The Making of a Myth
How We Went from Crucified Man to Resurrected Lord
In this part of the study, I would like to illustrate my beliefs on the creation of the Christ myth. I base my report on the work of many great scholars. Some of the scholars who have influenced this work are: John Dominic Crossan for his monumental books, The Historical Jesus and The Birth of Christianity, Burton Mack for his enlightening book, Who Wrote the New Testament? The Making of the Christian Myth, Robert Funk and the Jesus Seminar for their books, The Five Gospels and The Acts of Jesus, and the man who brought historical Jesus research to the public, Albert Schweitzer for his book, The Quest of the Historical Jesus. There are so many other scholars who have influenced me that space prevents me from listing them all. Many of their works can be found at my books page.
Without further ado, here is The Making of a Myth.
Jesus overestimated the potency of his message and it angered the right people enough to get himself executed. The reasons are numerous and inconsequential to the purpose of this work.
Jesus died on the cross and was thrown into a shallow grave where he was consumed by scavenging animals. This was done in accordance with Jewish law found in Deuteronomy 21:22-23 which said that an executed criminal that was hung from a tree should not be left to face the sundown. That Jesus was thrown into a shallow grave as opposed to being buried in a tomb should be obvious due to the fact that there is no reason for us to believe that Jesus had anyone to speak out for him after his death. He did not have anyone of any power speak out for him to prevent his crucifixion so we should assume that no one would have done so after he had perished. As Crossan puts it in his book, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, "In general, however, if one had influence, one was not crucified, and if one was crucified, one would not have influence to obtain burial. It would have been impossible, without influence or bribery, to obtain a crucified's corpse. And it might also be very dangerous to request it, lest even familial association with a condemned criminal be judged as part of the problem and handled accordingly." (page 153)
People began to talk about the radical teacher and his radical teachings. They talked about how they would keep his message alive through their actions. Indeed, all that the master had taught gave them a "new life". They were born again, as the master must have been "born again". This led to talk about the master transcending or cheating his death.
A cult forms around this idea, and they are persecuted by one Saul of Tarsus. They try to tell him that there master is alive in them and that he has risen from the dead. He does not believe that they would mock God and the dead and persecutes them in the synagogues forcing them to meet in their homes. This forms the early "house churches" spoken about in Acts of the Apostles.
One day, while Paul is on the road to Damascus (not the one in modern day Syria, but the spiritual one spoken about in the Dead Sea Scrolls), something happens to him that forces him to come around to consider this master's message. What it is remains speculation, but suffice it to say that it was something of a traumatic physical or emotional experience.
Saul, now named Paul, begins to believe the things that they tell him, but tries to convince them that this was something that did not fit into the Judaism that he had grown up with. Paul, in affect, ends the covenant held between the nation Israel and God and attempts to create a new covenant. This view is accepted by some and rejected by others.
Paul becomes the new voice of the message, starting communities all over Asia Minor, Greece, Rome & Palestine. He begins to write about his risen lord who has transcended death through resurrection. Paul never specifies what type of resurrection he means, spiritual or physical, and it does not seem to matter to the early followers.
Paul and other church leaders are persecuted. Paul is called to Rome to defend this new religion. His ship meets rough weather and crashes, killing all aboard.
Mark comes along and writes a biography based on early oral sources and the writings of Paul. He writes to the point where a resurrection would occur, but stops short of saying that Jesus rose from the grave in a physical sense. The Gospel of Mark ended at 16:8, originally, and had the last 12 verses added at a later date. Mark invents Joseph of Aramathea to get Jesus from the cross to a tomb with a stone in front of it.
Matthew writes his gospel some time later and includes wild tales of earthquakes and mass risings. To appease some of the problems that his community was facing from some of the Jews, he invents a guard at the tomb to prevent the rumor of the disciples stealing the body and burying it elsewhere. Matthew writes a full blown resurrection with appearances to disciples who had earlier fled.
Luke also writes a tale of resurrection but, not knowing Matthew's gospel, does not include the wilder aspects of his story. He knew of all of the important features from Mark, and may have even heard Matthew read aloud. By the time that Luke wrote his tale, there was plenty of urban legend about Jesus floating around that the common bits can be explained away whether a common source outside of Mark is posited or not.
By the time that the Gospel of John was written, enough time had passed that no one who had been alive at the time of Jesus was still living to dispute anything that he wrote.
When I am faced with the threefold choice of lord, lunatic or liar, I always opt for the fourth, unmentioned, choice:
legend.