Stringbean

He may, I have Suns of God and Christ Conspiracy both are great books.

Dave31

Mysticism and mythicism are two completely different things that should never be confused with each other.

The website you linked to with the video at bluehoney.org shows that Freke and Gandy certainly have gone off in a completely different direction from The Jesus Mysteries. One glance at that website shows that they are far more interested in the psychedelic influences. I see no reason whatsoever to believe that they'd be interested in a mythicist project.

Have you invited Carrier and Dawkins to review the 'Rebuttal to Dr. Chris Forbes' as well as write a review for the 'New Zeitgeist Part 1 Sourcebook (2010).' ?

Dave31

God in the Box film premiering at the Heartland Film Festival in Indianapolis, Indiana playing October 17 through 22.

In the trailer there's an interesting clip of Acharya S at 2:05 through 2:45

MCalavera

Great books?

icardfacepalm:

Dave31

What do we have here with MCalavera, another anti-Acharya troll who, like GakuseiDon, talked trash about her books for several years long BEFORE he ever read one?

What's interesting is that scholars are siding with her work independently more and more. One good example is the late dating for the gospels and lack of credible evidence for a HJ.

There are also a number of preachers, priests etc who quietly embrace the Christ myth

Acharya S has clearly had quite a positive impact over the last nearly 15 years that she's been online. So, you can thank her for that next chance you get.

mountainman

Faced with a choice of either the books within Codex Vaticanus, Sinaticus and Alexandrinus, or Acharya's books, which ones are more valuable? Dont you think that the New Testament as a series of "Great books" has had its run in the sun (or are its centuries of authority better refered to as "Dark and Sunless"?).

JRR Tolkien Took 12 years to write the "Lord of the Rings". Eusebius of Caesarea took the same length of time to write "The History of the Christian Church" and other works. Are these great books?

I know which books I would read to my children, and these books were never published by a minority political party that enacted laws such as "Religious privileges are reserved for Christians". For Christ's sake the Bible itself is an imperial Roman face-palm, and anyone who thinks it contains more history than Tolkien's "Hobbit" needs to cite the ancient historical evidence for their claims.

Does anyone feel like FACE-PALMING the C14 results for Christian Origins?

These wonderfully academic "Church Fathers" are obviously far more respectable and reliable that the C14.
Radiocarbon dating presently suggests a chronology somewhere between 220 and 340 CE.
Does this forum have a bookmaker?

GakuseiDon

I have a feeling that priests have had doubts even before then. :constern01:

Catholicism:

Father Ted!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UckdO...eature=related

Father Dougal!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HPL0BaOa-8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytoDs2i2rK0
Also the last minute, from 2 min 50 secs in: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyB2q...eature=related

Church of England:

I couldn't find the episode on Youtube, but quotes from the "Yes Prime Minister" episode "The Bishop's Gambit" can be found here:
http://www.jonathanlynn.com/tv/yes_m...ode_quotes.htm

"We cannot leave the appointment of Bishops to the Holy Ghost, because no one is confident that the Holy Ghost would understand what makes a good Church of England bishop."

"The bench of bishops should have a proper balance between those who believe in God and those who don't."

"An atheist clergyman could not continue to draw his stipend, so when they stop believing in God they call themselves 'modernists'."

MCalavera

The fuck are you talking about?

I've read one of her books by the way so don't use that same lameass line you've used on every person who strongly disagrees with her "findings" and "evidence".

Such as?

List their names please.

mountainman

Why dont you do some honest homework for a change. The chronology for the authorship of the canonical books of the new testament has been claimed to be no earlier than 180 CE in recent publications, some of which have been discussed in threads on this forum.

GakuseiDon

I doubt mythicists in general will be thanking her. I don't know which is worse: Acharya S actually believing what she writes below, or her not believing it. Her beliefs do come across as cult-like, down to emphasizing actual physical danger due to trying to promote the truth against a powerful enemy, and with mysteries that only the brave will examine and the clever will understand.

Some selected quotes from her article:

This continuing encouragement in hearing from dozens of educated clergymen over the past 15 years has kept me inspired to push forward with this fascinating subject, in the face of relentless hostility and unpleasant assaults by fanatical defenders of the faith...

Interesting that mythicists always seem to posit things this way. That non-religious people can also be equally critical is rarely acknowledged. Or if it is, it is a big mystery to the author. Actually not only are many of her critics not religious; many of the sources she cites as evidence, esp from the 19th Century, are priests.

I bring these issues to attention here because for many years now I have "suffered in silence," while assailed incessantly with all manner of calumny, libel and fallacious contentions, including that "no credible scholar or clergyman takes her seriously."

"No credible scholar or clergyman takes her seriously"? :huh: Who has been raising THAT objection?

Naturally, I would love any and all clergy who are reading this post to come forth! Leave a message here. As you can tell from my reticence in even exposing this issue, I am very friendly and discreet....

She bit Dr R Price's head off in his initial review of "The Christ Conspiracy". From my notes:

Sadly, there is no doubt that people court danger from religious fanatics when beliefs are questioned. But it sounds like hyperbole.

Indeed, while I've been swinging in the wind out here largely alone - with a few courageous professionals pitching in - I have yet to "out" anyone against his or her will. The same cannot be said about the treatment I have received, as my detractors have continually exposed my private information - endangering me and my family. But we as human beings apparently do not deserve courtesy, dignity and respect - that's the whole problem with human-hating religious fanaticism in the first place.

Them-vs-us. Solidarity through oppression by a common enemy.

In addition to the fear of the mob and the loss of income is another reason for the clerical concealment: One of these individuals revealed an ages-old "brotherhood" secret when he told me - in a foreign language that few non-natives speak - that we must not reveal the mysteries to the vulgar, because the masses are "idiots" and cannot comprehend.

"Mysteries", secret knowledge, being in-the-know. All very attractive for some.

Finally, some of her responses in the Comments section:

After a severe illness that lasted three years, I had nothing to lose by exposing this information, even though I knew it would bring down the wrath of the slitty-eyed mobs. I had already faced death too many times to count, and I was not afraid.

It is because of the vile, human hatred of these rabid cultists that I must do what I do. I always stuck up for the underdogs in school who were being picked on by bullies, and that's what I'm doing now.

And also:

One of these individuals further informed me that he is afraid of "death threats" if he breaks his silence on the mythical nature of the gospel tale. I haven't pressed the issue further with him, yet.

Sounds like a classic punishment for divulging the mysteries...

Certainly fringe-theorists are going to take their share of abuse by questioning the prevailing paradigm, and it's easy to make fun of her and Dave for their over-the-top responses. But there is something quite disturbing in those responses, where critics appear to be lumped together, regardless of what their critics personally believe.