The parallels between Jesus Christ and Harry Potter are actually closer than most people may realize. The book also looks at where Jesus in the Bible came from, an actual person, or a collection of stories?

When the first Harry Potter book was released, does anyone remember the uproar from the religious community? The lawsuits and book burnings came about because the book supposedly promoted witchcraft. By the time the last book was released, the attitude was very different because of the Christ-like images and things that happened to Harry. Many people considered Harry as a Christ-like figure (which J.K. Rowling freely acknowledges).

The assertion that Jesus, as a historical figure, never existed is hardly new; the claim has been made all through out history. A central question to ask is: Which Jesus are we seeking? Are we looking for someone who was born of a virgin, died, rose again and ascended to Heaven? Are we looking for a rebel leader during a time of occupation?

From time to time, an archaeological discovery is made which references a person or place mentioned in the Bible. That would seem to increase the possibility that the Bible is true, since there is now independent evidence that the person or place referenced really existed. Right? Using that line of reasoning, books like The DaVinci Code or the Harry Potter books are just as real as the Bible, because they also mention places that really exist. Another assertion is that Jesus invented ethics and morality; before Him, there was nothing. Really? The various civilizations that existed before Christianity, ranging from Sumeria to Egypt to China, might have something to say about that.

The life of Jesus has supposedly been thoroughly discussed and analyzed in the writings of other historians, including Pliny, Tacitus, and especially Flavius Josephus. The problem is that the total analysis of Jesus amounts to just a couple of paragraphs per author. There has been much controversy over the centuries as to whether or not those paragraphs are real or fakes. The similarities between the life of Jesus and those of people like Dionysus, Asclepius, Mithras and Pythagoras (who was known for a lot more than just his mathematical Theorem) are more than just coincidence.

Large parts of the Bible were taken, or otherwise re-interpreted, from ancient pagan myths and stories. The Great Flood, for instance, came from the Epic of Gilgamesh. The idea of a flood that covered the whole world will mean a lot more to a people who live between two great rivers, like the Tigris and Euphrates, than to residents of an arid place like Palestine.

Why did all the ancient religions, including Christianity, seem to use the same images and shapes? Observations of the constellations in the sky led people to construct myths about them, which truned into stories and eventually became religion.

This is a very fascinating and eye-opening book. It is full of footnotes, so this is more than just some anti-Catholic rant. Those who treat the Bible as a group of stories and parables about the right way to live should not have their faith damaged by this book. It is very much worth the reader's time. ( )

Was Harry Potter molded in the form of Jesus Christ? This book touches on the similarities between Jesus and Harry, but only as a surface introduction and running theme floating above a much deeper topic. The meat of the book is in its serious research into Jesus as a nonhistoric figure, a developed myth. Like our favorite little wizard.

This idea of a nonhistorical Jesus greatly disturbs most Christians. Murphy takes a stab at explaining our unease: “If Jesus was not historical, he would have been no different from other myths and fables … he would be meaningless, and it is impossible for him to be meaningless, because he is meaningful to me. Therefore he is historical.” He’s right, the idea of Christ as a myth is more than a bit disconcerting; it hits at the very heart of many of us.

Yet Murphy’s intent is not to demote Jesus to the role of an ordinary fictional being, or even an ordinary god. Jesus was never meant to be the same as other contemporary figures of mythology; to his storytellers, he was the epitome of such. “Jesus would be something entirely new simply by virtue of his being an assimilation of the best features of each. Jesus is the culmination and combination of all other religious traditions of his time.”

Murphy sifts through various mystery religions and myths of a dying and resurrecting god, and their possible influence upon the Gospel story. For once, it’s done tastefully and without sensationalism. Maybe you’ve read works by Freke, Dougherty, and Harpur. While I don’t want to take anything away from those researchers—their books are interesting in their own right—I found Murphy’s tempered treatment much more to my taste. Without trying to foist a Gnostic version of Christianity on me, and without succumbing to overzealous scholarship, Murphy gently yet forcefully introduces the strong similarities between Christianity and other first-century religious philosophies and mystery cults, concluding in the strong likelihood that Jesus was a mythical savior.

I cannot help but add my two cents. Part of Murphy’s argument seems to be that it’s unreasonable to expect first-century writers to knowingly attribute mythical qualities and stories to a historical person. Ergo, Jesus must have been understood mythically. I must confess that my area of research biases me in favor of a historical Jesus. I’m a hard sell, because for years I immersed myself in the topic of divine attributions awarded to real, historical persons in the Imperial Cult (the cult of the Caesars) and I recognize much of the New Testament as a response on the same playing field; Christians lifting up their guy in the same manner. I find nothing strange about honoring a man such as Jesus in supernatural story and find it a quite plausible explanation for the plethora of Jesus’ similarities to pagan gods and heroes.

Additionally, in order for Murphy to prove Jesus was never a real person, so much hinges on Paul, our earliest Christian writer, and Paul is an enigma. Murphy points out many interesting similarities between the teachings of Paul and the mystery religions, where the central rite, it appears, was a symbolic death of the initiate, followed by rebirth into a new life. Sounds a lot like Paul, doesn’t it? Murphy argues that Paul recognized Jesus’ crucifixion metaphorically, and expected his converts to experience the same death. Unquestionably, Gnostic strands of Christianity did worship Jesus in the form of a mystery religion, and such groups did embrace the writings of Paul. But would such an understanding of Jesus drive Paul to such great suffering and imprisonment? Would it leave him absolutely convinced that the world was ending—quite literally and quite rapidly—and that believers in Christ would be swept up to heaven? Remember, Paul was so convinced the end of the world drew near that he even encouraged abstinence, telling his readers that the time grew so short that they needn’t bother marrying.

So, even though it’s hard for me to fully embrace Murphy’s conclusion, I loved the book, and found it to be a fascinating and scholarly contribution to a very hot debate. It should be welcomed as such. ( )

Derek Murphy's Jesus Potter Harry Christ opened my eyes.

Murphy begins his adventure by noting that the first Harry Potter novels drew scorn from some Christians for seeming to endorse witchcraft and magic. And since those books appeared to be written for children, they were especially malign. Murphy further notes, though, that the later Harry Potter novels silenced some of the criticism when it was alleged that J. K. Rowling was writing an allegory of the Jesus Christ story in the manner of The Chronicles of Narnia of C. S. Lewis.

Murphy then asks the huge question that his book answers, in this reader's opinion: Is the Harry Potter story more fictional that the Jesus Christ story?

Although I was raised as a Christian, I began doubting in my early teens that the virginal birth, miracles, raising of the dead, fulfilling of the prophecies of the Old Testament, and resurrection were true. I assumed that 2,000 years ago the Romans had indeed crucified or otherwise executed a Jewish rebel whom the ordinary, non-ruling people of the time loved.

I also assumed that the supernatural aspects of the story were later add-ons, meant to persuade credulous believers that Jesus Christ was more than just an appealing renegade, by introducing the claim that he was also divine. For example, the loaves-and-fishes story could've depended upon nothing more than the miracle of Adam Smith's capitalism. Jesus Christ drew crowds—who drew entrepreneurs who could profitably cater to a hungry market when they saw one.

Jesus Potter Harry Christ, however, convinced me that there probably was no historical Jesus Christ. He was undoubtedly a cleverly wrought amalgam of pagan gods, especially the sun gods. His birth to a human mother and a god father at the winter solstice, as well as his death and return at the spring equinox, are clearly religious stories revised and retold in the centuries before the establishment of Christianity.

The early Christians, though, needed to insist that there had been a historical, in-the-flesh Jesus who lived, died, and rose to heaven. Otherwise, he was nothing more than yet another pagan myth or allegory.

Murphy explains something else. Why did the Christians succeed while their competing cults, notably the Gnostics, failed? Because the Christian message was simplicity itself. In order to gain immortality, one had only to state one's belief in a historical Christ who died and rose to heaven.

The intolerance, based upon the idea that there was no other worthy idea, began then. The wars and genocides would come later. Would a mythical, allegorical Jesus Christ have served the world and his followers better? Murphy implies yes—asserting that a non-historical Jesus could still be "profoundly meaningful."

Regardless of one's opinion on this matter, Jesus Potter Harry Christ is a thoroughly enjoyable read. ( )