Is Christianity based on older myths?

[Mudhammam]

I'm sorry. There was several posts in a row that more than suggested I back up my position that believing Jesus never existed is a minority view.

Back to that. You dismissed my entire post by saying that whomever dreamed all this up had plenty of time since Jesus was "not a historical figure". If you believe there was a vast conspiracy, and we, for argument's sake, say that the early church had a library of world religions in which to copy its myths, do you have a reasons why someone would go through all that trouble?

Isn't it substantially more probably that the early church just believed what they said?

No problem, Steve. I did not actually dismiss your entire post "by saying that whomever dreamed all this up had plenty of time since Jesus was 'not a historical figure'." Rather, and I quoted exactly what I was responding to, you said:

If Christianity was a recycling of old myths, then it all had to be developed and synthesized between Jesus' death and the writing of Paul's letters or at the latest the gospels a few years later. That would be an impressive undertaking resulting in a systematic theology.

I was pointing out the obvious solution to the "problem" you posed. You granted (hypothetically) that Christianity was a recycling of old myths, but then appeared to assume that time would still be an issue. But if we're allowing that the Gospels are not history, then there is no issue because no time has passed between mythic Jesus' death and Paul's writing; nobody has even attempted to transport the mythical Christ into a historical figure yet (if the first Gospel was written in the 60s), so your question was misguided.

I don't believe there was a vast conspiracy. Mystery cults were common in the first century. Christianity was just that, though with enough plagiarism and adaptation of many key ingredients in other popular beliefs and philosophies to branch out and become a successful religion within a few hundred years. It would be no different than Mormonism today. Do you believe that requires a vast conspiracy to be explained or a few nut jobs, loads of gullible people, and some enthusiastic salesmen? The evidence for Christianity suggests it differs little from the pattern.

And what makes you think I don't believe the communities of churches (there was no "Church") believed in a historical Jesus? Obviously, some did, some didn't, and those that did eventually came to dominate. It's not really that complicated, and certainly not mysterious. Everything, on the mythicist view, falls into place with the behavior that human beings regularly exhibit, which frankly, is beyond me, but hey, people are generally pretty dumb, and these people for the most part couldn't even read or write (who knows if they could even count past four).

---

So all that to say it was politics that caused Paul (or whomever was part of the conspiracy) to come up with a fairly complicated system. I guess the early Christians were playing the long game since it didn't become a political force for over 300 years. I am amazed at how clever these people were who, at best looked down on and at worst persecuted, for over 7 generations with that long game in mind--what dedication.

I know you think you're criticizing some of our ideas here, but a free tip: study a position before you try to dismantle it, because none of your points are really very good, or accurate.