Why Is There Even A Jesus Myth Theory?

By Stephen Bedard

I have spent much of my apologetics activity responding to the Jesus myth theory. My first book (co-authored with Stanley Porter) Unmasking the Pagan Christ and my first journal article were both responses to the Jesus myth theory.

Although generally discounted by scholars, I believe that it is a dangerous theory that is influencing people through the medium of the internet. I am thankful that many apologists see this challenge and are responding to it.

This post is not a response to the specific claims of the Jesus myth theory.

Jesus Myth

My question is: Why is there even a Jesus myth theory to begin with? It does not make sense for people to just wake up one morning and decide they are going to question the historicity of one of the most well known ancient figures. Why do they do it?

I do not believe that there is only one answer to that question. I will present four possible reasons for people to embrace this theory.

1) Atheist Agenda. Atheists by definition deny the existence of God. Traditionally, however, they have accepted the existence of Jesus. They have seen Jesus as either someone who was delusional or someone who was misrepresented (usually by Paul).

More recently, some atheists have begun to question the existence of Jesus as well. Why make this leap? It may be the fault of many Christian apologists. Some apologists, including myself, see the resurrection of Jesus as the best evidence for the existence of God. If the evidence demonstrates that Jesus died and then on the third day was seen alive, something supernatural must have happened.

Instead of attacking each piece of evidence, it may be easier for some atheists to just reject the entire story. There is no need to respond to the empty tomb if Jesus never existed.

2) Anti-Religion. This reason has some overlap with the first but it is somewhat different. Being anti-religious does not require being an atheist. Some people use their love for God to fuel their hatred of religion.

The denial of the existence of Jesus should be seen in the context of attitudes toward other founders of major religions. In addition to denying the existence of Jesus, there are those who deny the existence of Moses, Buddha and Muhammad. Admittedly, those who deny the existence of Muhammad are quite careful in how they express that view.

There seems to be a trend for people to question the existence of every founder of a religion. How long before people question the existence of Joseph Smith?

3) Another Conspiracy. Some people embrace the Jesus myth because of their love for conspiracy theories. We can assume that at some point people knew that Jesus was a myth and then at another point people believed he was real. Someone had to be responsible for this change.

The Church has made many mistakes over the centuries and so they are an easy target. Church leaders must have secretly decided to make Jesus historical, presumably to make money off of the ignorant masses.

Once you add Constantine into the mix, you have both religious and political powers conspiring together. That is the makings of the perfect conspiracy theory.

4) Alternative spirituality. Not everyone who subscribes to the Jesus myth does it for negative reasons. Some use it to replace traditional Christianity with an alternative spirituality.

My introduction to the Jesus myth came through Canadian author Tom Harpur. Harpur is a former Anglican priest. Having read his books and spoken with him over coffee, I have a sense of why he believes what he does. Harpur was deeply disturbed by the exclusivity of traditional Christianity. Belief in Jesus as the only way is, according to Harpur, the reason behind the crusades, inquisition, holocaust and so on.

But what if the story of Jesus was true in a spiritual sense rather than a historical sense? What if there was no historical Jesus to divide Jews, Christians and Muslims? What if there was a cosmic Christ in every human of every religion and of no religion? Then there would be the potential for peace and unity for the human race.

This is not the place to respond to each of these claims. Rather the purpose of this post is to acknowledge that there are different reasons why people accept the Jesus myth. The practical application for apologists is to determine the kind of Jesus mythicist we are interacting with. Their place in each of the four categories will influence how we respond to their questions.

Christian Apologetics Alliance BLOG Banner


Free CrossExamined.org Resource

Get the first chapter of "Stealing From God: Why Atheists Need God to Make Their Case" in PDF.

Powered by ConvertKit
22 replies
  1. Ed Vaessen says:

    “Some apologists, including myself, see the resurrection of Jesus as the best evidence for the existence of God. If the evidence demonstrates that Jesus died and then on the third day was seen alive, something supernatural must have happened.”

    The resurrection is debatable.

      • Ed Vaessen says:

        Jesus died on the cross according to the gospels. A ‘trustworthy’ witness told us that on that occasion an earthquake occurred, a solar eclipse and zombies started to walk.
        Other trustworthy witnesses didn’t seem to notice these things.

        Why should we trust these trustworthy witnesses?

        • David Ryan says:

          Ed can you name a source for these other witnesses that didn’t seem to notice these things? Or are you just assuming that other people didn’t witness these things because not all of the witnesses to the events in question actually became believers?

          • Ed Vaessen says:

            That is easy. The three other gospels, Mark, Luke and John, do not mention an earthquake, a solar eclipse or dead people rising from their grave to walk the streets of Jerusalem.
            It gives rise to the assumption that details were invented by Matthew.

    • James Barlow says:

      The resurrection is debatable because of the inconveniences within the accounts. My reasons for leaning toward the mythicist explanation has nothing to do with the above 4 reasons. It has to do with zero eyewitness writings, forty plus years distant. It has to do with zero references to him by contemporaries. It has to do with Church Fathers disagreeing about when he lived, how old he was, etc. It has to do with the contradiction between gospels about the date, and circumstances, of his birth. “The Jews weren’t expecting a crucified Messiah,” intones Ehrman. But it probably began as a mystery cult among very, very hellenized Jews, and gentiles.

  2. Andy Ryan says:

    Reason number five is that there genuinely isn’t much evidence for any of the stories about Jesus. Might there have been an itinerant rabbi called Jesus around that time? Sure, perhaps there were several. Are any of the stories in the Gospels about this man true? There’s not really any way of checking.

    • David Ryan says:

      What way of checking do you require? I mean we have extra-biblical references to Jesus including archeological evidence. The archeological evidence suggests he was an important man. The extra-biblical accounts suggest he made an impact in the society of that general area. But of course, most importantly you had several first century Jews that abandoned their ancestral faith to follow a new belief system. A radical system at that, that told them to love their enemies among other things. Their number included a murderer that completely changed his life around. He went from killing Christians to sacrificing his life for the same belief system and worldview. And they were all ultimately tortured and killed for their beliefs with the exception of the apostle John who died a natural death but was still tortured prior to that and then exiled. You can, of course, claim they lied but usually in American courts anyway people are innocent until proven guilty. And generally to prove someone guilty you look for motive. What was their motive? A violent death? A poor life? (none became rich off this) The most likely explanation is that they truly believed what they were teaching. So now the question is why did they believe what they were teaching? And again I believe the most likely explanation they believed it was because it was true.

      • Andy Ryan says:

        What archaeological evidence do you have for the existence of Jesus?

        What evidence do you have for the martyrdom of Apostles?

        Saul/Paul never even met Jesus. Plenty of other faiths have martyrs who died for their faith.

  3. Ed Vaessen says:

    David Ryan:
    “The archeological evidence suggests he was an important man. The extra-biblical accounts suggest he made an impact in the society of that general area. ”

    Please explain.

  4. Terry says:

    2 Corinthians 4:4 – …whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.

    • Ed Vaessen says:

      Why is it so difficult for some people to accept the fact that people may have different opinions and can stick to their opinion for the obvious reason that it is natural to do that? This whole attitude of some believers to think that the other does not ‘want’ to see their truth is not only childish, it has been the root of very much suffering.

      • Terry says:

        I wasn’t trying to make you believe anything you don’t want to believe. You have complete freedom to believe what you will. Peace.


Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *