Jesus resurrection story is not original

It seems that there are historical claims about resurrection of others before Jesus. Justin Martyr argued: “when we say … Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propose nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you consider sons of Zeus.”

The resurrection myths do not disprove Christ’s resurrection, rather they point to it. The ancient myths are merely fractures images of the promise God made to Adam and Eve after they fell and were cast out of the Garden:

Gn. 3[15] I 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."

Thus, all the descendants of Adam and Eve had this primordial promise of the coming Messiah. The great pagan poets and philosophers had enough inspiration from the Holy Spirit to write the truth but in mythological form. Mythology is not the same thing as fairy tales (and even fairy tales can relate truth). Rather, mythology is merely a literary form, like poetry or prose, that tells a story, true or imaginary, that conveys truths, cultural, religious, whatever. Mankind had the promise given to them which they passed on through stories and mythologies. It came physically true in the person of Jesus Christ. That is what Justin Martyr was referring to. :slight_smile:

The Justin Martyr quote is inaccurate. Jesus Christ was true man and true God. Zeus, whatever his origin, was not God even though he was considered a god. Context is important.


Zeus also wasn’t a man and there is no historical context for him. Zeus also was immoral and raped several mortal women. There’s no comparison.

So? Who cares? Greek mythology has no basis in reality/history. Jesus does. The whole resurrection idea is pretty cool, so of course people are going to use it in stories. Doesn’t mean they’re real.

[quote=Myst]The whole resurrection idea is pretty cool, so of course people are going to use it in stories. Doesn’t mean they’re real.

Stories. Not necessarily real. Absolutely. I agree with you.

Read a little bit further in Justin’s ‘First Apology’, into the chapter that follows the citation you’ve quoted. Having said what you quote – in the chapter entitled ‘Analogies to the sonship of Christ’, Justin then goes on to say (all emphases mine):

And that this may now become evident to you—(firstly) that whatever we assert in conformity with what has been taught us by Christ, and by the prophets who preceded Him, are alone true, and are older than all the writers who have existed; that we claim to be acknowledged, not because we say the same things as these writers said, but because we say true things: and (secondly) that Jesus Christ is the only proper Son who has been begotten by God, being His Word and first-begotten, and power; and, becoming man according to His will, He taught us these things for the conversion and restoration of the human race: and (thirdly) that before He became a man among men, some, influenced by the demons before mentioned, related beforehand, through the instrumentality of the poets, those circumstances as having really happened, which, having fictitiously devised, they narrated, in the same manner as they have caused to be fabricated the scandalous reports against us of infamous and impious actions,of which there is neither witness nor proof—we shall bring forward the following proof.

In other words – almost as if Justin were replying to your post! – he says that the stories of Christ alone (and not the stories of pagan gods) are true; and that their truth does not depend on old myths that happen to have superficial similarities; and that they are historical while the myths are fictitious.

To put it another way: Justin demolishes your assertions here, in the very document which you claim demonstrates ‘historical claims’ that are injurious to Christian doctrine. :shrug:

Oh, come now. Are you suggesting that the stories of Oedipus, Myrrha and King Mino’s wife, Pasiphae copulating with a bull to produce the Minotaur, were all inspired by the Holy Spirit?!?!?

Those are mythological gods and they did not become human. Jesus became human while he was on earth, suffered and died and was buried and rose again on the 3rd day. I know of no other god in any religion who became human, died and was resurrected to become part of the Holy Trinity of God.

It is quite original

Those are rather worn out arguments…

Fictional mythological stories are …a just stories

Among so many differences…in this case - it *HAPPENED *- and was not just a person coming back from the dead…but rather transcending such…indeed his body is a glorified body…

*So yes quite original. *

Some sources for your reading etc:

"The resurrection, then, is not a theory, but a historical reality revealed by the man Jesus Christ by means of his “Passover”, his “passage”, that has opened a “new way” between heaven and earth (cf. Heb 10:20). It is neither a myth nor a dream, it is not a vision or a utopia, it is not a fairy tale, but it is a singular and unrepeatable event: Jesus of Nazareth, son of Mary, who at dusk on Friday was taken down from the Cross and buried, has victoriously left the tomb. In fact, at dawn on the first day after the Sabbath, Peter and John found the tomb empty. Mary Magdalene and the other women encountered the risen Jesus. On the way to Emmaus the two disciples recognized him at the breaking of the bread. The Risen One appeared to the Apostles that evening in the Upper Room and then to many other disciples in Galilee. "

-Pope Benedict XVI Urbi et Orbi message 2009

The history accordingly is full of Gods with the same attribute as Jesus. Consider the case of Mythra.

How about Mythra?

How about Mythra?

How could you justify myth from real story? The history is full of mythes.

The history is full of mythes.

Why these attributes are important? They actually similar with the case of Mythra and another similar Gods.

The story is not original. You can see this in here.

It’s really funny that you bring up Mithras. You realize, of course, that the Roman cult of Mithras – that is, the one that bears all these ‘similarities’ to Christianity – didn’t rise until after Jesus’ death and resurrection?

Yes, there was a Persian god named Mithra, but all these ‘correspondences’ that you point out to us do not proceed from that mythological deity. Rather, they were developed after Jesus’ ministry. In other words, you have effectively helped us disproved your case: the Mithras myth is derivative, and comes to rise after Jesus – it is Jesus who is ‘original’. Thanks for the help in developing our case against yours! :thumbsup:

I don’t think so. Do you have any source to show that? How about other Gods cited in the link I provided.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit