Have you ever had someone tell you that Christianity borrowed from other pagan religions in order to create history out of nothing? Me either. Because the people who make such arguments are all confined to lunatic asylums. Almost no reputable historian makes arguments like this.
Well, Shane over at Caffeinated Thoughts wrote a post to answer the objection. (H/T ECM)
…the basic premise is that since Horus and Mithra both pre-date the New Testament, Christianity merely borrowed from that mythology ascribing to Jesus the virgin birth, the disciples, the tomb, and the resurrection.
And then you can see how well these theories do in formal academic debates. Listen to these two debates with the two best “mystery religions” people, squaring off against William Lane Craig.
Notice how neither of these debates is even close. Carrier admitted defeat after his debate, and Price admits that virtually no one agrees with him during his debate. This is fringe stuff that is very interesting to people who have no interest in testing their ideas in debates with professional scholars.
Debates about the historical Jesus are listed in this previous post.
- What about all those other books that the Church left out the Bible?
- Did the divinity of Jesus emerge slowly after many years of embellishments?
- Richard Bauckham defends the reliability of the gospels against James Crossley
- Assessing Bart Ehrman’s case against the resurrection of Jesus
- The historical criteria and the standard minimal facts case.
- The list of minimal facts that are accepted by all non-Christian scholars.
- The earliest and best source for the minimal facts.
- Some additional details about the empty tomb sources.
- And some details about the first witnesses to the empty tomb.
UPDATE: Dr. Glenn Peoples has a refutation of the lame Mithra hypothesis here.