Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

[Robert Tulip]

Hi Tat, I watched David Deley's video that you posted of his thoughts on astrotheology. It plots the life of Christ against the course of the year in terms of the zodiac signs starting from Aquarius and ending at Capricorn. This reminds me of Joseph Campbell's theory of the path of the hero. In her astrology book Saturn in Transit, Erin Sullivan plots a similar path over the thirty year orbit of Saturn, through the four quarters that Campbell described as the monomyth, which we recently discussed at booktalk in his Hero With a Thousand Faces. There is a widespread archetypal myth of the thirty year pattern concluding with the first Saturn return, as we are discussing in the chapter on Christ and Horus at 12 and 30, presenting a cycle moving through all twelve signs of the zodiac. The natural cycle is 2.5 years per sign, whereas Deley presents an imaginative correlation to main events in the life of Christ as told in the Gospels, jumping from his birth to the ministry. This is fun, but highly speculative.

Here is Campbell's path of the hero. It only partially fits to the story of Jesus.


My concern about the way Deley has plotted this myth to the cycle of the year over the imagined life of Christ is that it might well be possible to find other ways of mapping the story to the annual cycle. It was interesting that Deley used Leonardo's The Last Supper, but plotted the signs to the painting from left to right, opposite to the way I have argued that Leonardo himself actually deliberately embedded the stars of the zodiac from right to left.

I just bought Earl Doherty's 2009 book Jesus Neither God Nor Man. In looking at the index, he devotes very little attention to astrotheology, and does not argue for it. I plan to look into why this might be so in more depth, because there is a sense, as we see with Deley's video, that perhaps Doherty considers that astrotheology lacks rigor, and is just imaginative astrological fantasy, and does not yet make a real contribution to the mythicist argument. We see this attitude in Doherty's emphasis on Christianity as a Greco-Judean synthesis, leaving out Egypt.

This common skepticism and lack of interest is why I emphasise so much the need for astrotheology to be firmly based in astronomy. As I mentioned recently, Cruttenden is one example of a writer who has done a disservice to astrotheology by his wild speculation conflicting with scientific knowledge. I consider that Murdock is entirely rigorous, and we see that she does not indulge in the sort of imaginative fantasy that Deley has presented. I note he does not give sources, so it looks just like his own ideas. That is fine, but it stands more as an intriguing hint than something that will convince anyone.

[jRup]

Thanks for the Argo link, Robert. I had not considered the "Ark" angle before. Guess the Greeks aren't ancient enough for me. I prefer the Nu-ut, Nu (Mother Night who rode the void and gave birth to all the animals and humans) and was likely masculinated (is that a word?) to "Noah." Whether or not the constellations are 'fixed' seems beside the point. A few months ago Ophiuchus was restored to the zodiac, making 13, as it was in antiquity. Thirteen, you all probably figured out long ago comes from a lunar/feminine calculation. Patriarchal invaders decreed that a solar year of 12 months would be law henceforth, but still insisted that their fellow patriarchs lived to be 900 or so years old. Thirteen lunar months times 70 solar years = 900 (months) more or less, thus the 'punishment' for our sins is simply that we have to figure our lifespan by years rather than months. If one believes that a culture feminine in nature was more kind and peaceful, patriarchy is indeed a cruel punishment.

Fixed constellations can be arbitrary enough if one sees the whole of the night sky as a giant 'connect-a-dot' layout. Leo, for example, can be made into Buto, the cowled serpent. The cowl form, and the 'golden eye' resemble a tree and the eye an apple. That it is also adjacent to Hydra and only a month or so away from 'The Twins' is a perfect setting for Adam and Eve in the garden with the serpent, and also for Cain and Abel (originally Hevel, a female name) on the next annual turn. Later it is easily taken up as one of Heracles' 'tasks', just as his battle with Serpens began when he was an infant ... and a thousand other sagas.

How much these star patterns stimulated our brains and made us avid collectors of myth, story, parable, commandment and other 'entertainment" can be gauged by our modern appetites. We are insatiable. More is spent in time and money each year on movies, sporting events, drugs, pornography, travel and 'adventure' (especially warfare) than on food, shelter, healing and education. Not only that, we (religious folk) seem to yearn for eternal entertainment at the feet of an all powerful storyteller and are more than willing to pay with our, and our fellow earth-creatures', lives to attain it.

Or so it says in my little book of stargazing.

[tat tvam asi]

Deley's video source mostly came from here Robert: http://www.usbible.com/astrology/gospel_zodiac.htm

That's a methodical break down, gospel by gospel, of the life of Christ based on the annual cycle. With respect to 12 and 30, Capricorn start's off as the first 1/12th of the the annual Journey after the sun's winter solstice, which at 30 degrees, the sun leaves Capricorn and enters Aquarius. Jesus appears at age 12 in the Temple and then is suddenly rushed to age 30 meeting John the Baptist for baptism in the sign of Aquarius. And of course, the next sign being Pisces at which point Jesus gathers two fisherman and the cycle of the sun continues around in likewise fashion from sign to sign until finally coming back to Capricorn (winter solistice) with allusions to the following spring equinox. This is another version of the annual solar cycle in myth much the same way that the 12 labors of Hercules was constructed, although from different starting and stopping points of the solar cycle:

PAGAN PARALLELS
The breakdown of the Gospels into twelve zodiacal motifs is not a coincidence. It was the way myths were written in biblical days. To make my point, there is a popular myth called "The Twelve Labors of Hercules". It serves to show how these ancient stories were patterned after the astrological patterns of the stars. Watch how the sun, personified as Hercules, goes through each of his twelve labors.
1. In Leo, Hercules first labor was to slay the Nermean lion. After killing the lion, the hero flayed the beast and used its skin as a shield. The leonine skin may be compared to the brownish clouds trailed by the sun in fighting its way through the atmospheric vapors, which are eventually conquered. The constellation, Orion, is often depicted with Orion holding up an animal skin as a shield.
2. When the sun entered Virgo, the constellation of Hydra was setting, and, thus, the second labor of Hercules was to kill the Lernean Hydra. The monster had several head, one being immortal, and as he raised them to attack Hercules, the hero burned off the mortal heads and buried the immortal one under a stone. The heads are allegorized as the clouds being burned up by the suns rays.
3. When the sun enters Libra, the constellation of the Centaur rose above the horizon, so Hercules in hit third labor was entertained by a centaur and soon afterwards he slew a group of centaurs in a fight over a cask of wine. In Libra, there is a star group called the Boar appearing in the evening sky. So after killing the centaurs, Hercules met the Erymanthian boar and engaged him in mortal combat.
4. As the sun moved into Scorpio, Cassiopeia, more anciently known as the Stag, Rose into view, and the fourth labor was the capture of a stag with golden horns and brazen feet.
5. As the sun passed into Sagittarius, three constellations named after birds followed, and these were the Vulture, the Swan and the Eagle. In his fifth labor, Hercules killed the three birds with arrows.
6. The constellation of Capricorn was also called the Stable of Augeas, and the sixth labor was the cleaning out of the Augean Stable. This is why, when Jesus was born in Capricorn, he is depicted as being born in a manger.
7. While the sun was in Aquarius, the Lyre, or celestial Vulture, proceeded to set. Prometheus at the time was also setting, while the Bull of Europa was on the meridian. In his seventh labor, Hercules slew the vulture which had preyed on the live of Prometheus and captured a wild bull engaged in laying waste the island of Crete.
8. While the sun was going through Pisces, Pegasus the celestial horse, rose in the east, so for his eighth labor, Hercules escaped with the horses of Diomede.
9. As the sun enters Aries (the Ram of the Golden Fleece), the ship Argo was rising in the evening sky and Andromeda was setting. On of the stars of Andromeda was called her girdle. In his ninth labor, Hercules sailed in the ship Argo in search of the Golden Fleece; he also fought the Amazons and captured the girdle of Hippolyte, their queen, and then rescued Hesione from a sea monster. The constellation Argo, by the way, makes its appearance in the Bible as Noah's ark.
10. As the sun passed into the Bull, the Pleiades rose and Orion set, and for his tenth labor, Hercules labor was to restore the seven kidnapped Pleiades sisters to their father after killing their abductor, King Busiris (Orion). Then our hero traveled to Spain and appropriated the oxen of Geryon.
11. When the sun entered Gemini, Sirius (the Dog Star) was rising, and for his eleventh labor Hercules overcame Cerberus, the guardian dog of Hades. In the Bible, Sirius is recognized as the star of Bethlehem; it is the brightest star next to the sun. Orion has three stars at its belt that point that follow Sirius as the three wise men.
12. As the sun entered the constellation Cancer, the River and the Centaur were setting in the western sky. The constellation Hercules also descended toward the west followed by Draco (the Dragon of the North Pole) a guardian of the Golden Apples of the Hesperides. In the star atlases Hercules had been pictured as crushing the head of the dragon with one of his feet. Genesis 3:15 doesn't makes sense until you see Hercules' foot on top of the serpent's head.
15I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." (Gen. 3:15)
In the twelfth and final labor, Hercules journeys to the Hesperides in quest of the Golden Apples of that region. Afterwards he donned a robe, which was soaked in the blood of a centaur slain by him at the rive crossing. The robe mysteriously caught fire, and Hercules perished in the flames.
This death ended his mortal career, but later on he resumed his youth in Heaven, and there became immortal. His death scene can be compared to the description of a beautiful sunset.

Final thought
It would be more accurate to think of Jesus as the sun of God rather than the son of God.

[tat tvam asi]

Also of interest is this book on the Gospel Zodiac and how mythicism is growing and spreading out currently:

[jRup]

Thanks for reminding me about Hercules/Heracles, Tat. And Orion, too. Older
versions call him Osiris (Egypt) and Telepenis (Hurrio-Hittite) - Osiris, when
slain and parts claimed by the fourteen nomens, was missing his penis (Orion's
knife and scabbard) and it was returned to him each night by Isis as he
emerged 'reborn' from the Eridanu river of stars. He 'arose' at dawn as Ptah,
ascended the ladder of heaven as Ra and died in the west as Seker at the
hand of his mortal brother enemy, to be reborn once again by the healing hand
of Isis. During daylight hours he reigns as Lord of the Underworld. At night
he confronts himself, is reborn, and recycled.

Your observation that Jesus is the 'sun' is appreciated.

Said another way, more in line with the topic of Jesus and Egypt, the 'boy'
returns from obscurity, is baptized in a river and 'born', suffers and dies,
but is reborn, arises yet again (after 3 days to provide some 'creative' change
in the story), is observed by Mary Magdalen (etal), then descends to the
underworld to confront Satan (unsuccessfully - Satan promises fortune, fame
and power but Jesus is claimed to have 'rejected' it all. But by turning his
back on a problem like evil - 'out of sight out of mind' - he permits himself to be
used by his enemy over and over again - who is more famous, wealthy and
powerful than he who stands behind Jesus and manipulates him like a
puppet? Psychologists know this phenomenon well - ignor-ance is bliss) ...

Returning to Telepenis, in winter, which he caused with wild destruction,
he mates with mother earth using his 'hunting knife' to recreate abundant
life in Spring. You, if voyeurism, is your bag, can see him doing it early most
winter mornings, before Ptah peeks over the horizon. Possibly this inspires the
admonition 'not to spill one's seed upon the ground' a religio-political, anti-Hittite
sentiment.

Anyway, scripture writers went out of their way to promote the sterile life of
heaven and implant it on Earth - "On Earth as in Heaven" seems to resonate
with all of the major faiths with the possible exception of Buddhism.

[FTL99]

I just bought Earl Doherty's 2009 book Jesus Neither God Nor Man. In looking at the index, he devotes very little attention to astrotheology, and does not argue for it. I plan to look into why this might be so in more depth, because there is a sense, as we see with Deley's video, that perhaps Doherty considers that astrotheology lacks rigor, and is just imaginative astrological fantasy, and does not yet make a real contribution to the mythicist argument. We see this attitude in Doherty's emphasis on Christianity as a Greco-Judean synthesis, leaving out Egypt.

I'm glad that you brought that up, Robert. Earl Doherty mentions Acharya S and astrotheology on page 153. I think Earl leaves the issue of astrotheology to Acharya possibly for the same reason Acharya leaves much of the topic of Paul to Earl Doherty. I don't know for a fact, but I think he simply defers to Acharya on this issue of what the myths all mean - it's really not his area of expertise. You can see the same deference in his review of Acharya's book "Christ Conspiracy" still up at Amazon. Would you contact him and ask him to see what he says? I'd be interested to read his response. I'd also like to know what he thinks of her mythicist position too. Well, I'd also like to see Earl, Dr. Price and others write a review of Acharya's Sourcebook too:

The New Zeitgeist Part 1 Sourcebook (2010)

Another reason may be also due to the fundy pseudo-skepticism against Acharya's work by the Richard Carrier crowd. BTW, Carrier has never read a single book of Acharya's. Carrier's favorable reviews about Earls book has given Earl much notability. However, Carrier has been going around telling people not to discuss Acharya's work or recently created mythicist position in blogs, articles and books, etc., probably in an attempt to erase her work from history. There are both theists and atheists constantly mucking up her wiki page too - it's been deleted three times.

http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/vie ... 269#p21269

Like I say, Earl wrote an outstanding review of "Christ Conspiracy," but he has been harassed for it, simply for being supportive of her work at all. Earl, Dr. Price and on down the list seem to be scared to death to even mention anything related to Part 1 of the Zeitgeist movie about religion, even though it has received around 200 million views worldwide across nearly three dozen languages. There's clearly an interest in the subject; unfortunately, even atheists and so-called freethinkers are attempting to suppress open and honest discussion on it.

So, it appears that in order for Earl to stay on Carrier's good side he must avoid discussion of Acharya's work in astrotheology and even her mythicist position.

[DWill]

When you look at the history of a mythicist view of Christ, don't you see a lot more than arguments having to do with astrotheology being offered? I mean, I think anyone following this interesting discussion here could be forgiven for thinking that the mythicist position equals astrotheology. But that isn't the case, is it? Just glancing through the Wikipedia article on mythicism seems to confirm that the many writers who have opposed the conventional outlook on Jesus have diverse views on where Christianity came form..

[FTL99]

Well DWill, you really need to read Acharya's books to understand the background here.

* First of all, nobody has ever claimed that astrotheology is the only argument.
* Second, there exists no Department of Astrotheological Studies so, very few have ever really checked into it.
* Third, Acharya's books discuss far more than just astrotheology, such as textual criticism of the bible itself. Astrotheology is an important part of it that's not getting the attention it deserves. It's precisely what's missing from the discussion even to this very day. That's one reason why Acharya's work is so significant.
* Fourth, Wikipedia is not the best place to go for information on mythicism as it relates to the history of religion. Notice Wiki has no mention of the mythicist position?
* Fifth, there have always been efforts to keep mythicism out of the discussion. We have definitions and encyclopedia entries for theist, atheist, agnostic etc. and even the evemerist position has been around since the 3rd century bce but, no mention of the mythicist position anywhere. In fact, there has never been a clear, succinct comprehensive mythicist position at all until Acharya S recently created.
* Sixth, it's important to note that there is no requirement in New Testament scholarship to investigate the case for mythicism in order to get their PhD. So, theologians and biblical scholars are simply not experts on the case for mythicism.
* Seventh, it's also important to note that even NT scholars don't agree on the evidence for Jesus.

On and on it goes. In the 60's Gerald Hawkins wrote 'Stonehenge Decoded' and was quite fiercely attacked for basically saying that Stonehenge was an ancient astronomical observatory. It took 20 years before academia finally conceded that he was correct. Now, we have evidence similar to Stonehenge all over the globe some much older some more recent. It's categorically clear that the ancients created religions with roots in astrotheology.

What is a Mythicist?

The History of Mythicism

Evemerist v. Mythicist Position

"The ancient Egyptian religion is a sun-based religion and the yearly cycle of the stars was very important for them to calculate their calender. It would be surprising if there was no an alignment with certain celestial phenomena. However, archaeoastronomy is not an established science working hand in hand with archaeology in much of Mespotamia and Egypt. There are several reasons for this:

"The problem is that until recently hardly any research was done in that area: Egyptologists are no astronomers, and calculations in that field are extremely complex. This was taken for granted, but not a field of research. So nothing to much 'scientific' can be said, simply because of lack of data. That is something else than saying Egyptologists dismiss celestial alignments: they simply never looked into it. That is the disadvantage of a rich culture like that of the Egyptians: one can't do everything."

- Paul Haanen
Archaeologist in Egypt
http://www.freethoughtnation.com/forums ... 5339#p5339

[Vishnu]

Not to get off topic, but oh, so Hawkins IS actually accepted as a credible source by members of his field now? Cause I've been told, relatively recently, that he was a quack. I guess the person that told me that was still stuck in the 60s, eh? But yeah, if this is true that he has been redeemed, that's great, as I know of someone who will be glad to hear that. Would you happen to have any links from more modern scholarship that endorses him?

[FTL99]

Gerald Hawkins was attacked for his research by a guy named Atkinson, who pretty much tried to deny everything.

"Atkinson later reversed his position in the face of intense research by A. Thom and associates, published in Journal for the History of Astronomy, vol 5, 1974."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Hawkins

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeoast ... ns.27_work

The above link fails to note the work by Alexander Thom and associates confirming Gerald Hawkins. No professional astronomer today would consider Hawkins any sort of quack. His work has been confirmed by many astronomers over the last 30 years.

Sir Dr. Norman Lockyer was one of the first to point out the astronomical alignments of Stonehenge in his book, "Stonehenge and other British Stone Monuments Astronomically Considered," published in 1906. So, it really took almost 80 years before Stonehenge was accepted as an astronomical observatory.

Sir Dr. Norman Lockyer: Father of Archaeoastronomy