Return to Answer

As others have pointed out, in Paul’s desert experience, he heard a voice in Hebrew: ”it is hard for you to kick against the pricks.” The phrase is a direct quotation from a play by Euripides (d. 406 BCE), the Bacchae, with Jesus speaking instead of the Greek god Bacchus. That the conversation took place in Hebrew demonstrates that it was less about Greek legends and more about Jesus.

According to the Biblical scholar Fredrick Danker, being in the textile business, Paul most likely was involved in being a maker of stage properties. Since Bacchus was a major focus of stage activities it stands to reason that Paul was very familiar with most aspects of the Bacchus religion.

In the initial encounter by Paul, the Jewish Hebrew speaking Jesus shows up, out Bacchusing Bacchus so to speak. He appeared as a Zeus-like non-ethereal being of light that quoted Bacchus lines from a pagan play and (for some reason) was heard but not understood by others.

For those who believe it actually happened, as I do, it is suggested that God deliberately mimicked the events described in "The Bacchae" as a type of praeparatio evangelica. For example C.S. Lewis describes his conversion and his subsequent belief that Christianity fulfills the longing and expectations of what was expressed in mythology:

The old myth of the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens—at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences...

… By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle…God is more than a god, not less: Christ is more than Balder, not less. We must not be ashamed of the mythical radiance resting on our theology. We must not be nervous about “parallels” and “Pagan Christs”: they ought to be there—it would be a stumbling block if they weren’t.

In the view of C.S. Lewis and many other Christian apologists, Acts provides a reliable and historically accurate report of Paul’s conversion. Lewis was an expert in ancient Greek and Latin literature. As some have noted, he bathed in Greek and Latin works like a dolphin bathes in the sea. He was well aware that there were parallels with Greek and Roman mythological narratives in the New Testament accounts. However, as an expert in literary genre, Lewis saw the New Testament as not being fictional in composition.

Lewis once criticized Bible scholars who regarded the Gospel of John as a poetic, spiritual “romance” rather than as historical narrative. He argued, “I have been reading poems, romances, vision-literature, legends, myths all my life,” he wrote. “I know what they are like.” Lewis adds that if somebody “tells me that something in a Gospel is legend or romance.” He wrote, “I want to know how many legends and romances he has read, how well his palate is trained in detecting them by the flavor; not how many years he has spent on that Gospel.”

The argument, of C.S. Lewis and other Christian apologists, is that Luke wrote the way he did precisely because he was aware of what Euripides wrote and wanted to offer something compelling to the followers of Bacchus. So Luke crafted his historical narrative with that in mind, for the purpose of conveying spiritual and rhetorical points.

In other words, Jesus fulfilled these archetypal symbols of mythology at certain places & times in history so that faith in the goodness of God could be nourished through the testimony of miracles taking place.

For more of how Bacchus worship might have influenced the contextualization of Christianity by the New Testament writers see "The First Dionysian Gospel: Imitational and Redactional Layers in Luke and John" by Mark G. Bilby. See also Bruce Louden’s "Greek Myth and the Bible."

As others have pointed out, in Paul’s desert experience, he heard a voice in Hebrew: ”it is hard for you to kick against the pricks.” The phrase is a direct quotation from a play by Euripides (d. 406 BC), the Bacchae, with Jesus speaking instead of the Greek god Bacchus. That the conversation took place in Hebrew demonstrates that it was less about Greek legends and more about Jesus.

According to the Biblical scholar Fredrick Danker, being in the textile business, Paul most likely was involved in being a maker of stage properties. Since Bacchus was a major focus of stage activities it stands to reason that Paul was very familiar with most aspects of the Bacchus religion.

In the initial encounter by Paul, the Jewish Hebrew speaking Jesus shows up, out Bacchusing Bacchus so to speak. He appears as a Zeus-like non-ethereal being of light that quotes Bacchus lines from a pagan play. For some reason, he was heard but not understood by others.

For those who believe it actually happened, as I do, God deliberately mimicked the events described in "The Bacchae" as a type of praeparatio evangelica. For example, C.S. Lewis describes his conversion and his subsequent belief that Christianity fulfills the longing and expectations of what was expressed in mythology. He writes:

The old myth of the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens—at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences...

… By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle…God is more than a god, not less: Christ is more than Balder, not less. We must not be ashamed of the mythical radiance resting on our theology. We must not be nervous about “parallels” and “Pagan Christs”: they ought to be there—it would be a stumbling block if they weren’t.

In the view of C.S. Lewis and many other Christian apologists, Acts provides a reliable and historically accurate report of Paul’s conversion. Lewis was an expert in ancient Greek and Latin literature. As some have noted, he bathed in Greek and Latin works like a dolphin bathes in the sea. He was well aware that there were parallels with Greek and Roman mythological narratives in the New Testament accounts. However, as an expert in literary genre, Lewis saw the New Testament as not being fictional in composition.

Lewis once criticized Bible scholars who regarded the Gospel of John as a poetic, spiritual “romance” rather than as historical narrative. He argued, “I have been reading poems, romances, vision-literature, legends, myths all my life,” he wrote. “I know what they are like.” Lewis adds that if somebody “tells me that something in a Gospel is legend or romance.” He wrote, “I want to know how many legends and romances he has read, how well his palate is trained in detecting them by the flavor; not how many years he has spent on that Gospel.”

The argument, of C.S. Lewis and other Christian apologists, is that Luke wrote the way he did precisely because he was aware of what Euripides wrote and wanted to offer something compelling to the followers of Bacchus. So Luke crafted his historical narrative with that in mind, for the purpose of conveying spiritual and rhetorical points.

In other words, Jesus fulfilled these archetypal symbols of mythology at certain places & times in history so that faith in the goodness of God could be nourished through the testimony of miracles taking place.

For more of how Bacchus worship might have influenced the contextualization of Christianity by the New Testament writers see "The First Dionysian Gospel: Imitational and Redactional Layers in Luke and John" by Mark G. Bilby. See also Bruce Louden’s "Greek Myth and the Bible."

As others have pointed out, in Paul’s desert experience, he heard a voice in Hebrew: ”it is hard for you to kick against the pricks.” The phrase is a direct quotation from a play by Euripides (d. 406 BCE), the Bacchae, with Jesus speaking instead of the Greek god Bacchus. That the conversation took place in Hebrew demonstrates that it was less about Greek legends and more about Jesus.

According to the Biblical scholar Fredrick Danker, being in the textile business, Paul most likely was involved in being a maker of stage properties. Since Bacchus was a major focus of stage activities it stands to reason that Paul was very familiar with most aspects of the Bacchus religion.

In the initial encounter by Paul, the Jewish Hebrew speaking Jesus shows up, out Bacchusing Bacchus so to speak. He appeared as a Zeus-like non-ethereal being of light that quoted Bacchus lines from a pagan play and (for some reason) was heard but not understood by others.

For those who believe it actually happened, as I do, it is suggested that God deliberately mimicked the events described in "The Bacchae" as a type of praeparatio evangelica. For example C.S. Lewis describes his conversion and his subsequent belief that Christianity fulfills the longing and expectations of what was expressed in mythology:

The old myth of the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens—at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences...

… By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle…God is more than a god, not less: Christ is more than Balder, not less. We must not be ashamed of the mythical radiance resting on our theology. We must not be nervous about “parallels” and “Pagan Christs”: they ought to be there—it would be a stumbling block if they weren’t.

In the view of C.S. Lewis and many other Christian apologists, Acts provides a reliable and historically accurate report of Paul’s conversion. Lewis was an expert in ancient Greek and Latin literature. As some have noted, he bathed in Greek and Latin works like a dolphin bathes in the sea. He was well award that there were parallels with Greek and Roman mythological narratives in the New Testament accounts. However, as an expert in literary genre, Lewis saw the New Testament as not being fictional in composition.

Lewis once criticized Bible scholars who regarded the Gospel of John as a poetic, spiritual “romance” rather than as historical narrative. He argued, “I have been reading poems, romances, vision-literature, legends, myths all my life,” he wrote. “I know what they are like.” Lewis adds that if somebody “tells me that something in a Gospel is legend or romance.” He wrote, “I want to know how many legends and romances he has read, how well his palate is trained in detecting them by the flavor; not how many years he has spent on that Gospel.”

The argument, of C.S. Lewis and other Christian apologists, is that Luke wrote the way he did precisely because he was aware of what Euripides wrote and wanted to offer something compelling to the followers of Bacchus. So Luke crafted his historical narrative with that in mind, for the purpose of conveying spiritual and rhetorical points.

In other words, Jesus fulfilled these archetypal symbols of mythology at certain places & times in history so that faith in the goodness of God could be nourished through the testimony of miracles taking place.

For more of how Bacchus worship might have influenced the contextualization of Christianity by the New Testament writers see "The First Dionysian Gospel: Imitational and Redactional Layers in Luke and John" by Mark G. Bilby. See also Bruce Louden’s "Greek Myth and the Bible."

As others have pointed out, in Paul’s desert experience, he heard a voice in Hebrew: ”it is hard for you to kick against the pricks.” The phrase is a direct quotation from a play by Euripides (d. 406 BCE), the Bacchae, with Jesus speaking instead of the Greek god Bacchus. That the conversation took place in Hebrew demonstrates that it was less about Greek legends and more about Jesus.

According to the Biblical scholar Fredrick Danker, being in the textile business, Paul most likely was involved in being a maker of stage properties. Since Bacchus was a major focus of stage activities it stands to reason that Paul was very familiar with most aspects of the Bacchus religion.

In the initial encounter by Paul, the Jewish Hebrew speaking Jesus shows up, out Bacchusing Bacchus so to speak. He appeared as a Zeus-like non-ethereal being of light that quoted Bacchus lines from a pagan play and (for some reason) was heard but not understood by others.

For those who believe it actually happened, as I do, it is suggested that God deliberately mimicked the events described in "The Bacchae" as a type of praeparatio evangelica. For example C.S. Lewis describes his conversion and his subsequent belief that Christianity fulfills the longing and expectations of what was expressed in mythology:

The old myth of the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens—at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences...

… By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle…God is more than a god, not less: Christ is more than Balder, not less. We must not be ashamed of the mythical radiance resting on our theology. We must not be nervous about “parallels” and “Pagan Christs”: they ought to be there—it would be a stumbling block if they weren’t.

In the view of C.S. Lewis and many other Christian apologists, Acts provides a reliable and historically accurate report of Paul’s conversion. Lewis was an expert in ancient Greek and Latin literature. As some have noted, he bathed in Greek and Latin works like a dolphin bathes in the sea. He was well aware that there were parallels with Greek and Roman mythological narratives in the New Testament accounts. However, as an expert in literary genre, Lewis saw the New Testament as not being fictional in composition.

Lewis once criticized Bible scholars who regarded the Gospel of John as a poetic, spiritual “romance” rather than as historical narrative. He argued, “I have been reading poems, romances, vision-literature, legends, myths all my life,” he wrote. “I know what they are like.” Lewis adds that if somebody “tells me that something in a Gospel is legend or romance.” He wrote, “I want to know how many legends and romances he has read, how well his palate is trained in detecting them by the flavor; not how many years he has spent on that Gospel.”

The argument, of C.S. Lewis and other Christian apologists, is that Luke wrote the way he did precisely because he was aware of what Euripides wrote and wanted to offer something compelling to the followers of Bacchus. So Luke crafted his historical narrative with that in mind, for the purpose of conveying spiritual and rhetorical points.

In other words, Jesus fulfilled these archetypal symbols of mythology at certain places & times in history so that faith in the goodness of God could be nourished through the testimony of miracles taking place.

For more of how Bacchus worship might have influenced the contextualization of Christianity by the New Testament writers see "The First Dionysian Gospel: Imitational and Redactional Layers in Luke and John" by Mark G. Bilby. See also Bruce Louden’s "Greek Myth and the Bible."

As others have pointed out, in Paul’s desert experience, he heard a voice in Hebrew: ”it is hard for you to kick against the pricks.” The phrase is a direct quotation from a play by Euripides (d. 406 BCE), the Bacchae, with Jesus speaking instead of the Greek god Bacchus. That the conversation took place in Hebrew demonstrates that it was less about Greek legends and more about Jesus.

According to the Biblical scholar Fredrick Danker, being in the textile business Paul most likely was involved in being a maker of stage properties. Since Bacchus was a major focus of stage activities it stands to reason that Paul was very familiar with most of the aspects of the Bacchus religion.

So, in the initial encounter by Paul, the Jewish Hebrew speaking Jesus shows up, out Bacchusing Bacchus so to speak. He appeared as a Zeus-like non-ethereal being of light that quoted Bacchus lines from a pagan play and (for some reason) was heard but not understood by others.

For those who believe it actually happened, as I do, it is suggested that God deliberately mimicked the events described in "The Bacchae" as a type of praeparatio evangelica. For example C.S. Lewis describes his conversion and his subsequent belief that Christianity fulfills the longing and expectations of what was expressed in mythology:

The old myth of the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens—at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences...

… By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle…God is more than a god, not less: Christ is more than Balder, not less. We must not be ashamed of the mythical radiance resting on our theology. We must not be nervous about “parallels” and “Pagan Christs”: they ought to be there—it would be a stumbling block if they weren’t.

In the view of C.S. Lewis and many other Christian apologists, Acts provides a reliable and historically accurate report of Paul’s conversion. C.S. Lewis was an expert in ancient Greek and Latin literature. It is fair to say that he bathed in Greek and Latin works like a dolphin bathes in the sea. He noticed that there were parallels with Greek and Roman mythological narratives. However, as an expert in literary genre, Lewis saw the New Testament as not being fictional in composition.

Lewis once criticized Bible scholars who regarded the Gospel of John as a poetic, spiritual “romance” rather than as historical narrative. He argued, “I have been reading poems, romances, vision-literature, legends, myths all my life,” he wrote. “I know what they are like.” Lewis adds that if somebody “tells me that something in a Gospel is legend or romance.” He wrote, “I want to know how many legends and romances he has read, how well his palate is trained in detecting them by the flavor; not how many years he has spent on that Gospel.”

The argument, of C.S. Lewis and other Christian apologists, is that Luke wrote the way he did precisely because he was aware of what Euripides wrote and wanted to offer something compelling to the followers of Bacchus. So Luke crafted his historical narrative with that in mind, for the purpose of conveying spiritual and rhetorical points.

In other words, Jesus fulfilled these archetypal symbols of mythology at certain places & times in history so that faith in the goodness of God could be nourished through the testimony of miracles taking place.

For more of how Bacchus worship might have influenced the contextualization of Christianity by the New Testament writers see "The First Dionysian Gospel: Imitational and Redactional Layers in Luke and John" by Mark G. Bilby. See also Bruce Louden’s "Greek Myth and the Bible."

As others have pointed out, in Paul’s desert experience, he heard a voice in Hebrew: ”it is hard for you to kick against the pricks.” The phrase is a direct quotation from a play by Euripides (d. 406 BCE), the Bacchae, with Jesus speaking instead of the Greek god Bacchus. That the conversation took place in Hebrew demonstrates that it was less about Greek legends and more about Jesus.

According to the Biblical scholar Fredrick Danker, being in the textile business, Paul most likely was involved in being a maker of stage properties. Since Bacchus was a major focus of stage activities it stands to reason that Paul was very familiar with most aspects of the Bacchus religion.

In the initial encounter by Paul, the Jewish Hebrew speaking Jesus shows up, out Bacchusing Bacchus so to speak. He appeared as a Zeus-like non-ethereal being of light that quoted Bacchus lines from a pagan play and (for some reason) was heard but not understood by others.

For those who believe it actually happened, as I do, it is suggested that God deliberately mimicked the events described in "The Bacchae" as a type of praeparatio evangelica. For example C.S. Lewis describes his conversion and his subsequent belief that Christianity fulfills the longing and expectations of what was expressed in mythology:

The old myth of the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens—at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences...

… By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle…God is more than a god, not less: Christ is more than Balder, not less. We must not be ashamed of the mythical radiance resting on our theology. We must not be nervous about “parallels” and “Pagan Christs”: they ought to be there—it would be a stumbling block if they weren’t.

In the view of C.S. Lewis and many other Christian apologists, Acts provides a reliable and historically accurate report of Paul’s conversion. Lewis was an expert in ancient Greek and Latin literature. As some have noted, he bathed in Greek and Latin works like a dolphin bathes in the sea. He was well award that there were parallels with Greek and Roman mythological narratives in the New Testament accounts. However, as an expert in literary genre, Lewis saw the New Testament as not being fictional in composition.

Lewis once criticized Bible scholars who regarded the Gospel of John as a poetic, spiritual “romance” rather than as historical narrative. He argued, “I have been reading poems, romances, vision-literature, legends, myths all my life,” he wrote. “I know what they are like.” Lewis adds that if somebody “tells me that something in a Gospel is legend or romance.” He wrote, “I want to know how many legends and romances he has read, how well his palate is trained in detecting them by the flavor; not how many years he has spent on that Gospel.”

The argument, of C.S. Lewis and other Christian apologists, is that Luke wrote the way he did precisely because he was aware of what Euripides wrote and wanted to offer something compelling to the followers of Bacchus. So Luke crafted his historical narrative with that in mind, for the purpose of conveying spiritual and rhetorical points.

In other words, Jesus fulfilled these archetypal symbols of mythology at certain places & times in history so that faith in the goodness of God could be nourished through the testimony of miracles taking place.

For more of how Bacchus worship might have influenced the contextualization of Christianity by the New Testament writers see "The First Dionysian Gospel: Imitational and Redactional Layers in Luke and John" by Mark G. Bilby. See also Bruce Louden’s "Greek Myth and the Bible."