The death and resurrection and the chronological stories about him (and the dozens just like him from many different religions before Christianity existed) are all a personification or personified stories about the Sun, the stars, the constellations, the seasons, and the eras of man/the Earth.
It is indeed the journey of human experience. How the Earth and the Sun provide life, food, growth, and then how the seasons change and they all die. Only to be resurrected again as the new seasons come around again each year.
I'd agree that this is one way of looking at it but that there may be others too - like it is a pattern in all of life on differing levels.
The following comes from a blog on/with David Bohm. Not to say it is 'right' but another way of looking at things.
"Someday, science and art will merge, Bohm predicted. “This division of art and science is temporary,” he observed. “It didn't exist in the past, and there’s no reason why it should go on in the future.” Just as art consists not simply of works of art but of an “attitude, the artistic spirit,” so does science consist not in the accumulation of knowledge but in the creation of fresh modes of perception. “The ability to perceive or think differently is more important than the knowledge gained,” Bohm explained.”"
For me, this might suggest that can be a way of looking at a question that is about choosing art OR science to find an answer (so they may be separate and in conflict) but there can be a way of looking at the same question, whilst choosing art AND science. May find different answers this way. The story of death and rebirth might then be an evolution of thought - science and art, together, apart, together, apart but moving into deeper union.
From the same blog is this - which I borrowed and placed in a different context.
“Bohm feared that belief in a final theory might become self-fulfilling. “If you have fish in a tank and you put a glass barrier in there, the fish keep away from it,” he noted. “And then if you take away the glass barrier they never cross the barrier and they think the whole world is that.” He chuckled drily. “So your thought that this is the end could be the barrier to looking further.”
So I question whether it is possible that the glass barrier could be a divide between science and art. If educated in a way of science, you could be left alone and never venture into art. If educated in art, one might never venture into science. Almost self-policing. But as this divide falls away (between the scientific and artistic parts of the mind?) we will see things differently, new creative answers could emerge. But this may evolve in stages - one model might 'die,' that another may be 'born.'
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/david-bohm-quantum-mechanics-and-enlightenment/