Evemerism
(Top Posts - History - 050102)

The way to verity on the Jesus-Fact or Fiction issues is
open-minded search for a logical, reasonable, and substan-
tive explanation for the myths and claims surrounding the
character.

I've endeavored, and continue to endeavor, to elucidate
on that topic. Others insist on perpetuating the cover-up
and disregarding, out-of-hand, any information which casts
doubt on the presence of some magic godman close to
2,000 years ago.

Here's a perspective you rarely will hear about within the
parameters of social / culturally sanctified "OK with Christ,
no matter what" perspectives ...

---
http://www.truthbeknown.com/footnote.htm#foot3
---

- - - begin excerpts - - -

Evemerism, named after Evemeras, a 4th Century B.C.E.
Greek philosopher who developed the idea that, rather than
being mythological creatures as was accepted by the reigning
intellectuals, the gods of old were in fact historical characters,
kings, emperors and heroes whose exploits were then deified.

Evemerists have put forth a great deal of literature attempting
to prove that Jesus was a great Jewish reformer and revolu-
tionary who threatened the status quo and thus had to be put
to death.

Unfortunately for historicizers, no historian of his purported
time even noticed this "great reformer."

In Ancient History of the God Jesus, Dujardin states, "This
doctrine [Evemerism] is nowadays discredited except in the
case of Jesus.

No scholar believes that Osiris or Jupiter or Dionysus was an
historical person promoted to the rank of a god, but exception
is made only in favour of Jesus. . . .It is impossible to rest the
colossal work of Christianity on Jesus, if he was a man."

The standard Christian response to the Evemerists has been
that no such Jesus, stripped of his miracles and other super-
natural attributes, could ever "have been adored as a god or
even been saluted as the Messiah of Israel." (Dujardin)

This response is quite accurate: No man could have caused
such a hullabaloo and hellish fanaticism, the product of which
has been the unending spilling of blood.

The crazed "inspiration" that has kept the Church afloat
merely confirms the mythological origins of this tale.

"The general assumption concerning the canonical gospels is
that the historic element was the kernel of the whole, and that
the fables accreted round it; whereas the mythos, being pre-
extant, proves the core of the matter was mythical, and it
follows that the history is incremental. . . . It was the human
history that accreted round the divinity, and not a human
being who became divine." (Massey, The Historical Jesus
and the Mythical Christ, henceforth, "MC")

The bottom line is that when one removes all the elements
of those preceding deities and myths that contributed to
the formation of this Jewish god-man - which is what Eve-
merists insist on doing - there is nothing historical left to
point to. As Massey says, ". . . a composite likeness of
twenty different persons merged in one . . . is not anybody."
(MC)

- - - end excerpts - - -