tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15264500.post8515864815309711436..comments2023-07-11T05:13:06.461-06:00Comments on Morehead's Musings: Easter and the Resurrection Mythic ArchetypeJohn W. Moreheadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01262542253787543738noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15264500.post-36542373456020053952010-04-06T13:19:18.233-06:002010-04-06T13:19:18.233-06:00"For me, the resurrection archetype is a mean..."For me, the resurrection archetype is a meaning structure in the human psyche based on universal human experience. It is not something innate as Jung averred"<br /><br />Jung did not precisely say the archetype was innate. In fact his theory of archetypes, along with the collective unconscious (from which the archetypes come) was placed by him firmly in a Darwinian framework. We share archetypes because we share a common evolutionary ancestry, and there is a commonality to our mind, just as there is to our sight, or hearing.TonyTheProfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10486414706261508994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15264500.post-88248471610804221422010-04-03T20:11:13.309-06:002010-04-03T20:11:13.309-06:00Peregrin, thanks for your comments.
First, I must...Peregrin, thanks for your comments.<br /><br />First, I must clarify in that I should have made it clearer in my post that this is a written summary of McKenzie's thesis by the author himself rather than my characterization. That being said I move on to interact with your comments.<br /><br />I wouldn't argue that the success and the growth of any religion is necessarily as an indicator of its truth. And as I read McKenzie in this summary I don't know that he is arguing that. Instead, he seems to be saying that the "myth made fact" to borrow from C. S. Lewis realized itself in acts of goodwill as exemplified by those who live the message of Jesus. But I am in agreement with you that forced conversion is not acceptable.<br /><br />It will be no surprise that I disagree with characterizations of the Jesus story as borrowing from Pagan myths of dying and rising gods, whether this is argued by atheists or Pagans. Following a mythopoeic argument I would say that what the myths yearn for was fulfilled historically through the life, death and Resurrection of Jesus. And of course I accept this in part because of my views on the reliability of the New Testament, supported I believe by good conservative scholarship on the topic.<br /><br />I would like to see Christians move beyond the dichotomy of myth (as something historically untrue) and history so that a position like McKenzie's might be considered. When this is done then the mythic insights of people like Tolkien and Lewis help us connect the dots between the Resurrection and the myths and archetypes of human yearning.<br /><br />Thanks again for sharing your criticisms and thoughts.John W. Moreheadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01262542253787543738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15264500.post-81751834745157113072010-04-03T19:21:14.216-06:002010-04-03T19:21:14.216-06:00Hi John,
Thanks for this wonderful post. While I ...Hi John,<br /><br />Thanks for this wonderful post. While I follow and agree with most of the arguments here, a couple of things do jar. <br /><br />You write: “One would be hard put to identify a hospital dedicated to the memory of Attis.” To link the success of the Christian message to the success of the spread of the religion is a mistake. As you well know Christianity often became successful and displaced pagan religions by being adopted as the official Roman religion. There are also many recorded histories of conversion being forced on people and there were (and are) many acts to spread the ‘Good News’ I am sure you would not condone. <br /><br />Buddhism has flourished longer that Christianity and thus has more “staying power”. By this measure it would have more validity that Christianity. Comparisons like this are too easy and prove nothing. <br /><br />The historicity of Christ as the Son of God and the Resurrection is of course only relevant to those who accept Him and the Gospels as authentic. There are many arguments that show how the Pagan resurrection myths were placed over and within the story of Jesus after His death. That is, what we now look back on and you rightly describe as unique, rather than “nothing but” another Resurrection myth, is itself a redaction. We have to therefore be careful in presenting Christianity as different to pagan religions by such means.<br /><br />Besides, as Augustine was supposed to have said: "That which is now called the Christian religion existed among the ancients, and never did not exist from the planting of the human race until Christ came in the flesh, at which time the true religion which already existed began to be called Christianity."<br /><br />For me the crux of the matter is twofold. Firstly, redaction or truth not withstanding, the Death and Resurrection of Jesus was and is seen as an historical event not a mythic history. This was and is a daring statement. Secondly, the Christian message was the first to place the divine and mythic motif of Resurrection within a human context of a man, just like us who suffered. It further allowed all, not just a priestly caste, who wished to participate directly with this myth the chance to do so through remembrance, ritual and relationship. <br /><br />Thanks again for this post. :)Peregrinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09508191641503321789noreply@blogger.com