often his predecessor's daughter, and (13) becomes king himself. (14) For a while he reigns uneventfully, (15) promulgating laws. But (16) he later loses favor with his subjects or with the gods and (17) is driven from the throne and the city and (18) meets with a mysterious death, (19) often atop a hill. (20) If he has children, they do not succeed him. (21) His body is not buried, yet (22) he has one or more holy sepulchers.

This fits very well, though there are some differences in detail. Here is a blow-by-blow examination:

1. His mother Mary was, of course, a miraculously-impregnated virgin. Her ancestry, however, is unclear, though some apologists claim that Luke's genealogy is of her ancestry, which makes her a descendant of King David.

2. His father, or at least his stepfather, Joseph was, of course, not a king, but according to Matthew and Luke, descended from King David.

3. No hint of that.

4. The Holy Ghost had made Mary pregnant.

5. He actually *is* the son of a god here.

6. King Herod orders the mass murder of all those poor baby boys, an event recorded nowhere else in the New Testament, let alone outside of it.

7. His parents flee to Egypt, taking him with them.

8. Doesn't match.

9. Only one detail of his childhood: where he shows himself to be very precociously learned.

10. He does wander around a lot.

11. He confronts Pontius Pilate.

12. He never gets married, though he does have some female groupies (there have been some speculations about him and Mary Magdalene).

13. He is treated as a sort-of king by his followers.

14. Much of his career is like that.

15. He delivers sermons and parables, which may be interpreted as laws.

16. Judas turns him in and a lynch mob comes after him.

17. Pontius Pilate decides to appease that lynch mob and sentence him to death.

18. He is crucified.

19. On Mount Calvary, a hill in Golgotha.

20. He is childless.

21. He leaves his tomb, surprising his followers.

22. Certainly true of him.

Let's look at Moses and the LIST (TM pending I'm sure)

1) The hero's mother is a royal virgin,
Nope

(2) his father is a king,
Adopted by the daughter of the king, so we'll say okie doke (kinda sorta) 1/2 point.

(3) the father is related to the mother.
Nope

(4) The hero's conception is unusual or miraculous;
Nope nope nope

(5) he is reputed to be a son of a god.
Nope nope nope nope

(6) Evil forces attempt to kill the infant or boy hero,
Him and every other Hebrew boy under the age of 2, but certainly not Moses in particular. I'm feeling generous, so I'll say 1/2 point again.

(7) he is spirited away to safety
Well, we never would have heard of him otherwise right?

(8) reared by foster parents in a foreign land.
Moses was born in Egypt, just to slaves, so no.

(9) we learn no details of his childhood
Hmmm.. guess not, dirty wrotten (ancient) biographers. Of course, ancient bios almost never talked about childhood, so go figure.

(10) he journeys to his future kingdom,
Hoy. Well, I guess we could say yes here, but he had to leave it first.

(11) he triumphs over the reigning king and
BIG yup!

(12) marries a princess, often his predecessor's daughter,
Well, I think the dad was well off, but a princess? And definitely NOT associated with his predecessor.

(13) becomes king himself.
Nope. He got to be a prophet though, and MAN, could his people ever BITCH!!!

(14) For a while he reigns uneventfully,
LOL! I guess we have to say no here.

(15) promulgating laws.
Yes. Go figure. Somebody has to right?

(16) he later loses favor with his subjects or with the gods
Later? Did he ever have it in the first place? To me the Jews are a pretty thick and fickle bunch

(17) is driven from the throne and the city
Nope again.

(18) meets with a mysterious death,
Not unless old age is mysterious.

(19) often atop a hill.
Well, he got to see Canaan from a hill, so... 1/2 point? Maybe?

(20) If he has children, they do not succeed him.
I don't think he had kids. And Joshua was certainly not a son, so we can say yes here. Does that mean Julius and Augustus and Tiberius and Caligula and Claudius and Nero Caesar and.... (well, are we getting the picture yet?) belong on this list too?

(21) His body is not buried,
Nope. He gets buried.

(22) he has one or more holy sepulchers.
Umm... okaaayyyy.

This list looks pretty lame to me. I count 7 1/2 I think out of a possible 22.

That's the problem with parallels. You have to hunt long and hard to make a match, and the bloody things just WON'T line up the way you want them too. No sooner do you make a list, and you have revise it.

Now, how does the Buddha look on this list? How about any obviously non-divine, never been worshipped ruler? If we find more than 6 matches does Price call them heros? Does Price even have a clue what he is doing here?

Finally, does ANYONE actually line up with all of these 22 factors? Or do you only have to match 6 or 7 to have it count?

Nomad

P.S. Has anyone ever notice how much an egg looks like a doughnut? (Both are breakfast foods, both have unusual holes, both can be eaten with or without toppings, both come from animal products...)

[This message has been edited by Nomad (edited January 26, 2001).]

Here are my responses to this whole sort of move, the Christ-myth theory:

JC and Mythology part I

JC and Mythology Part II


And my board devoted to this topic:

Magical Jesus Mystery Religions Tour

[Nomad:]
Let's look at Moses and the LIST (TM pending I'm sure)

[Me:]
Summary: my count:

1,2,3,4,5 - no
6,7,8,9,10,11 - yes
12 - no
13,14,15 - yes
16,17,18,19 - no
20 - yes
21,22 - no

10 yes, 12 no. Although the fit is not the best, it does include a mythic-hero-style childhood (an evil king tries to kill him, but he is spirited away to safety, and he is raised by foster parents in what is essentially a foreign land).

[Nomad:]
[1,2,3,4,5 not fitting because of lack of royal parentage...]

[Me:]
I concede there.

[Nomad:]
(6) Evil forces attempt to kill the infant or boy hero,
Him and every other Hebrew boy under the age of 2, but certainly not Moses in particular. I'm feeling generous, so I'll say 1/2 point again.

[Me:]
Actually, in this story, Moses was the intended target, and that evil Pharaoh decided to kill anyone who might possibly be Moses. The story of King Herod and Jesus Christ is remarkably similar, I must add.

[Nomad:]
(7) he is spirited away to safety
Well, we never would have heard of him otherwise right?

[Me:]
He escapes that evil Pharaoh in the way that Romulus and Remus escape another evil king -- by being put into a basket and sent to float down the river. Which certainly counts as being spirited away into safety.

[Nomad:]
(8) reared by foster parents in a foreign land.
Moses was born in Egypt, just to slaves, so no.

[Me:]
However, he was raised in the Egyptian royal court, which is practically a foreign country when compared to where and how the Israelite slaves had lived.

[Nomad:]
(9) we learn no details of his childhood
Hmmm.. guess not, dirty wrotten (ancient) biographers. Of course, ancient bios almost never talked about childhood, so go figure.

[Me:]
Interesting point, though a likely childhood story in his case would be some kind of story of precocity, such as Jesus Christ's.

[Nomad:]
(10) he journeys to his future kingdom,
Hoy. Well, I guess we could say yes here, but he had to leave it first.

[Me:]
I think that the community of Israelite slaves counts as a "future kingdom" here, since he'd become that community's de facto ruler.

[Nomad:]
(11) he triumphs over the reigning king and
BIG yup!

(12) marries a princess, often his predecessor's daughter,
Well, I think the dad was well off, but a princess? And definitely NOT associated with his predecessor.

[Me:] I concede that his wife isn't a big player in the story.

[Nomad:]
(13) becomes king himself.
Nope. He got to be a prophet though, and MAN, could his people ever BITCH!!!

[Me:]
Actually, he acts as the Israelites' de facto ruler, leading them from slavery in Egypt and onward to the Promised Land.

[Nomad:]
(14) For a while he reigns uneventfully,
LOL! I guess we have to say no here.

[Me:]
That may fit the later years of his life, when he led the Israelites in their wanderings.

[Nomad:]
(15) promulgating laws.
Yes. Go figure. Somebody has to right?

[Me:]
Which he issues in great abundance.

[Nomad:]
(16, 17, 18) [Moses never falling out of favor...]

[Me:]
I concede there.

[Nomad:]
(19) often atop a hill.
Well, he got to see Canaan from a hill, so... 1/2 point? Maybe?

[Me:]
I concede there; I'd give it no points.

[Nomad:]
(20) If he has children, they do not succeed him.
I don't think he had kids. ...

[Me:]
I agree -- he certainly was not succeeded by his offspring, if any.

[Nomad:]
(21) His body is not buried,
Nope. He gets buried.

(22) he has one or more holy sepulchers.
Umm... okaaayyyy.

[Me:]
I concede. I'm not aware of there being any claimed site or find of Moses's tomb.

In response to Metacrock, I wish to say that I have examined the board, and I find some of the arguments very flawed.

I agree that *exact* parallels do not necessarily exist, and I especially agree on the absurdity of Krishna -- Christ-na. The names may sound a bit similar, but "krshna" means "black" in Sanskrit and "khristos" means "anointed" in Greek. However, parallels are sometimes suspiciously close, such as between the Pharaoh-Moses and Herod-Jesus stories.

However, I disagree with the opposite sort of claim, an example of which is that a nonsexual impregnation by the Holy Spirit cannot be derived from pagan stories about fornicating deities. I disagree, because to me, that is taking the idea of miraculous conception a little bit further. And while Mithra being born from a rock may not seem like a virgin birth, it certainly qualifies as a miraculous origin.

Finally, I get to work on the story of the Buddha:

It's been a while since I read it, but from what I recall, the story of the Buddha's conception and birth makes the Gospel writers seem like peasants.

And instead of someone trying to kill the Buddha in his childhood, his father tries to keep him from his prophesied future career by pampering him. However, that strategy turns out less than successful, and he eventually goes on a quest for enlightenment, leaving his wife and baby son behind.

And though the Buddha never challenges his father in his quest for enlightenment, early in that quest, he got challenged by a devil, just as Jesus Christ had gotten challenged.

His career is indeed relatively uneventful, and much of it is devoted to expounding his teachings, which may qualify as laws of a sort.

He never falls out of favor, and his death was accidental and not deliberate (he was neither assassinated nor executed).

But his son showed no interest in being a Buddhist Pope.

So, like Moses, the Buddha is a good partial fit.

No, Moses was not the target, every Hebrew boy child was the target, and no reason except fear of the growing population of the Hebrews is given.

Exodus 1:15-22 The king of Egypt said to the Hebrew midwives, whose names were Shiphrah and Puah, "When you help the Hebrew women in childbirth and observe them on the delivery stool, if it is a boy, kill him; but if it is a girl, let her live."
The midwives, however, feared God and did not do what the king of Egypt had told them to do; they let the boys live. Then the king of Egypt summoned the midwives and asked them, "Why have you done this? Why have you let the boys live?" The midwives answered Pharaoh, "Hebrew women are not like Egyptian women; they are vigorous and give birth before the midwives arrive." So God was kind to the midwives and the people increased and became even more numerous. And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families of their own. Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: "Every boy that is born you must throw into the Nile, but let every girl live."

A separate issue, and the fact that the life of Jesus parralleled the life of Moses in Matthew's Gospel works against Price's theory rather than for it.

You are aware that the story of Moses was written very independently of the legend of Romulous and Remus I hope. There is no evidence at all that the author(s) of Exodus would have known anything about Rome, let alone their mythical stories. Again, Price finds himself reaching too much if he wants to try and make this case.

Bottom line, if the hero does not escape the dangers of his youth, we are never going to hear about him. What we should be looking at here is whether or not the majority of heros HAD to be rescued in their youth, and I think the historical record is decidedly mixed on this point.

More reaching. And doughnuts really do look like eggs if you use sufficient reductionism.

My point stands. Childhood just didn't matter to the ancients, so this is either a tataulogy or a non-sequitor.

And he very specifically did NOT become its king. This fact is added for emphasis, since ancient stories would have expected this one for sure. The Jews, however, were not your every day ancients, either in their religious beliefs or politics.

He was the ruler, but not the king, and this is an important distinction. God alone was king of Israel, and the fact that the people insisted on having a human one after about 400 years without proved disasterous in the long run. Kind of a beware what you wish for thing.

There is NO WAY you can claim that the life in the wilderness was uneventful. In fact, I can't think of a single similar ancient story of its like to the 40 years of deliberately imposed wandering in the wilderness on an entire nation. Can you?

And again, Israel was starting from ground zero law-wise, so go figure.

Basically, what we can see here is that if there is a common pattern to ancient hero stories (and I think that there is, but much more limited than Price would like to have us believe), Moses certainly didn't live up to his list (and neither did Jesus).

Kinda makes you wonder how he put the list together in the first place. If you ask me, it looks like over simplified pop-history of the worst kind. Price should be ashamed of himself.

Nomad

[Me:]
Actually, in this story, Moses was the intended target, and that evil Pharaoh decided to kill anyone who might possibly be Moses.

[Nomad:]
No, Moses was not the target, every Hebrew boy child was the target, and no reason except fear of the growing population of the Hebrews is given.

[Me:]
That seems like a pretext, because to really hurt the population, you need to kill the girls, because if it's mostly boys that get killed, the surviving boys can easily do overtime :-) Furthermore, there are simpler ways of getting rid of excessively abundant slaves, such as deporting them.

[Me:]
The story of King Herod and Jesus Christ is remarkably similar, I must add.

[Nomad:]
A separate issue, and the fact that the life of Jesus parralleled the life of Moses in Matthew's Gospel works against Price's theory rather than for it.

[Me:]
I disagree. This evil king who tries to kill him is a motif shared by other stories, such as that of Romulus and Remus. There are somesimilar stories with interesting twists. Oedipus's father tries to thwart the prediction of an oracle that Oedipus will eventually kill his father and marry his mother. The Buddha's father tries to keep him from becoming a religious prophet by pampering him.

[Me:]
He escapes that evil Pharaoh in the way that Romulus and Remus escape another evil king -- by being put into a basket and sent to float down the river. Which certainly counts as being spirited away into safety.

[Nomad:]
You are aware that the story of Moses was written very independently of the legend of Romulous and Remus I hope. There is no evidence at all that the author(s) of Exodus would have known anything about Rome, let alone their mythical stories. Again, Price finds himself reaching too much if he wants to try and make this case.

[Me:]
This may be a case of independent invention; how many ways are there of ensuring that some baby gets out of the sight of the minions of some evil king?

[Nomad:]
Bottom line, if the hero does not escape the dangers of his youth, we are never going to hear about him. What we should be looking at here is whether or not the majority of heros HAD to be rescued in their youth, and I think the historical record is decidedly mixed on this point.

[Me:]
So what about getting rescued? I personally think that the necessity of rescue shows the mythical nature of such stories, because there have been plenty of people in modern times who are worthy of such heroic stature,
and none of their biographies show someone trying to stop them from pursuing some prophesied career, let alone kill them in early childhood or keep them from being born.
About George Washington, we don't see any stories about some colonial governor ordering the killing of lots of baby boys to keep one of them from leading a rebellion against the Crown. About Albert Einstein, we don't see any stories about how his father was desperate to have Albert succeed him in his family's business (perhaps) rather than becoming a scientist. Etc.

That bit about keeping someone from being born was from the Romulus and Remus story, where some evil king made R and R's mother, a certain Rhea Silvia, a Vestal Virgin in order to keep men away from her. However, that did not keep the god Mars away from her, and one thing led to another...

[Nomad:]
(8) reared by foster parents in a foreign land. Moses was born in Egypt, just to slaves, so no.

[Me:]
However, he was raised in the Egyptian royal court, which is practically a foreign country when compared to where and how the Israelite slaves had lived.

[Nomad:]
More reaching. And doughnuts really do look like eggs if you use sufficient reductionism.

[Me:]
That's excessive literalness. In the story, Moses's "country" was the community of Israelite slaves, and he was raised outside of that in the Egyptian royal court.

[Me:]
I think that the community of Israelite slaves counts as a "future kingdom" here, since he'd become that community's de facto ruler.

[Nomad:]
And he very specifically did NOT become its king. ...

[Me:]
He might not have put a crown on his head and announced "I am your king", but he acted as if he was their leader, which is what a king is.

[Nomad:]
(13) becomes king himself. Nope. He got to be a prophet though, and MAN, could his people ever BITCH!!!

[Me:]
Actually, he acts as the Israelites' de facto ruler, leading them from slavery in Egypt and onward to the Promised Land.

[Nomad:]
He was the ruler, but not the king, and this is an important distinction. God alone was king of Israel, and the fact that the people insisted on having a human one after about 400 years without proved disasterous in the long run. Kind of a beware what you wish for thing.

[Me:]
See above. I think that this sort of comment is excessive literal-mindedness.

[Nomad:]
(14) For a while he reigns uneventfully, LOL! I guess we have to say no here.

[Me:]
That may fit the later years of his life, when he led the Israelites in their wanderings.

[Nomad:]
There is NO WAY you can claim that the life in the wilderness was uneventful. In fact, I can't think of a single similar ancient story of its like to the 40 years of deliberately imposed wandering in the wilderness on an entire nation. Can you?

[Me:]
Those wanderings aren't quite as eventful as escaping from Egypt, however.

[Nomad:]
(15) promulgating laws. Yes. Go figure. Somebody has to right?

[Me:]
Which he issues in great abundance.

[Nomad:]
And again, Israel was starting from ground zero law-wise, so go figure.

[Me:]
However, the Israelites could easily have adopted whatever laws that Egyptian free citizens had had.

[Nomad:]
Basically, what we can see here is that if there is a common pattern to ancient hero stories (and I think that there is, but much more limited than Price would like to have us believe), Moses certainly didn't live up to his list (and neither did Jesus).

Kinda makes you wonder how he put the list together in the first place. If you ask me, it looks like over simplified pop-history of the worst kind. Price should be ashamed of himself.

[Me:]
Mr. Price does concede that his biography is essentially an ideal type, and that actual biographies are likely to differ from it in some ways. However, miraculous or unusual origins, and people who try to keep them from fulfilling prophesied destinies, do seem fairly common, even if falling out of favor is not quite as common (Romulus, Moses, and the Buddha do not).

Price got the list (I do not remember the man who actually presented it as a study) from well over a century of work by anthropologists, archeologists, sociologists and folklorists.

It is not a boiler plate for heros it is a list of common elements in a mythic-hero's life. I belive there are some critically accepted cut offs for it--- some scholars say x amount, others say more (I do not remember it--- it was back in undergrad), but most mythic heroes share most of it. There are certian elements which are crucial, others which are not. (As in, you can lose alot of little details, a few big ones before you start to lose the ruler.)

Mythic Heroes are _not_ accpeted as people--- they may be based on people, but they left their humanity behind. Thus showing how Moses was a run of the mill hero while holding Yashua as a mythic hero only adds to the assumption that Yashua's life has been glamorized--- that is, fit into the construct of the mythic hero.

Motive?

Make the story more appealing to the listener.

Because the Mythic-Hero structure is universal. All areas of the world and all tribes of people shared in the basic structure of the folktale. This includes the basic points a story has to hit ( the set up, the inciting event, preparation, launch, adjustment to world, rising action, crises point, breath catcher, return, climax, denoument) and the major charcters in a story (Heroes, Mentors, Heralds, Gatekeepers, Shapeshifters, Shadows and Tricksters).

The Mythic-Hero structure quoted above is merely an excellent example of this specific type of hero. No, It also does not apply to Indiana Jones, Sommersby, Rob Roy, Shane, or Patton. It however does apply to characters in Willow, Krull, Legend, Baron Munchausen--- the more mythic tales. Myth used to be more important 2000 years ago--- today you would be laughed out of the room if you told Jesus' story--- we prefer the Cowboy Hero right now (that is the one Jesus would have best fit)

So no, this is not a parallel of all ancient hero stories, only a certain subset. (Modern folklore heros don't all match Snake Plisken, do they?) However, it is a good ruler by which to measure a hero--- it rules out Snake and in Jesus and Buddha. Fine, they follow a mythic construct.

Your car (I am going out on a limb here) has four wheels. That does not belittle it or damage it in anyway, it is just an observable fact.

Your probelem with applying the mythic hero contstruct to Jesus is what, exactly?

Please excuse spelling grammar or other confusing mistakes. My wisdom teeth surgery went bad and I am heavily medicated... I should be in bed.

Was that sarcasm? They are both decended from David... Or have my durgs just whacked me out?