The Myth of Historicity

Despite the demonstrated historiographical tropes of the gospels, today they are perceived to convey a bevy of myths. Myths can still be true despite being unhistorical. Sometimes Christian apologists defend the historicity of gospel myths to uphold their truth value. This is a modern technique of rationalization, the attempt to update Christian myths by making them seem more plausible. In reality, historicality does not demonstrate truth. So to study Jesus seriously, less investment in the so-called historical Jesus and increased attention to the mythological Jesus is a desideratum. Only by integrating gospel studies into myth studies can the former find a place in Humanities programs of modern public universities.

Eye Witnesses

This chapter introduces the idea of an eyewitness as a literary device of authentication. It compares the use of such an eyewitness in the fourth gospel and other contemporary literature (namely the Life of Apollonius by Philostratus and the Diary of the Trojan War by Dictys of Crete). It is argued that the literary convention of presenting a fictional eyewitness authority is a well-attested device of authentication, and satisfactorily explains why and how the author of John employed it.

Disappearance and Recognition

This chapter compares the Emmaus road episode in Luke 24 with Herodotus’s account of Aristeas of Proconnesus. Both Aristeas and Jesus seem to die but reappear to speak with travelers on the road, demonstrate true signs of their reality, and are later worshipped by human communities. Plausibility is greatly determined by prior investment in a story or its result, though invested authors strive to undercut skepticism by literary techniques of verification (for instance, Jesus denying he is a ghost and exhibiting his wounds). These techniques are paralleled in contemporary stories about Apollonius of Tyana, Astrabacus, Philinnion, and Protesilaus.

Child in Danger, Child of Wonder

This chapter compares Matthew’s story of the endangered child Jesus and his precocity with similar stories in mythic historiography. The ancient histories of Augustus, Moses, Cyrus, and Alexander the Great serve as key comparanda.

A Theory of Comparison

This chapter presents a positive program of comparison. In doing so, it criticizes the method and presuppositions of mimesis criticism (spearheaded by Dennis Ronald McDonald). Mimesis criticism compares texts on the basis of assuming direct genetic causations. A better theory vouches for polymorphous influence based on dynamic cultural interaction. Also treated is the notion of gospel genre, the identity of the evangelists, the themes of their gospels, and brief biographies of five contemporary Greco-Roman historians who serve as major sources of data: Diodorus of Sicily, Plutarch, Suetonius, Philostratus, and Iamblichus.