Christ in Egypt: Conclusion
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 6:34 am
I am jumping to the Conclusion because it contains arguments that summarize main issues in the book, especially on why this material is so controversial.
Readers of Christ in Egypt and those who are just interested in the discussion at Booktalk should understand the political dimension of this research. Establishing that orthodox Christianity is based on systemic fraud and censorship, and that the Gospel story of Jesus Christ is primarily a construction of historical imagination, is deeply controversial. Murdock is the target of academic and theological bullying and suppression because of the challenge the material she has unearthed presents to vested interests. Apologists routinely call her names, attack distinguished scholars for supporting her work, such as Robert M. Price, and suggest her work should be ignored. None of this vilification is based on rational argument and analysis, but rather rests on desperate efforts to sustain illogical and false Christian dogma, centered on the blind belief in the Biblical fiction of Christ as a literal historical man. Remember, these people who criticize Murdock without reading her books often themselves hold to beliefs for which there is zero evidence, such as the existence of supernatural entities.
Her detractors seek to maintain an immutable, fixed and absolute dogma, ignoring “how myths are changed and altered to suit the audience.” (p515) By contrast, Murdock is scrupulous in searching for evidence to justify her assertions regarding the evolution of religious belief. In the two centuries since Egyptian religion became accessible through the deciphering of the Rosetta Stone, the controversial nature of the material discovered has been subject of a successful rear-guard action by Christians, already reeling from the blows inflicted by Galileo and Darwin, and finding that Egyptian scholarship was an easier target than astronomy or evolution. Murdock asserts that “we are just now starting to see the implications of these finds” (p499), against a heavy backdrop of suppression, ridicule and censorship of serious objective scholarship. She gives the example of William Cooper, a nineteenth century scholar who presented “proofs of the merging of the Egyptian and Christian religions” and “was extremely disappointed by the weak reaction he received”. Similarly, Gerald Massey’s “massive works remain mostly unknown” despite being “substantially correct in both his facts and his conclusions.” (p502) The situation is that ‘information has been rigorously censored … Cooper’s brilliant lead was ignored and his fascinating leads left unfollowed.” (p503) This censorial attitude has a long Christian pedigree, such as the deletion of the comments of Clement of Alexandria comparing the twelve apostles to the signs of the zodiac, and of the comments by Epiphanius on pagan virgin mother rituals.
Rational people tend to look at this debate with disdain, since the miraculous supernatural worldview of conventional religion has been refuted by science. This rational response tends to see religion as obsolete, so people wonder why Murdock bothers to explore the contradictions within dogma. The point of interest in this material is that human thought exhibits continuous evolution from earliest times, and there is much to be learned about modern psychology and politics from exploration of ancient psychology and politics. Religion remains central to human culture. In fact there is more mythology within supposedly rational attitudes than is generally understood. Even science has its myths, such as the view that science supersedes religion, when the reality is that their concerns only partly overlap. By exploring the continuity between Christianity and older myth, Murdock helps to lay the groundwork for a rational understanding of religion, which is not the same thing as the atheist effort to abolish religion entirely.
The conclusion to Christ in Egypt (pp498-521) helps to explain the emotional origins of the political controversy within theology that Murdock’s work has prompted. Scholars who raised this material were sacked and jailed in the nineteenth century, and subject to “every sort of vitriolic and libellous epithet imaginable” (p505) by defenders of Bibliolatry. As a result of this exclusion, institutional scholars are still able to say this material is only of interest to “outsiders” who can be ridiculed and ignored, simply because the scholarly community excludes anyone interested in the mythic origins of Christianity from their professional circles!
The situation is that “censors have removed material threatening to their faith – a common occurrence that reduced much of the ancient world to rubble, the wrecked pieces of which we are only now putting back together.” (p504) This reconstruction effort is the primary goal of Christ in Egypt. “Scholarly timidity" has led many to hint at ideas they dare not voice, often in tantalizing concluding questions like breadcrumb trails. Entire genres of literature, such as Hermeticism, are still treated with disdain and denounced. “Because of cherished beliefs and biases, entire premises have been overlooked or rejected, such as looking for the influence of Hermetic literature on Christianity.” (p506) One interesting scholar, Morenz, cautioned against seeking out Egyptian parallels, advice that reflects a well-founded fear of persecution. As DM Murdock has commented here at Booktalk, much good material in other languages remains unavailable in English translation.
A key question is whether New Testament theology developed the idea of Christ from a historical Jesus, or, as Murdock argues, if the idea of a historical Jesus arose from a mythic theory of a cosmic Christ. Conventional opinion that Jesus Christ was the founder of Christianity assumes that Christianity started with the historical Jesus, and the theology of the eternal Christ was developed to explain the actual events. Yet major ancient theologians Augustine and Eusebius say that Christianity had existed ‘from the beginning’. Unlike modern apologists, ancient theologians did not dishonestly deny parallels, such as the widespread prior belief in virgin birth, but ascribed them to the devil. Egyptologist Budge says the Egyptian influence on Christianity ‘would fill a large volume’. But, as Murdock observes, “vested interests clamped down and rendered this worthy endeavour nearly impossible.” (p499)
In Murdock’s view, which I share, the truth is the reverse of the conventional assumption. Christianity started with the myth of the eternal Christ, ‘God’s anointed’, and gradually embellished this myth with fictional historical detail in order to use it as the basis of a mass political movement to subvert the Roman Empire. Ancient groups such as the Gnostics and Docetics held that Christ only seemed to come in the flesh, but their views were brutally suppressed and their books were burnt. The Bible deceptively puts the Gospels before Paul’s Epistles, even though the Gospels were not finalised until as much as century after the time of Paul. Paul makes only scattered reference to Jesus as historical, with nothing that corroborates the Gospel stories of miracles, parables and family. Even Paul’s brief mentions of the Last Supper and the cross and resurrection read more like hearsay embellished from cosmic myth. Major Christian theologian Justin Martyr does not “ever mention the canonical gospels by name, as if he had never heard of them.” (p519)
The conclusion of Christ in Egypt shows how Christians have routinely distorted history by claiming that pagan doctrines were based on Christianity, when the truth is the reverse. The Egyptian ideas of Osiris returning from the dead, of Isis as a virgin mother, and of the battle between Horus and Set, were already ancient and widely known by the time they were incorporated into the story of Christ. Suppressing these myths required intensive coordinated effort. That Christianity succeeded in brainwashing the world for nearly two thousand years is a testament to the fragile nature of human politics and psychology, in the modern world as much as in the ancient.
The fragility of religious psychology is shown by Murdock’s observation that popular Egyptian religion was also conservative and intolerant, subject to ‘the fashion of the day’. Conservative intolerance in more recent times reflects what Murdock calls an “enduring trauma” (p512), for example in “virulent dislike” of astronomy/astrology. So Frazer, in the major work The Golden Bough, aggressively rejects the idea of Osiris as a sun god, ignoring abundant Egyptian evidence linking Osiris to the sun. (I must say, this reminds me of Milton’s claim in Paradise Lost that Osiris and Isis are devils.) Murdock’s point here is that the widespread practice of wilful suppression should be kept in mind in analysing this material.
“The history of religion shows a continual wave of ideas that mutate.” (p515) Denial of this observation is at the root of monotheism, which Murdock therefore calls “an inferior and intolerant method of governance … based on … strength … rather than … correctness.” The key question in assessing religious claims is ‘who benefits?’
The concluding remarks of Christ in Egypt are worth considering: “The comprehension of the astrotheological and nature-worshipping perception behind the world’s religious ideologies greatly benefits humanity in a number of ways … we are free to develop true human community based not on neurotic and psychotic “religious” pathologies … but on shared common experiences and reference points, such as the mysterious and marvellous planet upon which we all live.” (p521)
Readers of Christ in Egypt and those who are just interested in the discussion at Booktalk should understand the political dimension of this research. Establishing that orthodox Christianity is based on systemic fraud and censorship, and that the Gospel story of Jesus Christ is primarily a construction of historical imagination, is deeply controversial. Murdock is the target of academic and theological bullying and suppression because of the challenge the material she has unearthed presents to vested interests. Apologists routinely call her names, attack distinguished scholars for supporting her work, such as Robert M. Price, and suggest her work should be ignored. None of this vilification is based on rational argument and analysis, but rather rests on desperate efforts to sustain illogical and false Christian dogma, centered on the blind belief in the Biblical fiction of Christ as a literal historical man. Remember, these people who criticize Murdock without reading her books often themselves hold to beliefs for which there is zero evidence, such as the existence of supernatural entities.
Her detractors seek to maintain an immutable, fixed and absolute dogma, ignoring “how myths are changed and altered to suit the audience.” (p515) By contrast, Murdock is scrupulous in searching for evidence to justify her assertions regarding the evolution of religious belief. In the two centuries since Egyptian religion became accessible through the deciphering of the Rosetta Stone, the controversial nature of the material discovered has been subject of a successful rear-guard action by Christians, already reeling from the blows inflicted by Galileo and Darwin, and finding that Egyptian scholarship was an easier target than astronomy or evolution. Murdock asserts that “we are just now starting to see the implications of these finds” (p499), against a heavy backdrop of suppression, ridicule and censorship of serious objective scholarship. She gives the example of William Cooper, a nineteenth century scholar who presented “proofs of the merging of the Egyptian and Christian religions” and “was extremely disappointed by the weak reaction he received”. Similarly, Gerald Massey’s “massive works remain mostly unknown” despite being “substantially correct in both his facts and his conclusions.” (p502) The situation is that ‘information has been rigorously censored … Cooper’s brilliant lead was ignored and his fascinating leads left unfollowed.” (p503) This censorial attitude has a long Christian pedigree, such as the deletion of the comments of Clement of Alexandria comparing the twelve apostles to the signs of the zodiac, and of the comments by Epiphanius on pagan virgin mother rituals.
Rational people tend to look at this debate with disdain, since the miraculous supernatural worldview of conventional religion has been refuted by science. This rational response tends to see religion as obsolete, so people wonder why Murdock bothers to explore the contradictions within dogma. The point of interest in this material is that human thought exhibits continuous evolution from earliest times, and there is much to be learned about modern psychology and politics from exploration of ancient psychology and politics. Religion remains central to human culture. In fact there is more mythology within supposedly rational attitudes than is generally understood. Even science has its myths, such as the view that science supersedes religion, when the reality is that their concerns only partly overlap. By exploring the continuity between Christianity and older myth, Murdock helps to lay the groundwork for a rational understanding of religion, which is not the same thing as the atheist effort to abolish religion entirely.
The conclusion to Christ in Egypt (pp498-521) helps to explain the emotional origins of the political controversy within theology that Murdock’s work has prompted. Scholars who raised this material were sacked and jailed in the nineteenth century, and subject to “every sort of vitriolic and libellous epithet imaginable” (p505) by defenders of Bibliolatry. As a result of this exclusion, institutional scholars are still able to say this material is only of interest to “outsiders” who can be ridiculed and ignored, simply because the scholarly community excludes anyone interested in the mythic origins of Christianity from their professional circles!
The situation is that “censors have removed material threatening to their faith – a common occurrence that reduced much of the ancient world to rubble, the wrecked pieces of which we are only now putting back together.” (p504) This reconstruction effort is the primary goal of Christ in Egypt. “Scholarly timidity" has led many to hint at ideas they dare not voice, often in tantalizing concluding questions like breadcrumb trails. Entire genres of literature, such as Hermeticism, are still treated with disdain and denounced. “Because of cherished beliefs and biases, entire premises have been overlooked or rejected, such as looking for the influence of Hermetic literature on Christianity.” (p506) One interesting scholar, Morenz, cautioned against seeking out Egyptian parallels, advice that reflects a well-founded fear of persecution. As DM Murdock has commented here at Booktalk, much good material in other languages remains unavailable in English translation.
A key question is whether New Testament theology developed the idea of Christ from a historical Jesus, or, as Murdock argues, if the idea of a historical Jesus arose from a mythic theory of a cosmic Christ. Conventional opinion that Jesus Christ was the founder of Christianity assumes that Christianity started with the historical Jesus, and the theology of the eternal Christ was developed to explain the actual events. Yet major ancient theologians Augustine and Eusebius say that Christianity had existed ‘from the beginning’. Unlike modern apologists, ancient theologians did not dishonestly deny parallels, such as the widespread prior belief in virgin birth, but ascribed them to the devil. Egyptologist Budge says the Egyptian influence on Christianity ‘would fill a large volume’. But, as Murdock observes, “vested interests clamped down and rendered this worthy endeavour nearly impossible.” (p499)
In Murdock’s view, which I share, the truth is the reverse of the conventional assumption. Christianity started with the myth of the eternal Christ, ‘God’s anointed’, and gradually embellished this myth with fictional historical detail in order to use it as the basis of a mass political movement to subvert the Roman Empire. Ancient groups such as the Gnostics and Docetics held that Christ only seemed to come in the flesh, but their views were brutally suppressed and their books were burnt. The Bible deceptively puts the Gospels before Paul’s Epistles, even though the Gospels were not finalised until as much as century after the time of Paul. Paul makes only scattered reference to Jesus as historical, with nothing that corroborates the Gospel stories of miracles, parables and family. Even Paul’s brief mentions of the Last Supper and the cross and resurrection read more like hearsay embellished from cosmic myth. Major Christian theologian Justin Martyr does not “ever mention the canonical gospels by name, as if he had never heard of them.” (p519)
The conclusion of Christ in Egypt shows how Christians have routinely distorted history by claiming that pagan doctrines were based on Christianity, when the truth is the reverse. The Egyptian ideas of Osiris returning from the dead, of Isis as a virgin mother, and of the battle between Horus and Set, were already ancient and widely known by the time they were incorporated into the story of Christ. Suppressing these myths required intensive coordinated effort. That Christianity succeeded in brainwashing the world for nearly two thousand years is a testament to the fragile nature of human politics and psychology, in the modern world as much as in the ancient.
The fragility of religious psychology is shown by Murdock’s observation that popular Egyptian religion was also conservative and intolerant, subject to ‘the fashion of the day’. Conservative intolerance in more recent times reflects what Murdock calls an “enduring trauma” (p512), for example in “virulent dislike” of astronomy/astrology. So Frazer, in the major work The Golden Bough, aggressively rejects the idea of Osiris as a sun god, ignoring abundant Egyptian evidence linking Osiris to the sun. (I must say, this reminds me of Milton’s claim in Paradise Lost that Osiris and Isis are devils.) Murdock’s point here is that the widespread practice of wilful suppression should be kept in mind in analysing this material.
“The history of religion shows a continual wave of ideas that mutate.” (p515) Denial of this observation is at the root of monotheism, which Murdock therefore calls “an inferior and intolerant method of governance … based on … strength … rather than … correctness.” The key question in assessing religious claims is ‘who benefits?’
The concluding remarks of Christ in Egypt are worth considering: “The comprehension of the astrotheological and nature-worshipping perception behind the world’s religious ideologies greatly benefits humanity in a number of ways … we are free to develop true human community based not on neurotic and psychotic “religious” pathologies … but on shared common experiences and reference points, such as the mysterious and marvellous planet upon which we all live.” (p521)