lpetrich

From <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/0968601405/customer-reviews/ref=cm_rev_all_1/103-8548441-2167843" target="_blank">the customer reviews of "The Jesus Puzzle" at Amazon</a>, in particular, the review by Michael Hoffman:

Orthodox mystics
(Supernaturalist esoteric Historical Jesus researchers.) These investigators research Jesus' life as part of seeking direct mystical experiences of the supernatural Christ, which manifested as the actual Historical Jesus. They think Jesus was supernatural and also can be experienced mystically.

Orthodox literalists
(Supernaturalist non-esoteric Historical Jesus researchers.) These do Historical Jesus research as part of worshipping the Christ of Faith. The assume there was a real, single, towering supernatural Historical Jesus who performed miracles, was resurrected from death, and is God. Even if they let go of some or all miracles, they maintain that Jesus is holy, is uniquely God, and is the Savior. The very existence of Christianity depends on an actual, single, uniquely holy Jesus.

Modernist mystics
(Non-supernaturalist, esoteric Historical Jesus researchers.) These assume Jesus was a mystery-religion initiator and spirituality expert who was unfortunately crucified. This approach so well explains mythic allegorical Christianity, an actual Jesus tends to become an unnecessary hypothesis, though by habit of tradition, such theorists try to find something for the supposed Historical Jesus to do as part of the mystery religion: he spent time with the Essenes as the Teacher of Righteousness, or was an even more towering and ethically influential man. Example: Andrew Welburn's book, The Beginnings of Christianity: Essene Mystery, Gnostic Revelation and the Christian Vision.

Moderate demythologizers
(Non-supernaturalist, non-esoteric Historical Jesus researchers.) These are today's mainstream Jesus scholars and liberal Christians, who focus on Historical Jesus studies to uncover a supposed liberal ethical teacher. They assume there was a real, single, towering Jesus, upon whom many myths were piled. They treat Jesus as a largely unique figure, though not a unique holy savior. Examples: The Jesus Seminar.

Skeptical hyperpluralists
(Non-supernaturalist, non-esoteric, skeptical Historical Jesus researchers.) These are interested in exploring our inability to choose among the plethora of Jesuses and Christs rather than promoting a particular Jesus. They acknowledge the mythic-only Christ hypothesis, but don't treat that any more seriously than any particular proposed Historical Jesus. Examples: Richard Grigg, Imaginary Christs: The Challenge of Christological Pluralism; Robert Price: Deconstructing Jesus.

Radical humanist debunkers
(Non-supernaturalist, non-esoteric mythic-only Christ researchers.) These classic scientific humanists neglect or belittle esoteric religious experiencing. Religion is bad; it's all superstition and deceptive myth to manipulate weak and irrational minds. This approach equates all religion with exoteric religion, and dismisses religion, without giving special coverage of esoteric religion and its claims to provide transcendent knowledge, insight, or wisdom beyond what scientific humanism provides. When Jesus is proven to be mythical, Christianity automatically vanishes altogether ("good riddance") for such scorched-earth debunkers. Example: Earl Doherty's The Jesus Puzzle: Did Christianity Begin with a Mythical Christ?

Fully allegorical mystics
(Non-supernaturalist, esoteric/allegorical mythic-only Christ researchers.)
These researchers propose an esoteric, allegorical, usually mystic-experiencing theory of the origin of Christianity. Scientific history refutes the Historical Jesus hypothesis, which should be replaced by a positive alternative hypothesis of the Jesus figure as an allegorical mythic personification of esoteric initiation experience that, with the Holy Spirit, conveys transcendent knowledge, enlightenment, an experiential core of religious insight, spiritual, mental, and ethical transformation, and the revealing of hidden wisdom. Mystery-religions are entheogenic (see James Arthur's Mushrooms & Mankind, and Clark Heinrich), experiential (Andrew Welburn), and determinism-transcending (see Luther Martin's Hellenistic Religions). Examples: Freke and Gandy's The Jesus Mysteries, and Jesus & The Lost Goddess, propose a Gnostic drama of Jesus rescuing Sophia, the lost and deluded soul; Acharya S, author of The Christ Conspiracy, proposes an astrotheology explanation for the origin of Christianity. The Jesus that became canonical was a mythical, allegorical figure loosely based on a variety of political, ethical, and religious figures of the era. The canonical Jesus is a socio-political rebel, liberator of those oppressed by the power establishment, whose storyline also allegorizes the mystic experiences of Hellenistic mystery-religion initiation. Jesus is an allegorical mythic dying/rising savior figure as in Hellenistic mystery-religions. His dramatic mystery-ritual storyline is set in the historical rather than mythic realm; it is about political rebellion against the power establishment that tried to use religion to justify the oppressive status quo. The power establishment took over this politically and mystically popular religion of Jesus to defuse it by making it a supernaturalist exoteric-only religion.

Michael Hoffman then goes on to discuss where "The Jesus Puzzle" fits into this picture.

Toto

Does Michael Hoffman post here? "Egodeath" sounds familiar.

I thought the review from the Christian in Nagasaki was interesting - he correctly recognized that Doherty relies on the Jesus Seminar and liberal modern scholarship, but is drawing the conclusions that they are afraid to.

Alexis Comnenus

Toto, afraid of what? You said before that some atheists had been intimidated into accepting a historical Jesus.

Who is doing the intimidating? Who are they afraid of? You sound like you seriously believe that there is some sort of conspiracy silencing troublesome academics.

Well, there isn't and to prove it, I present the UK where Christianity has no power, political or otherwise. And yet even here, I know of no credible historian who supports the Jesus myth thesis. Even ultra sceptic atheist Keith Hopkins doesn't suggest the idea.

Toto, just accept the fact that the reason no one supports the Jesus myth is that, with their training and professional expertise, they think it's wrong. When you start blaming bias and insinuating about religious loyalties that don't exist, it shows you know you've lost the argument.

Regards

Alex

Toto

Afraid of being labeled a nut case. The social power of abuse and scorn. Did you think I was talking about the Spanish Inquisition?? (I know, you never expect the Spanish Inquisition.)

A scholar who announces that he thinks there is no historical Jesus will get a lot of abuse and no gain. Much safer to talk about mysteries, and probably some guy who was behind the legend, even if we can't know anything much about him because of the layers of myth encrusted upon him.

Meanwhile, we've drifted from Loren's intended topic - the variety of views on the historical Jesus. The more you think about it, the more it sounds like asking whether the historic Jesus existed is like asking whether God exists. You can never get to the end of defining your terms, and you end up thinking that the question may not make any sense in real terms.

lpetrich

I've rearranged the descriptions; they will follow my discussion of the axes that these views can be plotted on.

One axis covers non-esoteric to esoteric.

The non-esoteric views focus on how historical the Jesus Christ of the Gospels had been; what would one see if one went to early 30's Palestine in a time machine? Were the Gospels letter-perfect documentaries? Or were they partially fictional? Or even entirely fictional?

The esoteric views are about experiencing Jesus Christ in some way or other, and what interpretation to pin on those experiences, whether literal or allegorical.

The other axis covers orthodox to modernist/skeptical to mythicist.

The orthodox end pictures Jesus Christ as a sort of cosmic superbeing, while the mythicist end considers the accounts of JC to be either fictional or allegorical.

----

Orthodox mystics
(Supernaturalist esoteric Historical Jesus researchers.)

Modernist mystics
(Non-supernaturalist, esoteric Historical Jesus researchers.)

Fully allegorical mystics
(Non-supernaturalist, esoteric/allegorical mythic-only Christ researchers.)

--

Orthodox literalists
(Supernaturalist non-esoteric Historical Jesus researchers.)

Moderate demythologizers
(Non-supernaturalist, non-esoteric Historical Jesus researchers.)

Skeptical hyperpluralists
(Non-supernaturalist, non-esoteric, skeptical Historical Jesus researchers.)

Radical humanist debunkers
(Non-supernaturalist, non-esoteric mythic-only Christ researchers.)