The Jesus Mysteries: Was The Original Jesus A Pagan God?

"The Jesus Mysteries" by Freke and Gandy.The authors conclude that Jesus was originally a mythical "god-man", like the Pagan gods Osiris and Dionysus. But under orders from Roman Emperor Constantine, Christian doctrines were chosen to support the theory of Jesus as a historical figure capable of actually doing the miraculous things previously attributed only to the mythical Jesus.In the pre-Christian era there were traditional Pagan "Mystery Religions", in which there were mythycal "god-men". These included Osiris in Egypt; Dionysus in Greece; Adonis in Syria; Attis in Turkey and Mithras in Persia. These stories had much in common, and the god-man is sometimes called Osiris/Dionysus. This god-man is God made flesh, the "Savior" and the "Son of God". His father is God and his mother is a virgin; he is born in a cave at the winter solstice before three shepherds; he offers rebirth by baptism; he miraculaously turns water into wine; he rides triumphantly into town on a donkey; he dies at Eastertime as a sacrifice for the sins of the world; he descends into hell; he rises on the third day and ascends into heaven, promising to return as judge; his death and resurrection are celebrated a ritual meal of bread and wine, which symbolizes his body and blood. These Pagan legends were not considered to be the literal truth.In the first century CE, after a long history of military defeats, the Jews wanted a god-man of their own. It was decided that Jesus would fill the role of the legendary god-man Osiris/Dionysus. But the Jews already had a God, Yahweh (Jehovah), the God of Abraham as in the Old Testament, and the all-powerful Yahweh had little in common with the Pagan Mystery Religions, so it was debatable how to merge the religion of Yahweh and the god-man Jesus into a single belief system. What emerged was an early form of Christianity called "Gnosticism". Both Pagan and Gnostic philosophies defined four levels of human identity: physical, psychological, mystical and spiritual. A Gnostic would progress through these levels by initiation ceremonies of baptism. The physical level was for the uninitiated; at the psychological level you would be initiated into the "Outer Mysteries", understanding the Jesus story as literally true; at the mystical you would be initiated into the "Inner Mysteries", understanding the Jesus story as an allegorical myth; and at the spiritual level you would realize your identity as the Christ or Logos. Much of our knowledge of Gnosticism from early Christian texts discovered in 1945 hidden in a cave near Nag Hammadi in Egypt, and called the Gnostic gospels.As time went by, a movement (which the authors call literalism) developed; the idea was to accept only the "Outer Mysteries", understanding the Jesus story as literally true. The literalist view was that you need a priesthood to interpret religion, unlike Gnosticism in which it was left to the individual. Literalism gained the upper hand, especially when the Roman Emperor Constantine, whose mother was a Christian, decided to consolidate his claim of "One Empire, One Emperor" by adopting an official "One God, One Religion" policy. So he appointed propagandist Bishop Eusebius to rid Christianity of Gnosticism, accepting only literalism. Eusebius obliged by actively suppressing Gnosticism (and Paganism), and destroying much of the Gnostic culture. The literalists were not above modifying texts and adding new material to suit their purposes. When Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE, the stage was set for the establishment of the authoritarian Roman Catholic church along with its dogmas and the Holy Bible, whose contents were determined according to their suitability for inclusion in the church hierarchy. This dictatorship of belief tended to stifle philosophical enquiry, and was followed by the "Dark Ages". Not until the Reformation, many centuries later, did Western society begin to emerge from the darkness imposed by Constantine at Nicaea.I found the theory expounded in this book far more plausible than the orthodox view, and I recommend it to anyone seriously interested in the history of Christianity.

The central thesis of Freke and Gandy - that Jesus was a Hellenized Jewish creation along the lines of Osirus-Dionysis (a "godman" that is killed and resurrected) is thought provoking in the least, outright heresy at most.The first quarter of the book borrows heavily from Campbell and universal myths, and specifically discusses the Hellenized world's mystery cults of Osirus, Dionysis and Mithras, claiming (tenuously) that they are all cut from the same cloth. The authors proceed to claim that, due to Biblical inconsistencies, Jesus was a similar godman to these mystery cults, invented to make the concept more palatable to Hellenized Jews. This is supported by drawing parallels between the Christian stories attributed to Jesus and those of the mystery cults; this syncretism is well trod ground.Other evidence they use to support their thesis are the facts that Paul's epistles (a) were directed primarily at urban, Hellenized Jewish communities, (b) the epistles predate the other Gospels, and (c) Paul makes no direct reference to the historical Jesus even though his followers and Paul lived at the same time. The evidence is not new; their interpretation of it IS, however.Freke and Gandy go on to infer that Paul (and the Gnostics) were a part of this movement to make Jesus a godman the likes of Osirus-Dionysis. I found this a bit far-fetched. I similarly had difficulty supporting their position that the early Church was so clearly delineated between Gnostics and (what Freke and Gandy refer to as) "literalists" and their supposition to how the "literalists" managed to dominate the faith.Regardless, I was impressed with the extensive citation of sources as they presented their thesis. Admittedly, some of the sources are old; but much of the scholarship they reference is above reproach. I am less enthusiastic regarding their use of what primary sources there are dealing with early Christianity. The authors are correct in pointing out that Eusebius is notoriously suspicious, and Josephus is also questionable. However, their extensive use of Celsus and Tertullian without the same level of skepticism is problematic.It's a fascinating read, and certainly has pointed me towards some sources that I need to examine and draw my own conclusions from. Depending on your familiarity with the New Testament and your tolerance for questioning faith (or the faith of others as the case may be) will determine your reaction to the book. It is, in my opinion, worth reading, but do so with the same critical eye the authors turn towards the subject they are examining.

I have read and studied at various tmes during the last 40 plus years of my life the subjects of theology, the perennial philosophy and non dualistic metaphysics. I have just completed reading the Jesus Mysteries. I have already started reading Jesus and the Lost Goddess and plan to read The Laughing Jesus next. After having already read a number of good books about Gnosticism this book and Jesus and the Lost Goddess fills in much of the lost story of the origins of the early church in a concise yet in depth manner, style and context not found in most books on gnostcism even in the best ones. I find that this both does not over look the mysticism of the first century while focusing on the mythological content of the early church movements. This is a vast subject and while one book may not coompletely satisfy it will be found to be, in my opinion both more than satisfactory for its intended purpose and satisfying enough that you may want to read the other two books by the same authors that I have listed above or even research some of the many books that the authors have identified as their soource and/oe reference books. These three books while they may have common threads to the books by DM Murdoch, a mythologist but not a mystic, will examine both sides of that proverbial and provocative coin of inexplicable and lost knowledge that was apparently prevalent during the formative tears of the Christian church and contemporay movements. All three books are thouroughly foot noted and referenced in detail. Even so, the text of the book flows in a relatively easy to read yet educational and informative style. I can easily see why this book was so popular and so widely read following its initial publication.

An interesting argument very well supported by historical and academic sources. Approach it with an open mind. Just one little gripe is about the style, namely the gross overuse of exclamation marks! It was unnecessary! Still worth a read for people of all religious persuasions.

This book send a pretty interesting shock wave through christianity, and it takes a lot to shake a christian these days, the chuch being too busy trying to cover up one scandal after another in the present, it doesn't have time anymore to deal with the ones rooted at its origins.Tim Freke makes it clear at the beginning of the book that its aim was not so much a single minded attack on christianity (and reitereates this at various points in the book) but to offer a different path, an alternate way of lookin at and dealing with its legacy, which no doubt the church will ignore and its proponents will decry as some of the books critics have tried, which some of the negative comments here are proof of, falling back on very weak arguments that the writer is not enough of a scholar or lacks the academic pedigree to be taken seriously or that the secondary literature on the subject he refers to is too obscure and hard to find. Really? That's the best they came up with?Just read the book and judge for yourself and no, he's no Dan Brown, thank unconscious field, he makes a very convincing case and offers a glimpse to a different path of spirituality which I can recommend and read some of his other work, especially The Mystery Experience.

Thais is a brilliant book. Gave me a vocabulary to describe what I have always felt but not had the words for. A real revelation to find that there are others who have exactly the same views. Will definitely follow this up

A real insight into the thoughts, ideas, opinions and historic thinking. Quite thought provoking, definitely worth a read.

Great value. Book was used, but look like new. Arrived before date quoted and great price. Excellent all round !. Will use company again.