As someone that hasn’t read the Bible, I don’t think you’ve read the Bible either

Remember that the bible is a collection of works from different places and times.

You get some literary works in the bible that are intentional fiction written to prove a real point, like the book of Job. This book was written specifically as a foil against hero’s journey narrative, to point out that sometimes bad things happen to good people, and it’s not something they can overcome under their own strength — and that this entirely misses the point of life in the first place.

There’s not really any reason to compare biblical narrative (or any other parts) to hero’s journey narrative, because the bible is already one of the most studied canons in the world; a lot of literary analysis techniques were developed with biblical works as their main referant.

This is probably an unpopular opinion, but here it goes…

Because the Hero’s Journey is junk science. Joseph Campbell who created the “Hero’s Journey” was an arch-reactionary who had intended to present an alternative to the literature of his day which he disdained. He longed for a return to the “wisdom of the past” and his book “The Hero with a thousand faces” was positioned as presenting this wisdom, arranged around Freudian and Jungian theories, particularly the debunked “collective unconscious”; as well as the ideas of reactionary philosopher Spengler and ethnologist Frobenius (particular Frobenius’ idea of “paideuma”).

What the book actually is, is a mashup of quotes from various myths and legends, deprived of their cultural context and strung together along the lines of Campbell’s preconceived beliefs. These myths and legends are never considered in their entirety, nor did Campbell dwell on the culture that produced them. From a standpoint of anthropology, it is a profoundly unscientific book and upon publication it was largely dismissed as such by Campbell’s peers.

In the “American Anthropologist” Stephen Porter Dunn wrote:

Campbell’s book is in a sense a throwback to an earlier heroic age of anthropology, when the air was dark with flying hypotheses and comparisons rained down like acorns in autumn. Reading it, the case-hardened social scientist derives the same sort of nostalgic, half-shamed pleasure as the ordinary adult would from reading G.A. Henty or Robin Hood to his children. Campbell uses the traditional equipment and methods of a literary critic, for whom comparison and analogy are tantamount to proof and fact. He writes in a curiously archaic style - full of rhetorical questions, exclamations of wonder and delight, and expostulations directed at the reader […]

Accordingly, The Hero’s Journey always mattered more to literary applications than as a genuine human artefact. Still the importance of the The Hero’s Journey as a storytelling concept only came after the success of “Star Wars”, when Hollywood discovered it as a template for blockbuster movies. Though Hollywood largely discarded most of Campbell (for good reason) in favor of the simplified version as presented by Christopher Vogler (for example: The 12 steps of the Hero’s Journey are Vogler’s version, Campbell used 17) who did not care much about the Hero’s Journey allegedly universal applicableness, than in its usefulness as a tool set.

Lots of people are still heavily invested in painting the Hero’s Journey as a universally shared principle of storytelling. To those people I recommend Robert Ellwood’s “The Politics of Myth”, which traces the development of Campbell’s thinking and the development of the Hero’s Journey.

Did you read the Wikipedia link you send ?

Eventually, hero myth pattern studies were popularized by Joseph Campbell, who was influenced by Carl Jung’s analytical psychology. Campbell used the monomyth to analyze and compare religions. In his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces(1949), he describes the narrative pattern as follows:

A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man.[2]

Campbell’s theories regarding the concept of a “monomyth” have been the subject of criticism from scholars, particularly folklorists, who have dismissed the concept as a non-scholarly approach suffering from source-selection bias, among other criticisms.

How would it do that? And where do you see that myth in the Bible?

Yeah! How come!?

Jesus was just Elric in another cycle

Removed by mod

Who are you trying to apply the Hero’s Journey too? Jesus? Because it doesn’t really fit at all.