GakuseiDon

Really? Who do you have in mind? Because it seems that most respondents on this thread commenting on her work have actually read one or more of her books, and so do have knowledge of her work. I've included comments from the first couple of pages in this thread:

Geetarmoore:

"I have read 3 of Acharya's works; Christ Conspiracy, Fingerprints of Christ, and the new 'Zeitgeist companion guide'."

butswana:

"I bought and read 'Christ Conspiracy' about 5 years ago. Her claims seemed a bit outlandish to me because it would require a conspiracy that would encompass the entire population of the ancient world."

Dr Robert Price review of one of her books (link given by jjramsey):

"FWIW, there is a cache of Price's critique of Acharya S here:
http://web.archive.org/web/200604191...ev_murdock.htm"

Mike Licona review of one of her books (link given by me):

"Mike Licona has written a review of Acharya S's "Christ Conspiracy" here:
http://www.risen-jesus.com/index.php...=22&Itemid=109"

Fenton Mulley:

"I think that refutation itself is something that needs to be checked out as well. Here are just two dubious statements that I recall from the last time I read it, but there are many more that raise ones brow."

Ronin:

"I shelled out the $15.00 way back in 2000 for The Christ Conspiracy (which came with a nice handwritten personalized message from her) and came away with the notion that quite a bit of sincere research was put into a work.

Of course, it was obviously structured from a highly outlined presupposition and there are a little over four pages of referenced sources...to include some rather dubious personalities from history.

While it really is a good primer on what to look for and where to start, I find it to be more helpful to the "mystics" and "new agers" than to atheists and skeptics concerned with empirical evidence.

Of course, the use of astrological references and the implausible "multinational cabal" set off all sorts of alarms and rightly so."

Roger Pearse

Ah, this is part of the scam. What you suppose is erudition is in fact often copied from a range of earlier non-scholarly works, themselves of a low standard.

If you spend enough time reading about some subjects you will pick up a jargon, and acquire familiarity with all sorts of things that normal people do not. Unfortunately it can easily be just a hateful sham.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

youngalexander

Grrr, 3/4 of the way thru my brilliant commentary on this thread - a power failure.

The Gist!
Have read TCC. On a par with F&G and that other Coen film 'Blood Holy'. Leaps of logic, amazing midrash and provocative innuendo. However, Astrotheology is where it is at, especially for a physicist. Thus I awaited SoG with great expectations.

Alas, I suspect that I put it down at about p28 as per Malachi's Mayan quote. I've just re-read the page - interesting, but then I have a priority list. It is down there somewhere ...

Now Freethinkaluva & skullnboner, if you are really interested in astrotheology, which undoubtedly informs many ancient religions, may I recommend Mysteries of the Unconquered Sun by Roger Beck. This guy actually knows his astrophysics and as an extra bonus can speak authoritavely upon archaeology, ancient religion, mythology and with linguistics - just like Acharya.

Incidently GDon, could be worth a read. The methodology employed 'cognitive science of religion' which does not seek to explain the 'doctrine' of Mithraism but to understand the apprehension of an initiate, might prove useful in circumventing the impasse that you and Earl have. Just a thort. In any event, I have found it most interesting re the apprehension of Christian initiates.

lpetrich

Then try to be careful to make your criticisms independent of your personal beliefs, try imagining what other people are likely think about Jesus Christ, especially believers in other religions. You might want to look at the less-flattering things that they have had to say about JC, however painful it might be to you to read such things.

Consider what I do: when I discuss Jesus Christ and Lord Raglan's Mythic-Hero Profile, I don't insist that it's a slam-dunk case for Jesus Christ having been a myth. In any case, JC fits LR's profile remarkably well, MUCH better than he fits Acharya S's "sun of God" profile.

In the sorts of places that Acharya S insists on finding Sun myths, no matter how implausible the connection is. Think of it this way: sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Samson was clearly Sunlike, Jesus Christ was not; from Gakusei Don's description, most of the JC-Sun connections seem a bit too impressionistic and stretched. Let's consider Samson's long hair vs. JC's crown of thorns.

Samson always had his long hair, which would be like the Sun's rays if it could stick out. As the Sun sets, it loses its rays and becomes less bright, leading to nighttime; this is much like Delilah cutting Samson's hair and making him weak.

JC's crown of thorns, however, he wears for only a little bit of his life, and as a sarcastic humiliation. "Look at what kind of 'king' he is!"

Congratulations, Malachi151, for sticking with that onerous task.

The Polynesians started more like 3000 years ago, and what they made use of did not require any fancy equipment or theoretical developments, just watching the night sky and noticing where the constellations rose and set. I recall from somewhere that they paid special attention to Orion, since it is a bright equatorial constellation; circumpolar constellations would have been little use for them.

(Matthew < Mattiu) All Acharya S has to do is consult Matthew (name) to find the true origin of that name.

English Matthew
French Mathieu
Latin Matthaeus
Greek Matthaios
Aramaic Mattay
Hebrew Matatyahu
"Gift of Yahweh"

I cannot speak for Malachi151, but I think that he came to that conclusion after noticing the zeal of her followers.

(ancient monuments with astronomical alignments...)

I fail to see how that demonstrates Acharya S's grandiose claims about astrotheology.

Are you sure that you had not antagonized the RRS admins by being nasty to them? There is a certain infamous serial bannee from IIDB who whines about being banned from several places, and who has whined that IIDB's and JREF's admins are closed-minded and do not want to learn The Truth. Yet he had been banned for spamming his "message" across IIDB, and he bans from his forums anyone with even small disagreements with him.

Richard Carrier is VERY knowledgable in ancient history, and he likely feels that reading her books would be like reading some ruler-and-compass construction of squaring the circle or trisecting an angle, both of which have been shown to be mathematically impossible. So if you want RC to read and evaluate those books, why don't you and your friends consider paying him to perform that onerous task? And you will have to ensure that he will get that payment even if he delivers a VERY negative review of her books.

Yellum Notnef

Slow it down there Tertullian. I have not read any of her books and you have just taken me out of context.

The dubious statements I'm referring to here are from Mike Licona's apologetic piece. His "review" may appear unbiased to you, but it's no surprise since you share Mike's magical beliefs.

Yellum Notnef

Would it not be fair to say that the love-able Jeffrey Gibson also has a cult following?

GakuseiDon

Oh, apologies! I thought you were referring to her and her "Christ Conspiracy" book.

manwithdream

I know that someone gave a link to an old book review by Robert Price about one of Acharya S's old books, but there is another one on her site that I don't know if anyone pointed out. http://www.truthbeknown.com/price-sog-review.html

GakuseiDon

You know, he actually makes many of the same criticisms about "Suns of God" that he did about "The Christ Conspiracy", except that he wraps some sugary complimentary language around the criticisms this time. It almost looks like Dr Price is taking the mickey out of her.

This is how he starts the review (my bold throughout):

"The very learned Acharya S has spoken again. In a sequel to her wide-ranging The Christ Conspiracy, she has redoubled her efforts to show the solar - that is, the astro-theological - basis of all religions and mythologies, and to demonstrate that the great savior figures of the world's religions are late historicizations of the sacred sun myths. At the outset, let me make clear that I regard Acharya ("the Teacher," as she was dubbed by friends and students) as a colleague and fellow-laborer in the field of Christ-Myth scholarship. The issues over which she and I differ are secondary, though important and fascinating. In my review (which I fear has done at least as much harm as it may have done good) of her previous book, I focused on our differences, disliking to be held responsible for certain specific views set forth by one with whom I am nonetheless in fundamental agreement."

After a bit, he then goes on to make many of the same criticisms as before, though with toned-down language:

Acharya also argues that the far-flung similarities between myths and faiths are the result of dissemination. There was borrowing, cross-pollination, at least where travel was imaginable. She accepts the theories of various nineteenth and early twentieth-century scholars to the effect that just about all ancient languages (at least including Hebrew, Welsh, and Sanskrit) were cognate cousins, and that faith communities as seemingly disparate as Buddhism, Druidism, and Essenism represented different branches of a single denomination whose priests were sometimes in communication with one another. It was a conclave of such secret brotherhoods that invented Christianity. Here, I confess, I am way over my head. I am no linguist, much less a comparative linguist. Some of the writers Acharya cites seem to have been grinding an ax, e.g., to demonstrate that all Western culture had roots in Ireland, including the Bible. She quotes Freemasonry apologists who have their own reasons for wanting to see Egyptian connections all over the place. But motive matters not. They might be right anyway. But I can't say... I suspect a lot of this amounts to lucky false cognates. But I can't say. I plead ignorance...

Next, he criticizes "Suns of God" for its reliance on old sources -- a criticism repeated by many who have read her work:

Again and again, Acharya finds herself hemmed in by old writers who never elevated their claims above the level of hearsay (as she herself points out). Kersey Graves (The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors) assures the reader that he has before him plenty of original documentation for his claims of crucifixion parallels, but he, er, doesn't have room to include any. And this is the rule, not the exception. Lundy, Higgins, Inman, Graves, Doane, etc., they all claim they have read or heard this or that, but none of them can site a single source document. Acharya seems generously inclined to believe them. I don't. I am not saying they were frauds or deceivers. Acharya suggests that these researchers may have read texts or examined ancient monuments that have since been destroyed by ecclesiastical censors. And she may be right. I certainly wouldn't put it past the Machiavellian ethics of the religious authorities. But did they get rid of all the evidence only after Doane, Graves, and the others had managed to see it? It is not that I distrust these old researchers. It's just that I cannot agree or disagree with their evaluation of evidence they do not share with me.

He goes on to say that "please keep in mind that I agree with Acharya on the basics", and finally ends by looking at Acharya's comments on how finding the "historical Jesus" is an all-but-impossible task, which he also agrees with. But then, this position is not new to him.

It's a curious review. No problems with Dr Price finding places of agreement or disagreement, but the tone throughout the review is unusual. I understand that Acharya has hinted at suing, or raised the question at least, when facing issues in the past -- I'm not saying that this is the case here, but does anyone know whether Acharya threatened to sue Dr Price on his "Christ Conspiracy" review?

manwithdream

GakuseiDon,

I think he was not threated with a lawsuit because of the first amendment. I think he just likes fringe ideas if they are interesting. His other book review are mostly about fringe books, and he liked some of them, even if he disagreed with the writers. I think he looks at her the same way.