Bible Myths and their Parallels in other Religions

by T.W. Doane

"He who knows only one religion knows none."—Prof. Max Muller."The same thing which is now called Christian Religion existed among the Ancients. They have begun to call Christian the true religion which existed before."—St. Augustine."Our love for what is old, our reverence for what our fathers used, makes us keep still in the church, and on the very altar cloths, symbols which would excite the smile of an Oriental, and lead him to wonder why we send missionaries to his land, while cherishing his faith in ours."—James Bonwick.

Genres: Religion, Nonfiction, History, Mythology, Ebooks, Christianity

631 pages, Kindle Edition

Published August 17, 2016

Reviews

[Georges Alexandre · Rating 2 out of 5]

A colossal research from the author that proves his erudition and probably the work of a lifetime.
One can only show respect by the very academic approach on the subject to start with and the extensive exploration of so many books and papers that are all very well referenced in each chapter, especially considering the time the author wrote this (let us not forget this is a work of the 19th century).
It is paramount to understand that this was written in the mid 1800s to put it into context.
The author was very bold to write such a work that discredits the premises of the judeo-christian religion.
Given the relative scarcity of sources we can only admire the search he has performed and executed research on oriental creeds as well as South American but sometimes even lesser known faiths (at one point he mentions Micronesian islands).
It makes it impossible to write an all encompassing review of this book as the subject is so vast and by no means am I interested in criticising the religions either in confirming or disputing them. I am merely interested in reviewing this based on facts.
The positives I personally found were the following:
1) Thoroughness and references: there is no stone left unturned. I cannot imagine the years and hours the author must have spent to unravel all of this knowledge both in terms of geography as in terms of depth. As a simple example the fact that he mentions the theory of the "4 authors of the bible" is simply spectacular!
2) A certain critical approach and method: given the time this book was written, epistemology was only being touched as a hot topic and all of the authors conclusions seem to be based on previous sources. I only say 'certain' because this is one of the book's flaws too.
3) The 38th (penultimate) chapter - Explanation: Here the author accurately digresses and gives explanations that go beyond history, religion but also touch on anthropology with an accent on how a religion is formed, from simple and animistic observation to the later most complex systems.

The negatives are however plentiful.
1) Inaccuracies: admittedly, there is a lot in this book which can be proven wrong today with archaeological evidence. One must remember though that archaeology is also a science that advances and biblical archaeology was launched a lot later. Nonetheless many inaccuracies could have been avoided by doing one's homework properly and the references to Greco-Roman, Scandinavian Egyptian and other Eastern religions and history were plentiful even at the time (especially Greco Roman).
2) Conjecture: the majority of the conclusions the author reaches is purely conjectural and is driven by his urge to disprove the judeo christian creed. In this urge, he jumps into conclusions without necessarily remaining neutral and oversimplifies his syllogisms. (I had to giggle when I read that the Essenes or the Sami were Buddhists...)
3) Differences are overhelming compared to paralells. It is good to focus on a comparative study, which is what this book is about, but one must be careful of the shortcuts in one's conclusion. There certainly are many parallels between the instigators of the great religions in history and their myths/stories, but there are even more differences. Therefore amalgamating Jesus with Buddha or Krishna is more than disputable because there are more differences than common ground but comparing Moses to Bacchus or Jesus to Hercules can be laughable.
4) Lack of comparison with religions that came after Christianity: there hardly are any references (I counted briefly two with Islam) about later religions.
5) Dubious comparisons: there is absolutely no evidence that near Eastern religions have been influenced by Far Eastern ones, let alone American religions. Nonetheless the author fails to develop even more the evident comparison between Mesopotamian religions and judeo christian ones. The similarities are far more important and the geography much closer than India or (again) Mexico... He has not explored this opportunity adequately.

For the reasons above I was slightly underwhelmed by this book and understood why it is not a reference today and has been forgotten.
I would still recommend it , but only to someone with a critical eye and enough knowledge to be able to draw conclusions as to what needs more pondering and what must be discarded.

[Nathan Dehoff · Rating 3 out of 5]

I don't think I realized when I found this book electronically for pretty cheap that it was first published in 1875, although I soon learned from the style that it was fairly old. A modern book probably wouldn't use the word "Aryan" so often, for instance. The overall premise of comparing stories in the Bible, both Old and New Testaments but mostly the latter, was something I'm quite interested in, but I feel like the author went a little too far in his insistence that it was all more or less just copied. That some stories have very obvious counterparts doesn't mean there was nothing original in Judaism or Christianity. There's some adherence to the idea of the monomyth long before Joseph Campbell expounded upon that, and a theory that pretty much every major god or mythical hero represents the Sun. Certainly some of them did, but others are real stretches. The author definitely did a lot of research, some of which has been disproven or at least heavily disputed since then, but that's not his fault. It includes both obvious examples like the flood myths and some more obscure ones that I might have to look up. There's a fair amount on how much the nativity and resurrection stories borrow from that of other significant religious figures, and more recent stuff I've seen indicates that some of these similarities were vastly exaggerated. It doesn't mean there's nothing to them, but from what I've seen, the idea that, for instance, Mithra was born on Christmas Day doesn't have any direct evidence. I do think it's not unlikely that pagan elements crept into the New Testament, as Paul and some other early Christians were specifically trying to make their religion appeal to people who weren't Jewish. I think all religions borrow from each other, perhaps not even consciously.

[Mark · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was worried that this book was going to be difficult to read (being written in 1873) but the author Doane does a great job in his prose, making this thick book more manageable, despite the numerous foot notes and quotes. Surprisingly, this book is more of a critique of biblical narrative than a supporter of it, which gives my respect to the author, who must have taken a lot of abuse from the religious zealots of the day. Doane also did an incredible amount of research in writing the book, making many connections between the many heroes born of virgin mothers who were nailed to wood and then rose from the dead. Bible Myths and their Parallels in other Religions contains a lot of info that will make you rethink human history and wonder what is archetypical and what is fact.

[Jamie Robson · Rating 4 out of 5]

A bit outdated but solid

The book is obviously a bit outdated in terms of its evidence and conclusions, e.g. stating Matthew was the first gospel written but does show the progression to modern Bible scholarship. It also has the kernel of early Jesus mythicism though maintains a minimal Christ itself. An interesting read that needs some critical thinking as opposed to simply taking everything at face value.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thought provoking

This book was well laid out and made strong arguments against Christianity. The research vast and impeccable; however, I believe that faith in this Christian history is not something to eliminate from our world and or people. I do enjoy reading books that do challenge me in many different ways, but my faith goes to my core and will not be broken.

[Andy Febrico Bintoro · Rating 3 out of 5]

Christian myth?

This book try to prove that Jesus of Nazareth is so enveloped in the mists of the past, and his history so obscured by legend, that it may be compared to footprints in the sand. The book was not neutral to begin with, so many things here was bias in explanation.

[MR R · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have read many books which have successfully debunked Christianity but this book beats them all. Detailed and thoroughly scholarly in its research, in spite of its age it is incredibly readable. Highly recommended.

[David Moskos · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 / This but is filled with a massive amount of information, so much that it can be overwhelming. I took this in small chunks over the course of about a year. The information was interesting, though much of it has since been updated in more contemporary work.

[Margaret Nydell · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thorough

Too much detail for general reading, but good for research. Many obscure facts and references gathered in one place, well presented.

[Debi Emerson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not what I expected. It was a bit dry for my taste and I couldn't really get in to it. I may refer back to it later. It may be the kind of book that is better absorbed in small doses.