Sheshbazzar

Although the association with death, and with remembrance of the "deceased" has became the prominent -modern- usage, in archaic usage the term eulogy was not limited to the eulogising of the memory of the deceased, but was (and still can) also be an account of the accomplishments of the living. Or as in this particular case, a remembrance, or a memorial, of a living one that died, resurrected, and lives evermore. Thus more appropriate than such other terms as might only convey ideas limited to a permanent death and departure.

Doug Shaver

OK, if you insist.

In that case, the answer is: No way.

Satisfied now?

Clivedurdle

What if, amending Lucian, it is an oriental death cult?


Death, where is thy sting?

Sheshbazzar

A cult of extreme ascetics that undergo sensory deprivation through the practice entombment, so that they can be "revived" on the third day?

'Cept occasionally the "Reviver" dallied and delayed his arrival, much to the tomb inhabitants discomfort.

spamandham

No. They are, in general, what we might call "hero biographies". Don't let the name confuse you. They are not biographies in the modern sense at all. I tend to think of them as more liek 'fan fiction'.

mountainman

Dear wavy_wonder1,

Fiction is a singular genre (with many sub-genres), and unless you have some inside information to the contrary, the gospels may be fiction.

* simplistic popular biographical fiction
* proselyting (propagate the faith) propaganda fiction
* narrative/drama/story fiction
* "hero biographies"/'fan fiction' (S&H)

I can imagine the pagan skeptics (Hellenistic academics like Porphyry) referring to the gospels as obituaries to the new god of the empire's new state monotheistic religion. They would have been ruthless in their attack on the plain and simple religion of the galilaeans.

It sounds like a very unique and novel skeptical suggestion, and one which would be right at home in Monty Python's "Life of Brian", where the laughter would be more genuine, and less forced.

Best wishes,


Pete

Chili

I like your question but they are not obituaries because nobody died in any of the four gospels wherein only the persona is crucified.

The gospels show us how that is done successfully in Luke and John by way of resurrecton wherein the persona is placed subservient to intuition in what they call the upper room, while in Matthew and Mark the persona is also crucified but is not raised and returns to the lower house and effectively makes the saved sinner self righteous in his own right for the rest of his life.

This makes Luke and John divine comedies while Matthew and Mark are not so divine self inflicted tragedies.

Analyst

Are the Synoptic Gospels (Mark, Matthew, Luke) historical? (LINK)

An interesting discussion of the gospels. The summation is that these are all liturgies, and that gMark is either based on Homer's Odyssey; or on Egyptian myths, and that the other gospels are based on Mark. It is also pointed out how little of the miracles of the gospels are in Paul, implying that all were created later as a form of midrash.