Rating: 
Summary: "If the Truth can be told so as to be understood..."
Review: "...it will be believed." That quote (from Terence McKenna) may be a bit out of context here, but its always been a personal mantra for me, and it definately applies to this book! I've been what some might call a "spiritual seeker" for many years, delving into both the exoteric and esoteric mysteries of all that I could get my hands on -- including the works and ideas of the ancient Gnostics. Until finding this book, I've never found such a thorough and comprehensive synopsis of what the schools of Gnosticism were ultimately implying underneath all the mythic and epic veneer. Jesus and the Lost Goddess has truly revitalized my own search, and has re-illuminated those moments in my life when I may indeed have touched the Depths. It has given a renewed meaning to my own writing, (for which, go to: http://home.earthlink.net/~voyant121/index.html) and has provided a simple framework with which to relate all the various intimations of the Divine in my own life. I simply do not have strong enough words with which to recommend the incredible work that Freke and Gandy have put into this! After reading the negative reviews below, I can only conclude that those reviewers didn't even read it. There may be many who disagree with the ultimate import of this book's message, but the points that the negative reviews bring up do not even seem accurate or relevant to the book's discussion. Freke and Gandy never state that the various Gnostic schools were all underpinned by one and the same framework. What their work has truly accomplished is to cull the relative simplicity of the Secret from the tangled and fragmented remains of the Gnostic vision. The message of this book may not be literally indentical with what was taught in the Gnostic mysteries some 2000 years ago, but is completely and entirely relevant for our own times.
Rating:
Summary: Truth-at its finest!!!!!!
Review: Anyone that has seriously studied these matters will recognize this book for what it is - an attempt to substitute sensational fiction for fact. It's disappointing when the desire for publication completely overrides any semblance of scholarship.It doesn't really matter who you are, but especially if you're new to the subject, do yourself a favor and don't waste your time on this one. Begin with something more authoritative and closer to the truth, like the New Testament in the Bible.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting ... as a work of fiction.
Review: Anyone that has seriously studied these matters will recognize this book for what it is - an attempt to substitute sensational fiction for fact. It's disappointing when the desire for publication completely overrides any semblance of scholarship. It doesn't really matter who you are, but especially if you're new to the subject, do yourself a favor and don't waste your time on this one. Begin with something more authoritative and closer to the truth, like the New Testament in the Bible.
Rating:
Summary: It gives knowledge a bad name.
Review: As a scholar of this period I' d like to recommend many books, that attempt to illustrate the roots of Christianity and gnosticism - books that do a lot better. Read e.g. "Rethinking gnosticism" by M.A. Williams, Elaine Pagels, or even Walter Bauer's classic "Orthodoxy and Heresey", these books are problematic for conservative Christians and biblicists, but are an honest attempt at finding Christian beginings - challenging or not to history and church. W. Bauer says that in many place there where no such thing as gnosticism, but that what we today call gnosticism was simply called Christendom. Arguments and nuances as these are just not taken into account by Freke/Gandy. F and G also try to persuade us that gnosticism was a unified group - nonsense. Gnosticism varied as much as early Christendom - read M.A. Williams. And it is difficult to judge some thinkers of this period as either Christian or Gnostic - eg Valentinus who almost became Pope. F and G don't take into account that the gospels in the NT are riddled with Gnostic thought. They don't take into account that people of the age (except, in their opinion, Gnostic) could see that there are contradictions in the Jesus stories. The gospel of Luke is a classical hero epos - used deliberately to explain and lead to belief, not to prove a historical Jesus - there was no need. It is amazing how many critics when reading the bible, do so as fundamentalists or biblicists - F and G included. The book is also riddled with factual faults, and contentions I've never heard before and find preposterous. How do F and G know that Irenaeus has forged Josephus? They can't know! Clement of Alexandria is not a Gnostic but refutes them with venom along with the "fundamentalist" Christians because he finds them foolish and laughable. Clement of Alexandria is not a saint in the catholic church, he was, but was excommunicated. Plotinus was not a pagan mystic, but a philosopher. Plotinus wrote attacking pieces on many Christians but so called Gnostics especially. Plotinus was a major source of inspiration for Augustin, probably the single most important thinker for the catholic church - (strange?). The book is riddled with faults and what I regard as deliberate twisting of the truth - it is absurd to call Plotinus a pagan mystic and not a philosopher - I challenge F & G to find serious "non-religious" (impartial) philosophers/historians who do so! I could go on. The two twist the truth continually. They mention The gospel of truth several times. One of the striking things about this gospel is it's similarities with "orthodox" Gospels - there is nothing provocative about it at all really. Valentian gnosticism is similar to mainstream Christendom - and he reads the bible with the same method as for example Irenaeus. A thinker such as Tatianus can be deemed Gnostic or Christian, and was disliked in both camps. Most philosophers detested anything resembling religion - can they then be described as pagan mystics. And so on and so on....... Their conclusion. Jesus wasn't an actual historical figure. If we are to be as strict in our source criticism when studying Roman history, then Julius Caesar never existed - nor did virtually anyone else in ancient history. That Jews during this time were in close contact with pagan/Gnostic ritual cults is highly unlikely. There are books written about Hitler and the NAZIs being Gnostic - it is just as unlikely as F & G's proposal. As a historians their method of research stinks - the problem isn't with interpretation but with what they do to history. Honest historians couldn't have written this book! The biggest problem with this book is: Christendom needs to reassess itself and it's earliest sources. This book is not helpful in doing this, because it damages the important issues by describing them incorrectly and in my view it often deliberately twists the truth. There are so many other books that study Christian origins, that are serious and therefore more damaging to dogmatic fundamentalists who also misuse history. This book dose not really have to be answered, because from a scholars point of view - it is not serious research. If you want to read books that refute Christendom, do so - just don't read this one. It gives knowledge a bad name.
Rating:
Summary: Here is Wisdom....
Review: As much as I valued the authors' first book on the subject, I must say that I value this effort even more. This work goes beyond presenting the history of gnosticism, to setting forth the actual gnostic teachings in absolute crystal clarity. When you think about it, giving such clarity and accessibility to gnostic thought is a phenomenal achievement in and of its self. Unlike more academic studies, or outright translations, where you sense that the author or translator doesn't comprehend gnosis at all, here you have a definate feeling that you are getting teachings from true initiates. The analogy of the circle of the self with the One Consciousness of God at the center, radiating all of our individual psyches into the many seemingly separate bodies and egos of the physical world at the circumference is extremely well expounded. Yes, you find the same teaching in Plotinus, but only after wading through hundreds of pages of deliberately obscure prose.
Oh yes, the connection of the gnostic teachings to the gospels is the best I've seen. The meaning of formerly difficult passages veritably leaps out at you.
The authors mention in passing that when a student starts on the gnostic Way, meaningful coincidences often occur. This book was released on the date of my own birthday. I could not think of a finer or more appropriate gift. Thank you.
Rating:
Summary: Not Heresy
Review: Heresy to me. As a matter of fact the first Christians did not teach that Jesus was YHWH the Creator, nor that Mary was a 'godess'.
Rating:
Summary: Facinating
Review: I found this book facinating. Well written and well researched, this book opened my eyes to gnosticism and offered a new view on christianity that I am not likely to forget.
Rating: 
Summary: A great deal about gnostics, little about the goddess
Review: I'm not sure I believe much of what Freke and Gandy attempt to prove in their deconsruction of Christian Church. While there is not doubt that the early Christians were nothing like the Roman Catholic church of today, it's hard to convince this reader that the entire cult was based on a gnostic myth. At the heart of this book, the writers try to display (as in their earlier writings) that Jesus never existed. The gnostics just imagined his story, and egged on by Paul, who never met the historic Jesus, they spread their story world-wide. And then the literatists turned myth into history. It's hard to grapple with. While their description of the gnostics is wonderful and their slight brush with the goddess Sophia (who became the Virgin Mary as an object for veneration in the traditional church), the essential theme remains suspect.
Writers with better reasoning powers and closer readings of Jewish midrash and Gospel research (Spong and Pagels) have shown that the first Christians were both gnostic *and* that Jesus was a real person. They also point out theat another branch of original Christians, led by Jesus' brother James, practiced a highly Jewish form of Christianity, keeping the laws and demanding circumcision. If Jesus were just a myth, why would this cul even have come into existence? When it comes right down to it, Freke's and Gandy's view is skewed, but makes some interesting reading. It just isn't convincing.
Rating: 
Summary: Mediocre Gnosticism
Review: It seemed to start out with hope in explaining both the Christian and Pagan sides to Gnosticism in depth, but quickly fell away from deeper ideas to skim over both sides and lump them into psychological studies. Even the psychological studies lacked in depth research. Instead of digging deep within the ideas of the Goddess and her relationship with Christ and his other archetypes the authors copped out by diverting the subject matter as a psychological study of the human condition. This would have been fine had there been some warning of the direction of the study on the book jacket.
As a student of Gnosticism I already understood my own human condition and could have skipped over this book. At best, this is a book for a beginner or one who needs to find enlightenment through Gnosticism, not for one who is looking for more esoteric knowledge.
The rambling of the authors makes you feel like they are trying to be your spiritual guides. I feel like their approach was unethical and unprofessional. Plus, their editor needs to take a formal grammer class.
If you need a feel-good happy book that trys to guide your thoughts from "free will" to "our ideas are the right ideas" this book is for you. If you have a mind of your own and can think for yourself, steer clear.
Rating:
Summary: A life-changing book, "All-Is-One" Christian-style
Review: Put simply, the mystical Jesus is bigger, better, and more appicable than is the historical Jesus. Free from the fetters of history, culture, religiosity, and a pre-packaged believe-it-or-not faith, the mystical Jesus is found within, has always been within, and never for a moment has he been absent from a single person on planet Earth. The authors explode the historical Jesus and reveal the fullness of divinity that has reached right down into everything that exists. With this message, Christianity falls in line with all other major spiritual traditions affirming that All Is One. There is no separation. The idea of separateness is an illusion. We are all one with the Cosmos, and the Cosmos is in us. The True, Essential Self in us is the impartial Witness, witnessing all the horrors and joys of this existence, which is really God "acting out" himself/herself through us. There is nothing to fear, nothing to do, nothing not to do. We are left with this simple assurance: Everything is OK.
| 
