Myths and Religion: What’s Left when Christianity is Demythologized?
I think the fact that this question has to be asked is part of the problem. So much of Christianity as I’ve experienced it is based on the supernatural elements of it. It seems to be that it’s more important that Jesus died and was resurrected as a way of expiating our own sins than that he tried to teach humans to love one another and treat one another with respect. The focus for most Christians seems to reside in the promise of salvation, forgiveness of their sins, and everlasting life after death. Sometimes this focus is to the detriment of the actual teachings of the historical, non-mythologized Jesus. I believe that Christianity has much to offer beyond its mythology. I believe the world would probably be a better place to live in if most Christians looked at Jesus as teacher to model their lives on rather than as a pathway to eternal life.
In “New Testament and Mythology”, Rudolf Bultmann systematically attacks each of the mythological presuppositions surrounding the life and purpose of Jesus, from his virgin birth to his resurrection as a means of salvation. In doing so, Bultmann calls for a modern scientific understanding of these supernatural suppositions. Part of the problem of demythologizing Christianity lies in the resistance to even attempting to do it. Many Christians violently resist any effort to say that every word in the New Testament isn’t literally true. Karl Jaspers replies to Bultmann’s attempt at demythologizing by stating that myths “cannot be interpreted rationally; they are interpreted only by new myths, by being transformed. Myths interpret each other” (16). This point of view is representive of the problem inherent in trying to reach the point of Christianity through the confused haze of its supernatural mythology. Jaspers clearly is avoiding the issue. In fact, myths can be interpreted rationally and are not subject to being merely transformed. It only takes the effort of will forged by rational thought. There is nothing to prevent a ratonal interpretation of the myth of the sun god Apollo, why should there be a problem intrepreting the myths of Jesus Christ? The problem with Jaspers and others seems to be a relentless desire to not confront the challenge.
Christianity without mythology for some reason seems to be unworthy for many Christians. In his reply to Bultmann in Kerygma and Myth A Theological Debate, Julius Schniewind writes that Bultmann has “left us without a message for our Christmas, Good Friday and Easter sermons” (45). To this I would ask what do the events surrounding Jesus’s birth have to do with being able to teach the doctrine of loving one’s neighbor? Why does the lack of a Easter story prohibit teaching about Jesus’s many useful parables? Many Christians are “holiday Christians.” By that I mean they only go to church for Christmas and Easter services and tend to think about Jesus only on the occasions celebrating his miraculous birth and death. In “New Testament and Mythology” Bultmann rightly observes that Jesus’s birth “matters little, indeed we can appreciate his significance only when we cease to worry about such questions” (35). It is entirely possible to appreciate the works of Jesus without his having been born of a virgin. And yet an entire mythic cult has spread up around this belief in the virginity of Jesus’s mother, despite the fact that only two of the four gospels mention it and it seems not to have been terribly important to the first Christians. Mythic claims not only about the virginity of Jesus’s mother, but the circumstances surrounding her own birth are dogma for the Catholic Church. Even the mythology specifically mentioned in the gospels wasn’t enough to ensure belief in Jesus, there had to be additional mythology built up around his mother based on absolutely no historical fact.
The myth here totally outweighs the facts in terms of importance for believers. This can be most clearly demonstrated by this statement from The Maternal Face of God by Leonardo Boff: “Mary is historically immaculate, she is the Virgin Mother of God in fact, she was really taken into heaven body and soul” (243). This is very interesting. Mary is historically immaculate despite there being nothing in the Bible to tell us so. She really was taken into heaven body and soul despite there being nothing in the Bible to tell us so. She is the Virgin Mother of God in fact despite the fact that errors in the translation clearly point to the possibility of her not being a virgin at all and the very literal words of the Bible certainly indicate she was not perpetually a virgin. Christians not only don’t want to consider a religion without its myths, but have consistently built upon the myths through the centuries. This seems strange to me, as if they don’t trust the underlying values of their own religion.
Bultmann asks the very logical question, “How can the guilt of one man be expiated by the death of another who is sinless-if indeed one may speak of a sinless man at all?” (7). What is there to offer if this mythological assumption is stripped away from Christianity? To strip it away doesn’t necessarily mean to definitively say that it isn’t so. Whether it is or isn’t is beside the point. What is left in Christianity if we assume that it can’t be true, that our sins can’t be absolved by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ? Most Christians I’ve met don’t even want to consider this possibility. The salvation offered by Christ is the underpinning of their belief system. This is fine if all you are interested in is getting into heaven. But should that really be the driving force behind your choice for morality to live by? The only thing we can really know for sure, as a fact, is that we are going to die. What happens after is a mystery and a thing for faith. Putting your faith behind the mythological assumptions of Christianity is fine and inarguable. But why not put that aside as a hope and a possibility and live Christ-like while you are here? Christ-like to me means living non-violently, non-judgmentally, thoughtfully and morally. All things we should aspire to and which most of us undeniably lack. If Christ’s death can expiate our sins, all the better, but choosing to live a life in which that isn’t your main concern doesn’t seem to me to be a life that should raise eyebrows. Why does the thought of living life as a Christian in a demythologized form of Christianity put fear into so many people? It doesn’t make any sense to me. It is the violent reaction to Bultmann’s mere attempts at demythologization that I have difficulty understanding. What he proposed wasn’t that radical and shouldn’t be seen as an attempt to tear apart the Christian religion. Yet even today his views are attacked without even the attempt to understand them and, in fact, with solid resistance to even allowing them to be discussed.
Christianity will have much to offer even if one day all its mythologies have been debunked. But I fear most people wouldn’t even want to believe in it anymore. The unprovable myths have come to mean more than the concrete lessons. If only we could relegate that statement simply to Christianity.
