Is Jesus Occult?

A number of parallels have been drawn between the Christian views of Jesus and other religious or mythical domains. However, Eddy and Boyd state that there is no evidence of a historical influence by the pagan myths such as dying and rising gods on the authors of the New Testament. Paula Fredriksen states that no serious scholarly work places Jesus outside the backdrop of 1st century Palestinian Judaism, which is not the same as saying Christianity lacks Pagan influence.

Scholars have debated a number of broad issues related to the parallels drawn between Jesus and other myths, e.g. the very existence of the category dying-and-rising god was debated throughout the 20th century, some modern scholars questioning the soundness of the category. At the end of the 20th century the overall scholarly consensus had emerged against the soundness of the reasoning used to suggest the category. Tryggve Mettinger (who supports the category) states that there is a scholarly consensus that the category is inappropriate from a historical perspective. Scholars such as Kurt Rudolph have stated the reasoning used for the construction of the category has been defective.

Scholars such as Samuel Sandmel, professor of Bible and Hellenistic Literature at Hebrew Union College, view conclusions drawn from the simple observations of similarity as less than valid. Sandmel called the extravagance in hunting for similarities "parallelomania" – a phenomenon where scholars first notice a supposed similarity and then "proceeds to describe source and derivation as if implying a literary connection flowing in an inevitable or predetermined direction" thus exaggerating the importance of trifling resemblances.

Greco-Roman mysteries

Parallels have been drawn between Greek myths and the life of Jesus. An early example was Friedrich Hölderlin, who in his Brot und Wein (1800–1801) suggested similarities between the Greek god Dionysus and Jesus.

Modern scholars such as Martin Hengel, Barry Powell, and Peter Wick, among others, argue that Dionysian religion and Christianity have notable parallels. They point to the symbolism of wine and the importance it held in the mythology surrounding both Dionysus and Jesus Christ; although, Wick argues that the use of wine symbolism in the Gospel of John, including the story of the Marriage at Cana at which Jesus turns water into wine, was intended to show Jesus as superior to Dionysus.

Additionally, some scholars of comparative mythology argue that both Dionysus and Jesus represent the "dying-and-returning god" mythological archetype. Other parallels, such as the celebration by a ritual meal of bread and wine, have also been suggested and Powell, in particular, argues that precursors to the Christian notion of transubstantiation can be found in Dionysian religion, which incorporated theophagic rituals. Another parallel has been drawn to how in the Bacchae Dionysus appears before King Pentheus on charges of claiming divinity and is compared to the New Testament scene of Jesus being interrogated by Pontius Pilate.

E. Kessler has argued that the Dionysian cult developed into strict monotheism by the 4th century CE; and together with Mithraism and other sects the cult formed an instance of "pagan monotheism" in direct competition with Early Christianity during Late Antiquity.

Mithras

The worship of Mithras was widespread in much of the Roman Empire from the mid-2nd century CE. The Mithra cult in the Roman Empire was a syncretism of different religious motifs, centered on the god Mithras who emerges from a rock. Its closest similarities to Christianity are the story of the slaying of the bull by Mithras; a bull is captured and killed by Mithras when he plunges a knife into it and from the dead bull grain and plants are produced, that symbolize life. Mithras was a solar deity, closely associated with the Roman Sol Invictus.

Stanley Porter argues that Mithraism took hold within the Roman Empire after its expansion and only reached Asia Minor via Roman soldiers in the latter part of the first century, after the basic elements of the gospels were in place, and hence could not have influenced their essential elements.

Early Christian authors noted similarities between Mithraic practices and Christian rituals, but took an extremely negative view of Mithraism: they interpreted Mithraic rituals as evil copies of Christian ones. In the second century, Justin Martyr contrasted Mithraic initiation communion with the Eucharist:

Wherefore also the evil demons in mimicry have handed down that the same thing should be done in the Mysteries of Mithras. For that bread and a cup of water are in these mysteries set before the initiate with certain speeches you either know or can learn.

Tertullian then wrote that as a prelude to the Mithraic initiation ceremony, the initiate was given a ritual bath and at the end of the ceremony, received a mark on the forehead. He described these rites as a diabolical counterfeit of the baptism and chrismation of Christians.

Ancient Egypt

Early in the 20th century, Gerald Massey argued that there are similarities between the Egyptian god Horus and Jesus. Following those ideas, in the 1940s Alvin Boyd Kuhn suggested that not only Christianity, but Judaism was based on Egyptian concepts, and more recently Tom Harpur (a former Anglican priest who explained in his book The Pagan Christ that he believes in a spiritual Christ, but doubts that a historical Jesus existed) has expressed similar views. Harpur acknowledges Massey and Kuhn as his intellectual predecessors and theologian Stanley E. Porter states that most of Harpur's work is directly based on quoting Massey and Kuhn.

Porter has pointed out that Massey and Kuhn's analogies include a number of errors, e.g. Massey stated that December 25 as the date of birth of Jesus was selected based on the birth of Horus, but the New Testament does not include any reference to the date or season of the birth of Jesus. The earliest known source recognizing the 25th of December as the date of birth of Jesus is by Hippolytus of Rome, written around the beginning of the 3rd century, based on the assumption that the conception of Jesus took place at the Spring equinox. Hippolytus placed the equinox on March 25 and then added 9 months to get December 25, thus establishing the date for festivals. The Roman Chronography of 354 then included an early reference to the celebration of a Nativity feast in December, as of the fourth century.

Porter states that Massey's serious historical errors often render his works nonsensical, e.g. Massey states that the biblical references to Herod the Great were based on the myth of "Herrut" the evil hydra serpent, while the existence of Herod the Great can be well established without reliance on Christian sources.

Harpur has noted that Kuhn had expected his ideas to have a Darwin-like impact on religious studies, but that has not happened and Kuhn's concepts are generally ignored or rejected. Porter criticizes Kuhn's work based on various errors such as confusing the dates of the composition of the Mishnah and the Babylonian Talmud when drawing conclusions. Porter also criticizes Harpur's views (which are often based on Kuhn) for their lack of rigor and consistency.

Resurrection analogies

The Egyptians had specific harvesting rituals that related the rising and receding waters of the Nile river and the farming cycle to the death and resurrection of Osiris. The cutting down of barley and wheat was related to the death of Osiris, while the sprouting of shoots was thought to be based on the power of Osiris to resurrect the farmland.

Osiris-beds were common in ancient Egypt and were clay representations of a dead Osiris which when watered would sprout shoots in the spring, thus representing his power to control nature even after his death.

Christ myth theory proponent G. A. Wells still sees an analogy with the resurrection of Jesus in the Pauline epistles and Osiris, in that Osiris dies and is mourned on the first day and that his resurrection is celebrated on the third day with the joyful cry "Osiris has been found". However, since changing his position on the historicity of Jesus, Wells now states that the personage mentioned in the Q source is not all mythical and is "not to be identified with the dying and rising Christ of the early epistles". David J. MacLeod states that the Osiris legend is very different from the resurrection of Jesus in that "Osiris did not rise; he ruled in the abode of the dead."