What do you think?
Rate this book
The Pagan Christ: Recovering the Lost Light
A provocative argument for a mystical, rather than historical, understanding of Jesus, leading to a radical rebirth of Christianity in our time. For forty years, scholar and religious commentator Tom Harpur has challenged church orthodoxy and guided thousands of readers on subjects as controversial as the true nature of Christ and life after death. Now, in his most radical and groundbreaking work, Harpur digs deep into the origins of Christianity. Long before the advent of Jesus Christ, the Egyptians and other peoples believed in the coming of a messiah, a virgin birth, a madonna and her child, and the incarnation of the spirit in flesh. While the early Christian church accepted these ancient truths as the very basis of Christianity, it disavowed their origins. What had begun as a universal belief system built on myth and allegory was transformed, by the third and fourth centuries A.D., into a ritualistic institution based on a literal interpretation of myths and symbols. But, as Tom Harpur argues in The Pagan Christ , "to take the Gospels literally as history or biography is to utterly miss their inner spiritual meaning." At a time of religious extremism, Tom Harpur reveals the virtue of a cosmic faith based on ancient truths that the modern church has renounced. His message is Our blind faith in literalism is killing Christianity. Only with a return to an inclusive religion where Christ lives within each of us will we gain a true understanding of who we are and who we are intended to become. The Pagan Christ is a book of rare insight and power that will reilluminate the Bible and change the way we think about religion.
260 pages, Hardcover
First published March 22, 2004
77 people are currently reading
595 people want to read
About the author
Tom Harpur
34 books21 followersTom Harpur, columnist for the Toronto Star, Rhodes scholar, former Anglican priest, and professor of Greek and the New Testament, is an internationally renowned writer on religious and ethical issues. He is the author of ten bestselling books, including For Christ’s Sake and The Pagan Christ. He has hosted numerous radio and television programs, including Life After Death, a ten-part series based on his bestselling book of the same name.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews
December 25, 2008
Interesting but unconvincing book. The book is mainly a rehash of the work of Alvin Boyd Kuhn whose theories Harpur seems to have swallowed uncritically, even to the point of repeating the rather dubious etymology of Abraham as a Hindu name.
It would have been helpful if Harpur had backed up his claims with the work of other researchers besides Kuhn and a couple of others. It is accepted by some scholars that a few of the Gospel miracles were borrowed from the rites of Bacchus and that the raising of Lazarus is derived from the resurrection of Osirus. But Harpur goes too far in his identification of Jesus with Horus.
While pointing out the many similarities between the story of Jesus and the Egyptian Horus, Harpur fails to explain the critical differences. For example, one may say that a dragonfly resembles a hawk in that they both have wings, a tail, eyes, etc. But to jump from those observed similarities to stating that a dragonfly is a hawk is to disregard the critical differences between insects and birds.
And while it is true that after the 2nd century the Church began to suppress other religions, to say that this was a conspiracy to cover up the fact that they had stolen all the basic elements of Christianity from other cults is at best debatable and at worst revisionist history.
Some pictures would have helped. I would really like to see an Egyptian sarcophagus with KRST carved into it. (And Harpur doesn't say if KRST is in hieroglyphics or Greek or Roman letters.) As well as confirmation from other scholars that KRST stands for Christ and is not simply the Egyptian word for coffin. The premises of the book need a lot of backing up, which Harpur fails to provide beyond quoting from the works of Kuhn, who is not the most reliable authority.
It would have been helpful if Harpur had backed up his claims with the work of other researchers besides Kuhn and a couple of others. It is accepted by some scholars that a few of the Gospel miracles were borrowed from the rites of Bacchus and that the raising of Lazarus is derived from the resurrection of Osirus. But Harpur goes too far in his identification of Jesus with Horus.
While pointing out the many similarities between the story of Jesus and the Egyptian Horus, Harpur fails to explain the critical differences. For example, one may say that a dragonfly resembles a hawk in that they both have wings, a tail, eyes, etc. But to jump from those observed similarities to stating that a dragonfly is a hawk is to disregard the critical differences between insects and birds.
And while it is true that after the 2nd century the Church began to suppress other religions, to say that this was a conspiracy to cover up the fact that they had stolen all the basic elements of Christianity from other cults is at best debatable and at worst revisionist history.
Some pictures would have helped. I would really like to see an Egyptian sarcophagus with KRST carved into it. (And Harpur doesn't say if KRST is in hieroglyphics or Greek or Roman letters.) As well as confirmation from other scholars that KRST stands for Christ and is not simply the Egyptian word for coffin. The premises of the book need a lot of backing up, which Harpur fails to provide beyond quoting from the works of Kuhn, who is not the most reliable authority.
November 23, 2012
Having been intrigued by the Christ Myth Theory, I picked up this text largely on the purported strength of Tom Harpur's scholarship. Fool me once...
If "Pagan" had been written in the years before the advent of the World Wide Web, I might have been inclined towards a less negative review. However, many primary sources are now accessible in translation via the Internet. Fact-checking by author and reader alike should be de rigueur. For former Anglican priest and professor of Greek and New Testament theology Harpur, however, never let it be said that facts get in the way of a good conspiracy.
Some examples (there are many more):
Page 49 - Quote by Augustine which appears to show his approval of lying to the "vulgar crowd" when necessary. This passage was lifted completely out of context from "City Of God", Book 4, Chapter 31. Augustine is stating the position of a theologian (Varro) with whom he disgarees. He is NOT stating his own position.
Page 56 - Quote ascribed to St. Gregory of Nazianzen. I could not locate a primary source for the quote. The only prior source that I could locate was "Isis Unveiled", by Theosophical Society founder, Madame Blavatsky. The quote as presented in "Isis" is uncited. Given that much of Harpur's text is derived from the writings of Alvin Boyd Kuhn, a student of Theosophy, the use of this quote, however questionable in origin, is hardly surprising.
Page 65 - Harpur quotes Origen as writing, "Christ crucified [was a doctrine] only fit for children". I cannot find a primary source for this quote. However, a reading of Origen in "Against Celsus, Book 7, Chapter 43, seems to show that, on the contrary, the Crucifxion was an historical event in his estimation.
Pages 84-85 - Numerous purported similarities to Horus and Jesus are given, but uncited, by Harpur. Two of the most striking - that both were baptized and crucified appears to have no basis in fact based upon my admittedly brief research. These similarities are brought up quite frequently on Christ Myth web sites, but, to my knowledge, no primary source, such as the "Book Of The Dead" supports these contentions.
Then, there is the high esteem in which Harpur holds one of his three main sources, the aforementioned Alvin Boyd Kuhn, "I remain stunned at the silence with which his writings have been greeted by scholars" (Harpur 180). I was not familiar with Kuhn or his works before reading "Pagan", but preliminary research suggests that Kuhn is not widely citied in mainstream comparative religion or Egyptology circles, due to some unorthodox theories. Further, his credentials consist of PhD in Theosophy. I began reading one of Kuhn's works referenced by Harpur, "The Lost Light" to gain some deeper insight into his theories. The opening sentence of the Prologue is telling:
"Coming forth in a day when theology has long been discredited - even in its own ecclesiastical household - and religion itself is threatened with obliteration by rampant forces hostile to it, this book aims to rehabilitate theology and to stabilize true religion" (Kuhn, 1940).
Firstly, I was not aware that theology has been discredited by 1940 or, indeed, that the scholarly examination of sacred texts, practices and beliefs had ever been maligned by the mainstream. Secondly, what is "true religion"? Who decides this? Kuhn?
Let me state that I approach these texts not as a theologian myself, but as an interested amateur. Regardless of CV or reputation, I recommend testing authors by their sources. In the case of Harpur, the jury is still out, but I'm less than impressed so far.
If "Pagan" had been written in the years before the advent of the World Wide Web, I might have been inclined towards a less negative review. However, many primary sources are now accessible in translation via the Internet. Fact-checking by author and reader alike should be de rigueur. For former Anglican priest and professor of Greek and New Testament theology Harpur, however, never let it be said that facts get in the way of a good conspiracy.
Some examples (there are many more):
Page 49 - Quote by Augustine which appears to show his approval of lying to the "vulgar crowd" when necessary. This passage was lifted completely out of context from "City Of God", Book 4, Chapter 31. Augustine is stating the position of a theologian (Varro) with whom he disgarees. He is NOT stating his own position.
Page 56 - Quote ascribed to St. Gregory of Nazianzen. I could not locate a primary source for the quote. The only prior source that I could locate was "Isis Unveiled", by Theosophical Society founder, Madame Blavatsky. The quote as presented in "Isis" is uncited. Given that much of Harpur's text is derived from the writings of Alvin Boyd Kuhn, a student of Theosophy, the use of this quote, however questionable in origin, is hardly surprising.
Page 65 - Harpur quotes Origen as writing, "Christ crucified [was a doctrine] only fit for children". I cannot find a primary source for this quote. However, a reading of Origen in "Against Celsus, Book 7, Chapter 43, seems to show that, on the contrary, the Crucifxion was an historical event in his estimation.
Pages 84-85 - Numerous purported similarities to Horus and Jesus are given, but uncited, by Harpur. Two of the most striking - that both were baptized and crucified appears to have no basis in fact based upon my admittedly brief research. These similarities are brought up quite frequently on Christ Myth web sites, but, to my knowledge, no primary source, such as the "Book Of The Dead" supports these contentions.
Then, there is the high esteem in which Harpur holds one of his three main sources, the aforementioned Alvin Boyd Kuhn, "I remain stunned at the silence with which his writings have been greeted by scholars" (Harpur 180). I was not familiar with Kuhn or his works before reading "Pagan", but preliminary research suggests that Kuhn is not widely citied in mainstream comparative religion or Egyptology circles, due to some unorthodox theories. Further, his credentials consist of PhD in Theosophy. I began reading one of Kuhn's works referenced by Harpur, "The Lost Light" to gain some deeper insight into his theories. The opening sentence of the Prologue is telling:
"Coming forth in a day when theology has long been discredited - even in its own ecclesiastical household - and religion itself is threatened with obliteration by rampant forces hostile to it, this book aims to rehabilitate theology and to stabilize true religion" (Kuhn, 1940).
Firstly, I was not aware that theology has been discredited by 1940 or, indeed, that the scholarly examination of sacred texts, practices and beliefs had ever been maligned by the mainstream. Secondly, what is "true religion"? Who decides this? Kuhn?
Let me state that I approach these texts not as a theologian myself, but as an interested amateur. Regardless of CV or reputation, I recommend testing authors by their sources. In the case of Harpur, the jury is still out, but I'm less than impressed so far.
February 12, 2020
This book essentially boils down to “Just trust me bro. I read these three authors and they were, like, really good and stuff and now I’m, like, totally convinced.” I can hardly resist responding in kind with a good ol’ “Cool story, bro.”
The author multiplies bold claim after bold claim and yet offers nary a reference. The few footnotes he does offer are either 1) references to a biblical verse he just quoted (which I – or anyone really – could have easily found on our own. - And also, he sometimes unobtrusively inserts the chapter and verse in the text itself so I am not sure why sometimes he chooses instead to add a footnote and have me go to the back of the book just to find out that he is merely giving a gospel chapter and verse. Given the dearth of references, it almost comes off as though he’s doing that to show “See! …I do have references…really, I do…”) or 2) you flip back to the “Notes” section of the book and find that the reference is either lacking in relevance or merely pointing you back to that clique of three or four “scholars” that has informed his thesis. It makes me realize what a waste of time reading this book has been. Rather, I wish I had known and just read those few authors on which he relies so heavily. I might dare to hope that they, unlike him, would actually point me to the primary sources where I can go and confirm the claims for myself.
Having said that, while reading the book, I have gradually come to suspect that a reason (if not “the” reason) for the lack of citations is that he doesn’t actually want us to look up the sources – hence the “Just trust me bro” with which I introduced this review. This suspicion, fed by a few instances where he would quote certain Church Fathers such as Augustine and Jerome (although he erroneously attributed Jerome’s quote to Gregory of Nazianzus), gained some credence when I did dig those up (despite him not providing the reference) only to find that he had either misrepresented the quote (twice in Augustine’s case) or, given the context, plainly failed to understand the quote (in Jerome’s case). I am undecided whether to view this as dishonesty or shoddy “scholarship”.
There were also other instances where the claim made was so jarring, such as there supposedly having been some amulet of a crucified Orpheus dating to the 3rd century B.C.E. (on p.45) and yet, when I looked this up (and spent a few hours, not minutes, reading all about this supposed amulet) I found out that, aside from scholarly consensus considering it to be a medieval forgery, the very authors who Harpur himself is quoting are NOT claiming that the amulet dates from the 3rd century B.C.E but from the 3rd century C.E! There is a 600 year difference there and, even supposing that it wasn’t a medieval fake as suggested, it would still date from well AFTER the beginning of Christianity and thus not count at all as the kind of evidence Harpur presents it to be. Again, I have to wonder, what is this exactly?? Dishonesty? Incompetent research? Senility? …It really just comes off (along with much else in the book) as though he was just skimming through some material looking for anything that might buttress his claims.
Another instance where I could naught but shake my head and laugh: In his chapter 6 “Convincing the Sceptics”, he has a foot note “5” and when I checked at the back of the book I found it to be utterly irrelevant (more so than what I had come to expect). I kept reading and then fell upon the next footnote, “6”, and flipped back to the Notes section to find that there was no footnote “6”. What I did notice immediately however is that the earlier footnote “5” which was completely irrelevant in regards to the previous part of the text, was clearly relevant (although of no great importance or value) to the part of the text to which there was supposed to be a footnote “6”. So he refers to a footnote “6” which doesn’t exist in the back of the book, but turns out that footnote “5” is the one obviously meant to be “6”, which means that in reality it is footnote “5” which is missing -_- …I wouldn’t normally use an emoticon in a book review however I am of the mind that this fairly approximates Harpur’s highschool quality sourcing (a C grade student at best) and the intellectual maturity of his intended audience.
In any case, I only read this book because I found it in the used book section at my local library and as I suspected it to be “scholarly refuse” so I grabbed it for 1$ to avoid someone else buying it and falling for this baloney. And even if what he put forth was true, entirely or in part, you’d never know it from reading this book. Of course, you could “Just trust this bro” but you wouldn’t be able to confirm any of what he’s saying by looking up any primary sources. Certainly, if one really wants to, nothing stops one from trying to confirm all he says independently of any footnotes. But he’s the “Rhodes scholar”, I shouldn’t have to start from scratch to verify his claims, he should point me to the precise primary sources.
I would strongly encourage anyone who reads this book to disabuse him/herself of much of the unfounded nonsense promoted therein by simply using the internet to go find these myths he’s referring to and see all the “parallels” for yourself. I’m not even suggesting you go to a website debunking these supposed parallels, I’m just saying not to go find some “Jesus Myth” website which is just peddling more or the same thing. I won’t offer a website in this review as I don’t want it to seem as though I am leading to a site favorable to my opinion. Rather, simply find the myths he’s referring to from some neutral website which presents the myths on their own as they are and that doesn’t mention Jesus at all in any attempt to credit or discredit the Jesus Myth hypothesis. If you do so, I promise you that you’ll discover two things. Firstly, you’ll inevitably discover that Harpur conveniently leaves out all of the obvious and egregious differences between these other myths and the gospels Jesus narratives. And secondly, you’ll notice that as for the few similarities (relatively compared to all the differences) really aren’t all that similar and require quite a bit of hair pulling to get there, or, are completely fabricated and nowhere to be found in the myths at all. Anyone who reads this book and gobbles it all up as gospel without taking up this challenge is as dishonest as Harpur himself.
Lastly, although I touched on this already, it bears reiteration – Harpur grossly misrepresents the apostle Paul, the Church Fathers (especially Origen, Clement of Alexandria and Augustine), and orthodox Christian theology as a whole. The only people with the potential of being duped by his mischaracterizations are the theologically illiterate, which sadly seems to include most of those who have read and reviewed this book. Needless to add, that group includes Tom Harpur as well. (Or maybe he’s not illiterate but rather a lying sack of…)
The author multiplies bold claim after bold claim and yet offers nary a reference. The few footnotes he does offer are either 1) references to a biblical verse he just quoted (which I – or anyone really – could have easily found on our own. - And also, he sometimes unobtrusively inserts the chapter and verse in the text itself so I am not sure why sometimes he chooses instead to add a footnote and have me go to the back of the book just to find out that he is merely giving a gospel chapter and verse. Given the dearth of references, it almost comes off as though he’s doing that to show “See! …I do have references…really, I do…”) or 2) you flip back to the “Notes” section of the book and find that the reference is either lacking in relevance or merely pointing you back to that clique of three or four “scholars” that has informed his thesis. It makes me realize what a waste of time reading this book has been. Rather, I wish I had known and just read those few authors on which he relies so heavily. I might dare to hope that they, unlike him, would actually point me to the primary sources where I can go and confirm the claims for myself.
Having said that, while reading the book, I have gradually come to suspect that a reason (if not “the” reason) for the lack of citations is that he doesn’t actually want us to look up the sources – hence the “Just trust me bro” with which I introduced this review. This suspicion, fed by a few instances where he would quote certain Church Fathers such as Augustine and Jerome (although he erroneously attributed Jerome’s quote to Gregory of Nazianzus), gained some credence when I did dig those up (despite him not providing the reference) only to find that he had either misrepresented the quote (twice in Augustine’s case) or, given the context, plainly failed to understand the quote (in Jerome’s case). I am undecided whether to view this as dishonesty or shoddy “scholarship”.
There were also other instances where the claim made was so jarring, such as there supposedly having been some amulet of a crucified Orpheus dating to the 3rd century B.C.E. (on p.45) and yet, when I looked this up (and spent a few hours, not minutes, reading all about this supposed amulet) I found out that, aside from scholarly consensus considering it to be a medieval forgery, the very authors who Harpur himself is quoting are NOT claiming that the amulet dates from the 3rd century B.C.E but from the 3rd century C.E! There is a 600 year difference there and, even supposing that it wasn’t a medieval fake as suggested, it would still date from well AFTER the beginning of Christianity and thus not count at all as the kind of evidence Harpur presents it to be. Again, I have to wonder, what is this exactly?? Dishonesty? Incompetent research? Senility? …It really just comes off (along with much else in the book) as though he was just skimming through some material looking for anything that might buttress his claims.
Another instance where I could naught but shake my head and laugh: In his chapter 6 “Convincing the Sceptics”, he has a foot note “5” and when I checked at the back of the book I found it to be utterly irrelevant (more so than what I had come to expect). I kept reading and then fell upon the next footnote, “6”, and flipped back to the Notes section to find that there was no footnote “6”. What I did notice immediately however is that the earlier footnote “5” which was completely irrelevant in regards to the previous part of the text, was clearly relevant (although of no great importance or value) to the part of the text to which there was supposed to be a footnote “6”. So he refers to a footnote “6” which doesn’t exist in the back of the book, but turns out that footnote “5” is the one obviously meant to be “6”, which means that in reality it is footnote “5” which is missing -_- …I wouldn’t normally use an emoticon in a book review however I am of the mind that this fairly approximates Harpur’s highschool quality sourcing (a C grade student at best) and the intellectual maturity of his intended audience.
In any case, I only read this book because I found it in the used book section at my local library and as I suspected it to be “scholarly refuse” so I grabbed it for 1$ to avoid someone else buying it and falling for this baloney. And even if what he put forth was true, entirely or in part, you’d never know it from reading this book. Of course, you could “Just trust this bro” but you wouldn’t be able to confirm any of what he’s saying by looking up any primary sources. Certainly, if one really wants to, nothing stops one from trying to confirm all he says independently of any footnotes. But he’s the “Rhodes scholar”, I shouldn’t have to start from scratch to verify his claims, he should point me to the precise primary sources.
I would strongly encourage anyone who reads this book to disabuse him/herself of much of the unfounded nonsense promoted therein by simply using the internet to go find these myths he’s referring to and see all the “parallels” for yourself. I’m not even suggesting you go to a website debunking these supposed parallels, I’m just saying not to go find some “Jesus Myth” website which is just peddling more or the same thing. I won’t offer a website in this review as I don’t want it to seem as though I am leading to a site favorable to my opinion. Rather, simply find the myths he’s referring to from some neutral website which presents the myths on their own as they are and that doesn’t mention Jesus at all in any attempt to credit or discredit the Jesus Myth hypothesis. If you do so, I promise you that you’ll discover two things. Firstly, you’ll inevitably discover that Harpur conveniently leaves out all of the obvious and egregious differences between these other myths and the gospels Jesus narratives. And secondly, you’ll notice that as for the few similarities (relatively compared to all the differences) really aren’t all that similar and require quite a bit of hair pulling to get there, or, are completely fabricated and nowhere to be found in the myths at all. Anyone who reads this book and gobbles it all up as gospel without taking up this challenge is as dishonest as Harpur himself.
Lastly, although I touched on this already, it bears reiteration – Harpur grossly misrepresents the apostle Paul, the Church Fathers (especially Origen, Clement of Alexandria and Augustine), and orthodox Christian theology as a whole. The only people with the potential of being duped by his mischaracterizations are the theologically illiterate, which sadly seems to include most of those who have read and reviewed this book. Needless to add, that group includes Tom Harpur as well. (Or maybe he’s not illiterate but rather a lying sack of…)
July 7, 2010
The first hint this is a terrible book is the near total lack of primary sources cited. Add some obscene twisting of words, absurd leaps of logic and a general disregard for fact-checking and accuracy, and you have a shockingly stupid book.
June 26, 2025
Review of The pagan Christ: recovering the lost light by Tom Harpur. (Alternative title: The pagan Christ: Is Blind Faith Killing Christianity?)
You have likely encountered the theory of Christ as a pagan myth. The fact that this book achieved "bestseller" status suggests it might be another example of poor scholarship. However, I was surprised by the extent of its misinformation. If this represents a typical example of the genre, we can safely dismiss it entirely and return to reading Augustine.
This book is dreadful. I could not finish it—it was deeply disturbing. Harpur misrepresents Christianity, and he must be aware of this, given his background as an Anglican priest. He claims the church teaches that Christ cannot dwell within the heart, yet this is precisely what Christianity teaches. When the Holy Spirit descends upon believers, they receive the mind of Christ.
Harpur asserts that ancient peoples never believed their religious stories literally. Instead, they supposedly understood their symbolic meaning, possessing superior spiritual knowledge that Christianity has lost. In reality, ancient peoples did believe myths as literal truths and had little understanding of their psychological significance. They indeed embraced what he calls "superstitious supernaturalism," as the historical record demonstrates.
He claims that divine figures such as Jesus, Adonis, and Tammuz represented "the divine spark" incarnate in every human being for ancient peoples. He provides no references to support this view because none exist. This concept derives from Gnosticism, which emerged at a later period.
The book contains numerous errors. Harpur describes gods who suffer and die before returning to their heavenly realm, winning victories over enemies, enjoying triumphant processions, and being enthroned on high. He cites Osiris, Hermes, Balder, Adonis, Attis, Tammuz, and Thor as examples. However, Osiris, Adonis, Attis, Balder, and Tammuz never engage in battle and are never enthroned "on high." They remain in the underworld, typically governing seasonal vegetation cycles. I was unaware that Hermes and Thor were dying and resurrecting deities. Harpur never reveals his sources for this information.
Harpur maintains that the Jesus story possesses only subjective meaning and that everything in the Bible derives from Egyptian religion. He claims the "Osiris/Dionysus" myth already contains all Christian elements: virgin birth in a cave on December 25, turning water into wine at a wedding, healing the sick, casting out demons, performing miracles, riding a donkey into a special city, betrayal for thirty pieces of silver, celebrating communion with bread and wine, crucifixion, and descent into hell (chapter 3).
These events simply do not appear in either Osiris or Dionysus myths. Since Harpur provides no references, I conclude he has fabricated these connections. At this point, I abandoned the book, finding the experience too intellectually offensive to continue.
You have likely encountered the theory of Christ as a pagan myth. The fact that this book achieved "bestseller" status suggests it might be another example of poor scholarship. However, I was surprised by the extent of its misinformation. If this represents a typical example of the genre, we can safely dismiss it entirely and return to reading Augustine.
This book is dreadful. I could not finish it—it was deeply disturbing. Harpur misrepresents Christianity, and he must be aware of this, given his background as an Anglican priest. He claims the church teaches that Christ cannot dwell within the heart, yet this is precisely what Christianity teaches. When the Holy Spirit descends upon believers, they receive the mind of Christ.
Harpur asserts that ancient peoples never believed their religious stories literally. Instead, they supposedly understood their symbolic meaning, possessing superior spiritual knowledge that Christianity has lost. In reality, ancient peoples did believe myths as literal truths and had little understanding of their psychological significance. They indeed embraced what he calls "superstitious supernaturalism," as the historical record demonstrates.
He claims that divine figures such as Jesus, Adonis, and Tammuz represented "the divine spark" incarnate in every human being for ancient peoples. He provides no references to support this view because none exist. This concept derives from Gnosticism, which emerged at a later period.
The book contains numerous errors. Harpur describes gods who suffer and die before returning to their heavenly realm, winning victories over enemies, enjoying triumphant processions, and being enthroned on high. He cites Osiris, Hermes, Balder, Adonis, Attis, Tammuz, and Thor as examples. However, Osiris, Adonis, Attis, Balder, and Tammuz never engage in battle and are never enthroned "on high." They remain in the underworld, typically governing seasonal vegetation cycles. I was unaware that Hermes and Thor were dying and resurrecting deities. Harpur never reveals his sources for this information.
Harpur maintains that the Jesus story possesses only subjective meaning and that everything in the Bible derives from Egyptian religion. He claims the "Osiris/Dionysus" myth already contains all Christian elements: virgin birth in a cave on December 25, turning water into wine at a wedding, healing the sick, casting out demons, performing miracles, riding a donkey into a special city, betrayal for thirty pieces of silver, celebrating communion with bread and wine, crucifixion, and descent into hell (chapter 3).
These events simply do not appear in either Osiris or Dionysus myths. Since Harpur provides no references, I conclude he has fabricated these connections. At this point, I abandoned the book, finding the experience too intellectually offensive to continue.
December 13, 2010
It's my opinion that every Christian should read this book. It's not as blasphemous as the title might make it sound. The author explores the pagan influences in Christianity, and the true meaning behind the stories of the Bible that have gotten lost after centuries of literal interpretation. I think looking at the roots of the religion breathes new life into the Biblical stories and make them relevant today.
I knew some of this stuff before I read the book, but I was surprised at how much of it I didn't know. The author cites all of his sources, so those who doubt can do their own research and decide for themselves. Highly recommend it for anyone searching for meaning in the Bible or anyone interested in comparative religious studies.
I knew some of this stuff before I read the book, but I was surprised at how much of it I didn't know. The author cites all of his sources, so those who doubt can do their own research and decide for themselves. Highly recommend it for anyone searching for meaning in the Bible or anyone interested in comparative religious studies.
February 19, 2008
I didn't rate this highly because I don't mean to recommend it to anyone. It is, however, talked about in some circles... Tom Harpur is a former Anglican priest, turned journalist. He takes a sharply critical approach to Christianity--which is intensely interesting, but can leave a person feeling adrift at sea. He doesn't believe in a historical Christ, but sees Christianity as a repackaging of ancient mythologies, none of which were ever intended to be literalized. All of which point to an "inner christ." His Egyptian mythology is illuminating--and possibly sheds light on some metaphors that have been lost, but Harpur, quite literally, has thrown out the baby with the bathwater.
April 27, 2021
I read the book cover-to-cover. It is unmitigated drivel, faux scholarship at its worst. I concur with the assessment of Prof. W. Ward Gasque (https://historynewsnetwork.org/articl... Harpur is simply regurgitating the extraordinarily impressionistic writings of two nineteenth-century authors (Godfrey Higgins, 1772-1833, and Gerald Massey, 1828-1907), and one twentieth-century author (Alvin Boyd Kuhn, 1880-1963), none of whom knew whereof they wrote.
Read it, if you must, if you are curious about early Christian origins. But don't buy it (i.e., pay money for it or uncritically accept it's claims). It's not worth the price -- any price.
Read it, if you must, if you are curious about early Christian origins. But don't buy it (i.e., pay money for it or uncritically accept it's claims). It's not worth the price -- any price.
November 1, 2017
A great book. Fascinating read that makes the case that the Bible needs to be interpreted as myth and allegory rather than taken literally as historical truth. The author explains the origins of these myths and their commonality with many other ancient religions. I found a similar message in Joseph Campbell's "The Power of Myth" and highly recommend both books.
January 31, 2020
Full of holes without any supporting evidence except long-debunked theories from the 19th century.
June 3, 2024
AN ARGUMENT THAT THE “SPIRITUAL” CHRIST WAS “HISTORICIZED” BY THE CHURCH
Author Tom Harpur wrote in the first chapter of this 2004 book, “I write here… as a journalist with special training in theology and religion. I have the great responsibility of sharing the ‘story’ that follows with as wide an audience as possible, because what I describe and document in the following pages is one of the most far-reaching tragedies in history. It is the premise of this entire account that very early on, in the third and fourth centuries C.E., the Christian Church made a fatal error. Either deliberately, in a competitive bid to win over the greatest umbers of the largely unlettered masses, or through willful ignorance of the true, inner sense of the profound spiritual wisdom it had inherited from so many ancient sources, the Church took a literalist, popularized, historical approach to sublime truth. What was preserved in the amber of allegory, it misrepresented as plodding fact… The great truth that the Christ was to come IN MAN, that the Christ principle was potentially in every one of us, was changed to the exclusivist teaching that the Christ had come AS A MAN. No other could match him, or even come close. The Dark Ages---and so much more---were the eventual result.” (Pg. 2-3)
He admits, “In all honesty, however, this has not been a simple or easy journey for me. Having come from a Judeo-Christian background and commitment and dedicated my life to making known spiritual truth, I had never before encountered in depth the kind of challenges to my own faith I explore here. Certainly very little of what follows was ever presented to me by the institutional Church during my ten years of university training for the Anglican priesthood long ago. Nor was it ever once seriously discussed by any of my colleagues during the roughly ten years I spent at a professor of the New Testament and Greek at a prominent Canadian theological college… When I started my ministry in a parish, and even when I was teaching at the seminary, I had absolutely no idea of many of the startling truths you are about to encounter.” (Pg. 4-5)
He suggests, “anyone who wants to understand religion, religious ideas, and religious documents… must realize that the divine, the mysterious, the ineffable, the workings of the spirit in the human heart or in the cosmos at large cannot be adequately expressed other than by myth, allegory, imagery, parable, and metaphor. Literal, descriptive narrative inevitably leads to either idolatry or utter nonsense. Thus myths are not some fictional … addition to the major faiths; they are their very essence. Strip them away and there is little that is precious left. Christianity does not need to ‘demythologize’ its story; it needs to ‘remythologize’ it…” (Pg. 18)
He outlines, “Here is a summary of what the spiritual Christ of both the pre-Christian and the earliest Christian gnosis, or experience, was and how such a reality operates in us today: 1. The Christos is the name given to the incarnate presence of God within. 2. The Christos… is present within all humanity… 3. To release the potential power of the Christos within, everyone must realize his or her innate spiritual nature and power. 4. Doctrines, creeds, dogmas, rites, and rituals have tended to replace this awareness of an innate spiritual essence… 5. The Gospels are really dramas about the Christos… Jesus is the symbolic personification of the Christos. 6. Jesus’ birth, death, and resurrection are subjective events of the Christ within that each of us is meant to experience… 7. It is through our permission that the Christos unleashed to spiritualize our nature. We don’t become God, but each of us is a fragment of God with divine potential. 8. Religions should provide opportunity for people to commit their lives not to a personal, historic Jesus… but to the eternal Christ, however, this divine presence is described.” (Pg. 24-25) Later, he concludes, “incarnation---the indwelling of God or divine essence in the human, every human---is the central teaching of all ancient belief systems everywhere.” (Pg. 35)
He states, “The only difference… between the Jesus story of the New Testament and the many ancient myths depicting what seems the identical combination of concepts and characteristics is that nobody among the ancients... believed for one moment that any of the events in their dramas were in any way historical. What counted were the deep, timeless spiritual truths behind or beyond the fictional packaging. There was one primal, central myth… and all the rest flowed from that. In Christianity, however, the myth was eventually literalized. Jesus was historicized.” (Pg. 38-39)
He asserts, “Arles… was sacked by Christians in 270. These acts of outrage in all probability included the tragic destruction of scrolls and books that might well have illumined our understanding of the mysterious rock monuments of Stonehenge… The utter destruction of the 500,000 to 750,000 books and scrolls of the incredible library at Alexandra by a Christian mob stands as perhaps the greatest single testimony to the overwhelming hatred of learning and education held by the rank-and-file majority who flocked to the new religion.” (Pg. 61)
He says, “We come now to the most critical section of our exploration---the specific evidence that the Jesus story is not original as it comes to us in the New Testament Gospels… [Following Gerald Massey and Alvin Boyd Kuhn] I was led inexorably to the conviction that Egypt wat truly the cradle of the Jesus figure in the Gospels. Here already was the story of how the divine son ‘left the courts of heaven’ … and descended to earth as the baby Horus. Born of a virgin… he then became a substitute for humanity, went down into Hades as the quickener of the dead, their justifier and redeemer… This mythical prototype has led me… to a deeper, more spiritual comprehension of what it means to say that Jesus is the Christ… Once the historicization and literalization of the central character in the Jesus myth had taken place, and… was firmly locked into the four Gospels as actual histories of a god in disguise, the charge of the Pagan enemies and critics of Christianity was sounded. You have stolen all our beliefs and rites, they claimed… In my view, this verdict of the so-called Pagans is now unassailable… You, the reader, must eventually decide whether this ‘Pagan’ charge of religious plagiarism on a monumental scale was warranted…. But judging by the utter ferocity of the reaction of the Church… All the signs point to a guilty, fearful conscience at work.” (Pg. 77-79)
He recalls, “Anyone who reads Massey and Kuhn will, I’m sure, reach the kinds of conclusions I have reached here. Yet it wasn’t the research I did in preparation for this book that first convinced me … In fact, my understanding changed radically in the years after I left teaching in 1971… [In his 1991 book ‘life After Death’] I invited the reader to look at the Gospel story, or myth, of Jesus in a deeply personal way, as a story about the inner meaning of his or her own life…” (Pg. 154-156) Later, he adds, “the controversial founder of Theosophy, Madame H.P. Blavatsky, who has been greatly---and unfairly---maligned by her detractors, had unquestionably a deep insight into the nature and meaning of ancient, esoteric wisdoms.” (Pg. 165)
He summarizes, “the Bible… is not about history, unless by that you mean the inner story of the human mind and heart in its dealings with the divine. To realize that Jesus was, and still remains, the supreme dramatic symbol of the divinity within us all; to understand that the Christ is the divine essence of our nature; that his story is a dramatic representation of a deep element of human consciousness; to see the symbolic quality of all Scripture---all of this has made me deeply aware of the tremendously significant message I had to try to clarify and make as widely known as possible… the doctrine of Incarnation … gives us a basis for universal recognition of one another as brothers and sisters in God.” (Pg. 180)
This book may interest “Mythicists,” but perhaps also those interested in Theosophy, Spiritualism, and similar “Mind-based” religions.
Author Tom Harpur wrote in the first chapter of this 2004 book, “I write here… as a journalist with special training in theology and religion. I have the great responsibility of sharing the ‘story’ that follows with as wide an audience as possible, because what I describe and document in the following pages is one of the most far-reaching tragedies in history. It is the premise of this entire account that very early on, in the third and fourth centuries C.E., the Christian Church made a fatal error. Either deliberately, in a competitive bid to win over the greatest umbers of the largely unlettered masses, or through willful ignorance of the true, inner sense of the profound spiritual wisdom it had inherited from so many ancient sources, the Church took a literalist, popularized, historical approach to sublime truth. What was preserved in the amber of allegory, it misrepresented as plodding fact… The great truth that the Christ was to come IN MAN, that the Christ principle was potentially in every one of us, was changed to the exclusivist teaching that the Christ had come AS A MAN. No other could match him, or even come close. The Dark Ages---and so much more---were the eventual result.” (Pg. 2-3)
He admits, “In all honesty, however, this has not been a simple or easy journey for me. Having come from a Judeo-Christian background and commitment and dedicated my life to making known spiritual truth, I had never before encountered in depth the kind of challenges to my own faith I explore here. Certainly very little of what follows was ever presented to me by the institutional Church during my ten years of university training for the Anglican priesthood long ago. Nor was it ever once seriously discussed by any of my colleagues during the roughly ten years I spent at a professor of the New Testament and Greek at a prominent Canadian theological college… When I started my ministry in a parish, and even when I was teaching at the seminary, I had absolutely no idea of many of the startling truths you are about to encounter.” (Pg. 4-5)
He suggests, “anyone who wants to understand religion, religious ideas, and religious documents… must realize that the divine, the mysterious, the ineffable, the workings of the spirit in the human heart or in the cosmos at large cannot be adequately expressed other than by myth, allegory, imagery, parable, and metaphor. Literal, descriptive narrative inevitably leads to either idolatry or utter nonsense. Thus myths are not some fictional … addition to the major faiths; they are their very essence. Strip them away and there is little that is precious left. Christianity does not need to ‘demythologize’ its story; it needs to ‘remythologize’ it…” (Pg. 18)
He outlines, “Here is a summary of what the spiritual Christ of both the pre-Christian and the earliest Christian gnosis, or experience, was and how such a reality operates in us today: 1. The Christos is the name given to the incarnate presence of God within. 2. The Christos… is present within all humanity… 3. To release the potential power of the Christos within, everyone must realize his or her innate spiritual nature and power. 4. Doctrines, creeds, dogmas, rites, and rituals have tended to replace this awareness of an innate spiritual essence… 5. The Gospels are really dramas about the Christos… Jesus is the symbolic personification of the Christos. 6. Jesus’ birth, death, and resurrection are subjective events of the Christ within that each of us is meant to experience… 7. It is through our permission that the Christos unleashed to spiritualize our nature. We don’t become God, but each of us is a fragment of God with divine potential. 8. Religions should provide opportunity for people to commit their lives not to a personal, historic Jesus… but to the eternal Christ, however, this divine presence is described.” (Pg. 24-25) Later, he concludes, “incarnation---the indwelling of God or divine essence in the human, every human---is the central teaching of all ancient belief systems everywhere.” (Pg. 35)
He states, “The only difference… between the Jesus story of the New Testament and the many ancient myths depicting what seems the identical combination of concepts and characteristics is that nobody among the ancients... believed for one moment that any of the events in their dramas were in any way historical. What counted were the deep, timeless spiritual truths behind or beyond the fictional packaging. There was one primal, central myth… and all the rest flowed from that. In Christianity, however, the myth was eventually literalized. Jesus was historicized.” (Pg. 38-39)
He asserts, “Arles… was sacked by Christians in 270. These acts of outrage in all probability included the tragic destruction of scrolls and books that might well have illumined our understanding of the mysterious rock monuments of Stonehenge… The utter destruction of the 500,000 to 750,000 books and scrolls of the incredible library at Alexandra by a Christian mob stands as perhaps the greatest single testimony to the overwhelming hatred of learning and education held by the rank-and-file majority who flocked to the new religion.” (Pg. 61)
He says, “We come now to the most critical section of our exploration---the specific evidence that the Jesus story is not original as it comes to us in the New Testament Gospels… [Following Gerald Massey and Alvin Boyd Kuhn] I was led inexorably to the conviction that Egypt wat truly the cradle of the Jesus figure in the Gospels. Here already was the story of how the divine son ‘left the courts of heaven’ … and descended to earth as the baby Horus. Born of a virgin… he then became a substitute for humanity, went down into Hades as the quickener of the dead, their justifier and redeemer… This mythical prototype has led me… to a deeper, more spiritual comprehension of what it means to say that Jesus is the Christ… Once the historicization and literalization of the central character in the Jesus myth had taken place, and… was firmly locked into the four Gospels as actual histories of a god in disguise, the charge of the Pagan enemies and critics of Christianity was sounded. You have stolen all our beliefs and rites, they claimed… In my view, this verdict of the so-called Pagans is now unassailable… You, the reader, must eventually decide whether this ‘Pagan’ charge of religious plagiarism on a monumental scale was warranted…. But judging by the utter ferocity of the reaction of the Church… All the signs point to a guilty, fearful conscience at work.” (Pg. 77-79)
He recalls, “Anyone who reads Massey and Kuhn will, I’m sure, reach the kinds of conclusions I have reached here. Yet it wasn’t the research I did in preparation for this book that first convinced me … In fact, my understanding changed radically in the years after I left teaching in 1971… [In his 1991 book ‘life After Death’] I invited the reader to look at the Gospel story, or myth, of Jesus in a deeply personal way, as a story about the inner meaning of his or her own life…” (Pg. 154-156) Later, he adds, “the controversial founder of Theosophy, Madame H.P. Blavatsky, who has been greatly---and unfairly---maligned by her detractors, had unquestionably a deep insight into the nature and meaning of ancient, esoteric wisdoms.” (Pg. 165)
He summarizes, “the Bible… is not about history, unless by that you mean the inner story of the human mind and heart in its dealings with the divine. To realize that Jesus was, and still remains, the supreme dramatic symbol of the divinity within us all; to understand that the Christ is the divine essence of our nature; that his story is a dramatic representation of a deep element of human consciousness; to see the symbolic quality of all Scripture---all of this has made me deeply aware of the tremendously significant message I had to try to clarify and make as widely known as possible… the doctrine of Incarnation … gives us a basis for universal recognition of one another as brothers and sisters in God.” (Pg. 180)
This book may interest “Mythicists,” but perhaps also those interested in Theosophy, Spiritualism, and similar “Mind-based” religions.
August 12, 2011
In The Pagan Christ Tom Harpur takes a look at the origins of the Christ myth and attempts to trace its beginnings to Egyptian sun god religions. I suppose this may come as a surprise to those who aren’t aware that all religions are man-made creations. The only real difference is that it’s easier to document the human origins of more recently invented religions (Scientology, Mormonism), than it is the older ones like Christianity.
The main point Harpur wants to convey, is that these archetypal stories and allegories have existed for some time as a way for humans to make sense of the world and their place within it. Christianity, by taking these myths and transforming them into a story that was supposed to have occurred historically, has diminished the power and relevance of the myth in people’s lives.
I’m not sure if that’s true. I think people would rather believe that something really happened, rather than that it is just a moralistic fairy tale. However, he is certainly correct in concluding that fundamental biblical literalists are completely missing the point when they read the book as historic truth rather than allegory.
Harpur spends much of the book comparing Christian stories with those of Egyptian mythology, in particular drawing a correlation between Horus / Osirus and Jesus. He uses such comparisons as:
- both were born of a virgin and heralded by a star in the east
- neither had a history between the ages of 12 and 30
- both walked on water, cast out demons and healed the sick
- both were crucified between two thieves and resurrected three days later
and others.
I have no doubt that the bible is made up of a mish mash of stories borrowed from culture, history, myth and other religions. We know that Christmas was chosen to be December 25 to coincide with the Pagan celebration of the winter solstice. That Jesus echoed statements attributed to Buddah centuries before. That Easter is the first Sunday after the first full moon after vernal equinox (again – a Pagan celebration). The problem with Harpur’s analysis though, is that it’s too easy to stray into a kind of “six degrees of Kevin Bacon”. The three little pigs built a house of wood, Jesus was a carpenter and made things of wood too … therefore the Jesus myth sprang from the second little pig.
While Harpur’s analysis may have some merit, he strains his conclusions beyond what can be drawn from the facts at hand.
The main point Harpur wants to convey, is that these archetypal stories and allegories have existed for some time as a way for humans to make sense of the world and their place within it. Christianity, by taking these myths and transforming them into a story that was supposed to have occurred historically, has diminished the power and relevance of the myth in people’s lives.
I’m not sure if that’s true. I think people would rather believe that something really happened, rather than that it is just a moralistic fairy tale. However, he is certainly correct in concluding that fundamental biblical literalists are completely missing the point when they read the book as historic truth rather than allegory.
Harpur spends much of the book comparing Christian stories with those of Egyptian mythology, in particular drawing a correlation between Horus / Osirus and Jesus. He uses such comparisons as:
- both were born of a virgin and heralded by a star in the east
- neither had a history between the ages of 12 and 30
- both walked on water, cast out demons and healed the sick
- both were crucified between two thieves and resurrected three days later
and others.
I have no doubt that the bible is made up of a mish mash of stories borrowed from culture, history, myth and other religions. We know that Christmas was chosen to be December 25 to coincide with the Pagan celebration of the winter solstice. That Jesus echoed statements attributed to Buddah centuries before. That Easter is the first Sunday after the first full moon after vernal equinox (again – a Pagan celebration). The problem with Harpur’s analysis though, is that it’s too easy to stray into a kind of “six degrees of Kevin Bacon”. The three little pigs built a house of wood, Jesus was a carpenter and made things of wood too … therefore the Jesus myth sprang from the second little pig.
While Harpur’s analysis may have some merit, he strains his conclusions beyond what can be drawn from the facts at hand.
January 4, 2024
This book is filled with claims that have been proven lies by Egyptologists. Gerald Massey is not a good source, and thats when this book does provide a source which often it doesnt to the original claims because theyre made up.
He claimed hes a biblical scholar but doesnt know that there were never 3 wise men in the biblical text?
Almost all of the Horus comparisons have no actual evidence to back them up.
A video and article that goes over some of the false Horus claims.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FR08... https://talesoftimesforgotten.com/201...)
Anup the baptizer was not even an egyptian god, its a bad translation of Anubis who didn't even do baptisms, because Egyptians didnt do them.
Isis was never said to be a virgin and has been depicted having sex, and has stories of her having sex.
Neither Horus or Dionysus have 12 followers
Jesus's date of birth is not mentioned in the Bible so this has no difference in the story, but Horus has never been born on the 25th either.
Only current Pharaohs were believed to be divine, not every Egyptian.
Secular or not most historians believe Jesus was a real man, there is proof he existed. Whether or not you believe he's the son of God is a different argument, which is not the argument being presented in the text here. There are many more issues with this books claims but I think this is enough to make rational people turn their heads.
He claimed hes a biblical scholar but doesnt know that there were never 3 wise men in the biblical text?
Almost all of the Horus comparisons have no actual evidence to back them up.
A video and article that goes over some of the false Horus claims.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FR08... https://talesoftimesforgotten.com/201...)
Anup the baptizer was not even an egyptian god, its a bad translation of Anubis who didn't even do baptisms, because Egyptians didnt do them.
Isis was never said to be a virgin and has been depicted having sex, and has stories of her having sex.
Neither Horus or Dionysus have 12 followers
Jesus's date of birth is not mentioned in the Bible so this has no difference in the story, but Horus has never been born on the 25th either.
Only current Pharaohs were believed to be divine, not every Egyptian.
Secular or not most historians believe Jesus was a real man, there is proof he existed. Whether or not you believe he's the son of God is a different argument, which is not the argument being presented in the text here. There are many more issues with this books claims but I think this is enough to make rational people turn their heads.
April 20, 2018
This book was a re-read. Previously, I had read sections of this book for research when it was first released.
If you have studied the history of the formation of Christianity or comparative religions, there is not a whole lot new here. If you have not studied these things, some of the information contained may come across as shocking and provocative.
While Harpur claims his research and writing this book has reaffirmed his Christian faith, this book reads more like a dissertation on why Christianity is a myth, a historical falsehood, and entirely based on Egyptian mythology (particularly Isis, Horus, and Osiris). There are some leaps in logic that make this assertion of faith by Harpur difficult to believe.
On the whole, and what makes this book difficult to get through, is a large part of what Harpur imparts to his reader is merely a rehasing or direct citing of the works and research of Alvin Kuhn and Gerald Massey. Clearly, Harpur is a fan. And while I can appreciate Harpur's admiration of Kuhn and Massey and their contribution to this field of study, it is concerning that parts of this book are less about what Harpur has to say on the subject and more about regurgitating what others before him have said; I was left feeling like Harpur had a lot to say on the books he had read and not much to offer in terms of his own research.
If you have studied the history of the formation of Christianity or comparative religions, there is not a whole lot new here. If you have not studied these things, some of the information contained may come across as shocking and provocative.
While Harpur claims his research and writing this book has reaffirmed his Christian faith, this book reads more like a dissertation on why Christianity is a myth, a historical falsehood, and entirely based on Egyptian mythology (particularly Isis, Horus, and Osiris). There are some leaps in logic that make this assertion of faith by Harpur difficult to believe.
On the whole, and what makes this book difficult to get through, is a large part of what Harpur imparts to his reader is merely a rehasing or direct citing of the works and research of Alvin Kuhn and Gerald Massey. Clearly, Harpur is a fan. And while I can appreciate Harpur's admiration of Kuhn and Massey and their contribution to this field of study, it is concerning that parts of this book are less about what Harpur has to say on the subject and more about regurgitating what others before him have said; I was left feeling like Harpur had a lot to say on the books he had read and not much to offer in terms of his own research.
November 29, 2023
Excellent book! Clearly, Mr Harpur achieves his goal in my eyes, illuminating the message of Christ as a mystical, personal journey for each individual! He proves through extensive research and collaboration with other world renowned scholars, that early church elders purged this viewpoint by burning libraries and killing dissenters indiscriminately over hundreds of years, grabbing power over the illiterate masses for it's own enrichment and power! I also feel that the majority of the problems in our world today are the result of that one ancient power grab! Almost all of our current societal, cultural, and prejudicial issues are a result of that power play gone wrong. The christ is within us all. No matter what version of spiritually or naming convention, we choose to label our faith! There is no need for dogma, the Bible as history versus allegory, and especially, church ritual. It is an individual journey for us all. And we are all on this journey alone towards the realization of the christ within, trying to find the answer to why we are here! By the way, this is also what the Buddha taught!
April 11, 2013
The book is a good summary of the idea that the Jesus stories are retelling's of Egyptian myth. Certainly, the many proofs of Jesus existence do not have the historic support many believers claim.
Since Harpur extensively refers to Alvin Kuhn I read Kuhn’s book A Rebirth For Christianity and was disappointed to realize Harpur simply retells Kuhn without contributing anything new to the topic.
Since Harpur extensively refers to Alvin Kuhn I read Kuhn’s book A Rebirth For Christianity and was disappointed to realize Harpur simply retells Kuhn without contributing anything new to the topic.
June 9, 2019
This was essentially a love letter to Alvin Boyd Kuhn.
A lot of the info on this book was a stretch and the large majority of it was unqualified. It was unqualified claim followed by unqualified claim followed by a quote from Kuhn.
A lot of the info on this book was a stretch and the large majority of it was unqualified. It was unqualified claim followed by unqualified claim followed by a quote from Kuhn.
March 2, 2015
Interesting and thought provoking theories. Worth a read if you aren't already familiar with comparative mythology and the close similarities of Hellenistic myth to stories from the bible.
March 28, 2022
My second time reading this book. Harpur draws heavily on Alvin Boyd Kuhn, Gerald Massey, and Godfrey Higgins to assert that everything in the New Testament gospels and the Book of Acts is allegorical and was not originally meant to be taken as a literal history of a person named Jesus. All of the stories are meant as metaphors of the evolutionary journey our souls (the Christ within each of us) take on earth. The key: the NT is the story of the incarnation: the divine present in our material bodies. It is an ancient story that originated 3,500 years BCE in Egypt as the story of Horus and replayed many times in mystery religions worldwide before the first century CE.
In the third century CE the emerging Church, with the backing of the Roman emperor, took the many gospels of Jesus then in circulation and interpreted their symbolic stories as literalized history. Over the next 100 years the Church labeled the non-literalists as heretics, excommunicated them, and destroyed their books and pagan books that seemed to predate the god-man Jesus.
Harpur, an ordained Anglican priest who taught many years in the seminary, states that once he was convinced that the NT was not a literal history of a person named Jesus but an allegory of every man's soul, the gospel stories and the Church rituals enabled a deeper and more meaningful experience for him personally.
In the third century CE the emerging Church, with the backing of the Roman emperor, took the many gospels of Jesus then in circulation and interpreted their symbolic stories as literalized history. Over the next 100 years the Church labeled the non-literalists as heretics, excommunicated them, and destroyed their books and pagan books that seemed to predate the god-man Jesus.
Harpur, an ordained Anglican priest who taught many years in the seminary, states that once he was convinced that the NT was not a literal history of a person named Jesus but an allegory of every man's soul, the gospel stories and the Church rituals enabled a deeper and more meaningful experience for him personally.
December 2, 2019
He makes a few generalizations the average layperson is encouraged to look into for themselves. This implication doesn't give a whole lot of direction, but it does provide a lot of sources which one can look into for themselves. This broad sweep of pagan christianity seems to be relying on the work of Alvin Boyd Kuhn and his book "Who is this king of Glory?" which has also been recommended by other syncretists. Harpur is quite optimistic that the church can continue with their virtuous teachings and life changing message even more so than without the knowledge of the earlier Christ saviors of metaphorical pagan sun worship. A main theme is "The true myth", which we do not understand today.
August 18, 2017
Knowing the background of the author- I was impressed to receive much of the information which Dawkins and Hutchens books cover (God Delusion and god is not Great) a good two and three years ahead of their respective books.
Covering the history available versus the myths was an interesting dive- unevenly paced, and over too quickly.
Impressive - yet somewhat lacking greatness.
Sorely the most concise and collected and well-written book on this subject still seems to be the Dawkins book.
Still, knowing the background of the author makes this all the more compelling to read.
Covering the history available versus the myths was an interesting dive- unevenly paced, and over too quickly.
Impressive - yet somewhat lacking greatness.
Sorely the most concise and collected and well-written book on this subject still seems to be the Dawkins book.
Still, knowing the background of the author makes this all the more compelling to read.
February 16, 2022
I was hoping for more. Most of the reviews of 3 stars or less capture the issues. Harpur has a huge glare factor and bias from 3 authors. And he could have made his point in 50 pages. Oh, and quoting Woody Allen on page 158 was particularly cringe-worthy. You can skip this one on your spiritual journey. No worries about FOMO.
November 22, 2019
I read this book many years ago. What I do remember was that it was very enlightening and caused me to consider the bible and Christ in a completely different light. It was very instrumental in broadening my reading of authors such as, Richard Dawkins.
September 16, 2019
Was quite repetitive in some areas but it got the message across. The book is exceptionally well researched and very interesting throughout.
December 16, 2022
A bit repetitive but exceptionally insightful and enlightening.
May 10, 2024
Not easy to read however a “ must” read.
July 19, 2024
Even if this were published as fan fiction where it belongs, it would be barely serviceable. Poorly written, ahistorical hot garbage.
July 25, 2021
This book could have been written in less pages. It felt like the author was trying too hard to write his own words when all the ideas were someone else's.
November 13, 2023
Usually I don’t rate books unless I finish them, but in this case I chose not to continue. At 15% I have this book’s number, and it is one—as in one star.
Speaking of stars, we are all made of of molecules in this universe; you could have the same bits in you as a star. And other New Age-y mysticism. The Divine Spark. Follow the Light! OK I think the actual takeaway is, people should follow the light of Christ, not specific Biblical directives.
The Pagan Christ, with subtitles of Recovering the Lost Light and/or Is blind faith killing Christianity? purports to show that Christianity developed from other myths and religions in the area… which I would be fine with, but this book does not establish it. It is too badly written to prove much of anything, certainly not that all of the Bible was imported from Egyptian myths about Osiris. It is full of holes and New Age mish-mash. Harpur refers to a lot of other books and writers without documenting the scholarship. He seems quite taken with some older guys named Alvin Boyd Kuhn, Gerald Massey, Godfrey Higgins, and constantly mentions them. Egyptologists? (Are these even real people, or is this some sort of The Princess Bride , The Quincunx book prank? Never mind, I don’t want to know.)
I am not a scholar but I found mistakes in the actual footnotes, with pages and numbers referred to that have nothing to do with the reference. Apparently the author is a well-known religion columnist in Canada. Where do they find these people.
If you are interested in these topics, whether mysticism or archeology or historical Christianity, find something better. Bart D. Ehrman I would recommend for the latter.
Speaking of stars, we are all made of of molecules in this universe; you could have the same bits in you as a star. And other New Age-y mysticism. The Divine Spark. Follow the Light! OK I think the actual takeaway is, people should follow the light of Christ, not specific Biblical directives.
The Pagan Christ, with subtitles of Recovering the Lost Light and/or Is blind faith killing Christianity? purports to show that Christianity developed from other myths and religions in the area… which I would be fine with, but this book does not establish it. It is too badly written to prove much of anything, certainly not that all of the Bible was imported from Egyptian myths about Osiris. It is full of holes and New Age mish-mash. Harpur refers to a lot of other books and writers without documenting the scholarship. He seems quite taken with some older guys named Alvin Boyd Kuhn, Gerald Massey, Godfrey Higgins, and constantly mentions them. Egyptologists? (Are these even real people, or is this some sort of The Princess Bride , The Quincunx book prank? Never mind, I don’t want to know.)
I am not a scholar but I found mistakes in the actual footnotes, with pages and numbers referred to that have nothing to do with the reference. Apparently the author is a well-known religion columnist in Canada. Where do they find these people.
If you are interested in these topics, whether mysticism or archeology or historical Christianity, find something better. Bart D. Ehrman I would recommend for the latter.
November 17, 2013
Truly fascinating look at the origin of the Jesus myth in ancient Egyptian mythology. I have great respect for Harpur's project, which is to relocate Christianity as a system of allegorical and mythological thought that illuminates the evolution of the soul. He completely dismisses Jesus as having been a historical person in any capacity and his argument to this end is as air tight as they come. Where I think this book falls short is in Harpur's insistence on the eventual resurrection of the soul and its return to some sort of divine origin. While he manages to bring life and relevance to the stories of the New Testament there are places where he still clings to outdated and unhelpful ideas.
I must particularly criticize the notion that the crucifixion of Christ is meant to represent the crucifixion of the soul on the cross of physical embodiment. Throughout this book Harpur insists that the body is a prison for the soul and that in our embodiment we are "deader" and further from our true natures than we are in actual death, when our soul is set free and returned to "God." (He never truly explains what he thinks "God" is, and I'm left wondering what he means by it). These kinds of arguments that set up a dichotomy between body and soul really bother me and devalue physicality along with our earthly existence. I am someone who firmly believes that this one life is all we get, and that our soul, while real in the sense of describing an aspect of being human, is integral to our embodiment and not some separate thing that will go on living once our bodies die.
The author is also a bit repetitive. It is obvious that his discoveries have shaken his entire world view, but I don't think his startled tone and assumption that his readers will be equally resistant to his thesis does him any good. He restates a lot of his evidence in an attempt to convince skeptics but it slows down the pace of the book and is annoying to anyone who was already convinced by the initial instance of a particular argument.
Despite my few gripes though this book was very much worth reading. It truly transformed my ideas about the Christ myth and shone light on signs and symbols that I had become fed up with. Suddenly the nativity seems radiant to my jaded, atheistic mind. When the whole story is recast as something that occurs within each individual rather than a historical account, it actually becomes more vibrant and applicable than it is when you're trying to wrap your head around the utter impossibility of a virgin birth. There is much to be regained through the comparison of Egyptian and Christian myth that lifts religions out of the literalist holes they have been consigned to. Freed from having to pretend that some dude walked on water or rose from the dead readers can finally use the Bible as it was intended--as a manual for personal, internal, spiritual change. Change that is echoed in the cycles of the natural world and helps us to structure and make sense of our earthly lives. This almost makes me want to re-read the New Testament to see where it becomes new again.
I must particularly criticize the notion that the crucifixion of Christ is meant to represent the crucifixion of the soul on the cross of physical embodiment. Throughout this book Harpur insists that the body is a prison for the soul and that in our embodiment we are "deader" and further from our true natures than we are in actual death, when our soul is set free and returned to "God." (He never truly explains what he thinks "God" is, and I'm left wondering what he means by it). These kinds of arguments that set up a dichotomy between body and soul really bother me and devalue physicality along with our earthly existence. I am someone who firmly believes that this one life is all we get, and that our soul, while real in the sense of describing an aspect of being human, is integral to our embodiment and not some separate thing that will go on living once our bodies die.
The author is also a bit repetitive. It is obvious that his discoveries have shaken his entire world view, but I don't think his startled tone and assumption that his readers will be equally resistant to his thesis does him any good. He restates a lot of his evidence in an attempt to convince skeptics but it slows down the pace of the book and is annoying to anyone who was already convinced by the initial instance of a particular argument.
Despite my few gripes though this book was very much worth reading. It truly transformed my ideas about the Christ myth and shone light on signs and symbols that I had become fed up with. Suddenly the nativity seems radiant to my jaded, atheistic mind. When the whole story is recast as something that occurs within each individual rather than a historical account, it actually becomes more vibrant and applicable than it is when you're trying to wrap your head around the utter impossibility of a virgin birth. There is much to be regained through the comparison of Egyptian and Christian myth that lifts religions out of the literalist holes they have been consigned to. Freed from having to pretend that some dude walked on water or rose from the dead readers can finally use the Bible as it was intended--as a manual for personal, internal, spiritual change. Change that is echoed in the cycles of the natural world and helps us to structure and make sense of our earthly lives. This almost makes me want to re-read the New Testament to see where it becomes new again.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews