Before we begin chapter 4 of "Lord or Legend", lets review briefly. We have seen that one should not reject the idea of a person doing miracles without considering the evidence. We also saw that there are serious problems with the idea that the story of Jesus was a legend that arose quickly in first century Palestine, while contemporaries of Jesus were still alive.
In chapter 4, the authors consider another reason given to support the legend theory. This theory says that the story of Jesus as a god-man that was killed and resurrected is similar to other myths and legends, so it must be one also. Next time we look at some examples of these other ancient legends to see how similar they really are, but first let's look at some general problems with this theory. We still have same problem mentioned before, that the monotheisitc Jews in Palestine were very resistant to pagan ideas of other gods, why would they be influenced by them to create their own legend of another god? Secondly, Jesus was hardly like your typical mythical hero. He was a teacher and healer not a heroic warrior or king that overcame the people's Roman enemies. Why would they create a legend like that? Finally, just because a person is viewed as historically significant, does that mean he is a fictional person? Would it not be better to look at historical evidence instead of trying to find similar legends to compare him to?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment