I don’t know about you, but I seem to bump into this objection from time to time, particularly online. The basic thrust of this objection levelled at the Christian faith is that the story of a god’s resurrection is nothing new. That, in fact, it is a popular feature of ancient religious beliefs. Therefore, because we can reject the many other ‘resurrection accounts’ it should follow that we ought to reject Christianity.
That in a nutshell is the logic behind this objection. So to answer the objection we need to tackle the logic. We need to ask questions to pry open assumptions. Questions like, “Should Christianity be placed in to the same bracket as other ancient religions?” “What cultural framework should we interpret these ancient stories by?” “Does the historical accounts of the resurrection of Jesus Christ place that episode into a unique category?” etc.
Focus.org.uk have produced an 8-minute video on the objection that the resurrection of Jesus Christ was borrowed from pagan myths (embedded above). In the clip Focus interview four top scholars on this subject, who take this challenge and begin to respond with some helpful critiques of the question posed.
Each one of the four scholars has contributed to the subject in hand, some at considerable length (see below for further reading). Whilst the answers could fill hours of video, the scholars have cut to the heart of the question to give us a snapshot of the beginning of a response.
Ed: Have you come across this objection? Why not share your thoughts and experiences in dealing with this objection in the comments below?
In addition, it’s worth noting that we have covered the 4 Minimal Facts of the Resurrection on this blog. These 4 facts underline the unique historical grounding for the the Resurrection of Jesus. In this way the evidence sets apart this resurrection narrative from the others found in ancient religions.
Focus have produced many short video responses to common objections raised against Christianity. You can find them online on their YouTube Channel.
When I first came across this theory as an undergraduate, it did disturb me for a time, particularly in the context of the mystery cult of Mithras. However, when I looked into Mithras further, the mystery cult was a great example of Roman syncretism as it took a deity from earlier Persian mythology and seemed to layer on this resurrection myth. When you couple that with the time the mystery religion of Mithras first emerged (around 60-70AD) and the place it emerged (the near east), I think it would be possible to build a fairly compelling case that it was the Mithrain cult borrowing from Christianity, rather than the other way around.
On the face of it, the suggestion that there were many resurrection myths does sound disturbing! But once we look into the claims of these myths we see the Resurrection of Jesus as being evidentially-based, and in that way different from the others – including Mithras. Your points about the formation of that story are interesting! Thanks for sharing.
That’s a good point Derek. There is perhaps some cultural context that Jesus drew upon through his Resurrection, which made sense to hearers because the concept of rebirth wasn’t outlandish to them. Jesus’ physical, bodily resurrection would have been very weird though, so there still would have been some mind-strectching occurring! Thanks for your input.