Rating: 
Summary: Conspiracy junkies unite!
Review: This book is perhaps one of the biggest con attempts played on anti-religionists. The entire premise of the book is founded the authors attempt to stretch controversy so thin that just a little common sense reveals the underlying errors.The authors have very little concept of statistical probability, and the use of data. Additionally, the inconsistencies presented in the book are numerous and continue through the whole. I find the concept of Biblical inerrancy to challenge common belief, however this book utilizes over-generalization and extreme language in order to blast the reader onto their heels. I was expecting to find some evidence here, but instead discovered petty theories of the small-minded. A must read for anyone who is desperate, yes desperate, in their attempt to find moral liberation at the expense of truth. Forget all the evidence, forget logic and reason, step right up and take a look at the folly of an emotive tirade.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent in its discussion of the Mysteries, but . . . .
Review: I agree with Freke and Gundy that Christianity drew heavily from the Mysteries. I have, in fact, believed this for some time, and had learned some facts concerning the subject from Charles Guignebert's old (1943) The Christ. But the Freke-Gundy book was the first book that I had encountered that had presented me with a wealth of detail on the subject. Seemingly, Freke and Gundy conclude that because strong parallels exist between the "biography" of Jesus presented in the gospels and "facts" in the Mysteries, this proves that Jesus did not exist--was simply invented. An important point that these authors miss relative to this assertion, however, is that the early Jesus movement was a diverse one; for example, Burton L. Mack has identified (see his Who Wrote the New Testament?) seven distinctly different strands in that movement--only one of which was a "Christian" one. (Note that per Acts 11:26, the word "Christian" was first used in Antioch. Acts indicates that the earliest members of the Jesus movement called themselves people of The Way {of God, or the Lord}; see, e.g., Acts 9:2.) The modern Christian may find it disconcerting to learn that the early Jesus movement was diverse--and that "Christians" were not among the first members of the Jesus movement. But the fact of early diversity is important in two respects. First, it suggests to me--and contrary to what Freke and Gundy seemingly argue--that Jesus actually did exist. For I don't see how this variety could have developed had Jesus not existed. If the initial Jesus movement had consisted of one, and only one, strand (the "orthodox" contention!), the Freke-Gandy thesis would have some plausibility: for given the myriad of parallels between the Mysteries and Christianity, the likelihood that this was merely a coincidence is virtually nil--and it becomes believable that Jesus was invented (given that there is no contemporaneous evidence for Jesus's existence). Ironically, however, the very fact which the orthodox dispute--that the early Jesus movement was pluralistic--provides us with the best possible evidence that Jesus was a real person! For how else can one explain this early diversity? Why, then, the diversity? The simple--and correct, I believe--answer is that Jesus was a complex person: there were many facets to his personality, such that unless one were oneself a complex person, one would not have noticed this fact about Jesus. I am reminded here of the story of the blind men and the elephant, and thinking of the elephant in this case as representing a complex person, namely Jesus. (Also, I should add that the basic reason, in my opinion, that modern scholars have such differing views regarding Jesus is that--the paucity of good contemporary evidence aside--Jesus was a complex person, and most scholars are rather narrow in their perspective! Which is not to say that they aren't intelligent and erudite, though.) Freke and Gundy may think of Jesus as fictional, but (as I have said) it seems to me that the strongest evidence for the existence of Jesus is the fact that several rather different "denominations" were created in Jesus's name shortly after his departure. On p. 6 of their book Freke and Gundy recognize that there was early diversity in the Jesus movement, but their classification on the top of p. 7 is anything but helpful. (It is, in fact, worse than worthless, for it misleads the reader.) They distinguish between Literalists and Gnostics, and then seemingly assert (p. 10) that Gnostics were the original Christians. If by "original Christians" the authors mean people who were the earliest members of the Jesus movement, I disagree. The "True Disciples" group identified by Mack as an early part of the Jesus movement were gnostic (p. 61 in Mack); but Mack argues (p. 47) that the book of Q (written by the Q people) "will [,rather,] put us in touch with the first followers of Jesus." If Freke and Gundy are referring to "first Christians" in the Biblical (and Mack's sense)--i.e., members of the early (but not earliest) Jesus movement in Antioch--I still disagree. Rather, I believe that the first Christians (in the Acts sense) were diaspora Jews intent (if but unconsciously) on creating a Jewish Mystery that would be an amalgum of the Mysteries and Judaism. But that this "Christ cult" started going in several different directions rather early on: (1) some members led it toward gnosticism, with its emphasis on experience, personal transformation, myth, etc.; (2) some led it toward a version that was close to Judaism in emphasizing proper behavior, even continued observance of the Law; (3) some led it toward "orthodoxy," which emphasized proper belief (these beliefs derived largely from paganism, as Freke and Gundy elucidate so well). Plus, there may have been other strands of "Christianity" that developed as well; but it was the orthodox party that eventually won out, and suppressed all competitors.
Rating: 
Summary: Steer clear...WAY CLEAR of this one...
Review: It's hard to know where to even start with this book. Two things are immediately apparent: 1. The authors have a huge chip on their shoulder and 2. They lack the technical expertise and credentials to handle this topic (they are listed on the book jacket as "authorities" and "specialists"...but offer no justification for these titles). Even someone with a cursory understanding of ancient Christianity can spot the lopsided and loaded arguments that appear on virtually every page. One concrete example: the authors continually portray the ancient "pagan" philosopher Celsus as a brilliant "satirist" who makes Xty seem flawed. What they never tell you in the book's main text is that all of Celsus' arguments are laid out AND refuted by the ancient Church theologian, Origen. In fact, the only reason we know Celsus existed is that his arguments were preserved by Origen in "Against Celsus"...that's where the authors get all these quotes. But they never really explain this or examine Origen's counter-arguments. C'mon, is that intellectual honesty? This kind of slant is also reflected in the way that "scholars" are quoted and used...many of whom relied upon incomplete data when they were writing (like Bultmann, whose work has been discredited by modern archaelogical finds). One could go on, and on about misstatements about the Gospels and the Apostle Paul, etc. The imbalance and bias in this book just staggers the mind. I'm not a big fan of Gnosticism, but if you are really interested in it, read "The Gnostic Gospels" by Pagels instead. At least she has the credentials to back up what she writes; and she doesn't come to the off-the-wall conclusions that these guys draw. For a more scholarly investigation into the historicity of the New Testament, I'd suggest reading something by F.F. Bruce, Bruce Metzger, or N.T. Wright.
Rating: 
Summary: Powerful Book!
Review: It has been hard to completely absolve myself of my 'fire and brimstone' Baptist upbringing. When I've read the Bible I've meditated on such questions such as: was Jesus real? Are there missing books that were destroyed or lost? How much actually happened? Are there forgeries? What verses were changed, added or omitted? This book answered these questions. It also answered some I didn't even think to ask. I learned a lot about the Gnostics and their teachings. I found it fascinating. I also learned how Literalist Christians stole Christianity from the Gnostic Christians. The history of the Christian religion from its origins to the beginnings of the Literalist Church and how they attempted to destroy the Gnostic teachings was interesting to me. It helped me to let go of the last remaining vestige of my childhood religious background and now I can comfortably and confidently move forward in my spirituality. I highly recommend this book to anyone who has been damaged by their Fundamentalist, Pentecostal or Catholic background.
Rating:
Summary: Join the Mystery
Review: This work should generate many discussions of Christianity for years to come. I was a little skeptical when I began the book, but the authors deliver. They break down the Christ legend in such a way that even before the book was done I was nodding my head in agreement with what they had to say. They made a believer out of me. I look forward to reading what they have to say in "Jesus and the Lost Goddess."
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Compendium
Review: The authors present not-so-new facts about history and the lack of third party evidence to the exsistence of Jesus as an historical person. I found that the book was very well organized and easy to read. I felt the authors did a good job of comparison and analysis. The ideas are certainly NOT NEW, as other reviewers have noted. However, the authors do present their views in a logical and organized fashion. Highly recommend this book as a tretise into the darkness of Christianity and the conspiracy involved.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Summary of Existing Theories
Review: The book is a good summary of existing theories packaged like original research. It succeeds in drawing the relationship between pagan Elusian and Hermetic mystery schools and the gospels. It does so in a shallow manner--there are far better religious/mythical anthropology books that summarize the Hermetic mysteries (Isis/Osiris) or the Elusian(Dionysious/Ceres)and there are better that elucidate the relationship to Christ and Mary Magdelane for example. As presented here, it is in quick digest form. What is not disturbing about this book is the suggestion that the gospels contain many hidden references to pagan mystery cults and that many of the stories were derived from the Greecian or the Egyptian mystery schools. What is disturbing is suggesting that such research is in any way new. To suggest that the Mary cultists of the Catholic Church converted many of the older shrines that were dedicated to Isis or Diana etc. is nothing new. That the symbols of the wine and the bread of the eucharist were used in the Greecian msytery schools is nothing new. But many of the conclusions that are drawn are completely without merit. The book's biggest flaw--the authors simply dismiss the historical Christ as irrelevant. They reduce the complexity of the best Gnosticism to a mystical dimension only where all participants are a sort of Christ. Not only is this a simplistic gnosticism (and heresy) in the early church, it is not well developed. Reader's would be better to read the original gnostic texts if they wish to gain true insight into early Christian mysticism. I recommend "The Other Bible" as a starting point. The best gnosticism reconciles the historical message of God's revelation through history as Jesus Christ with the mystery school religions (the mystical marriage of god and goddess and the birth/death of the rising God) and early Jewish Cabala/mysticism. These are not contradictory movements but compliment each other quite nicely when read in the right light. One of the reasons most mystery schools had stages of initiation (as do secret societies) is to keep initiates learning at a pace they are comfortable with. For some, this type of "mystical" material is disturbing and can lead to many errant conclusions--thus the initiate is tested and the learning paced. When I read the author's conclusion I am reminded of initiates--those that are learning to quickly to do proper research. If properly credited, the author's would say "we came to the same conclusions as so and so in this Gnostic School and we will give credit where credit is due. That the author's don't see their 'heretical' conclusions as a ho hum sort that are nearly 2000 years old is why the sensationalist nature of this book tends to disappoint. What is new to the authors is not new to many readers of this type of literature. A fun read but not up to "Holy Blood Holy Grail" or even "The Templar Revelations" which do better at tracing the mystery schools from Egypt and Greece to the secret societies of Europe.
Rating:
Summary: Jesus Mysteries
Review: The authors took Sir James Frazer's "Golden Bough" to ridiculous extremes. They set a new record by revealing their bias not in the first page, but on the dedication page! This half-baked bit of scholarship somehow manages to combine Osiris and the Greek god of ecstasy Dionysius into one being, despite the inconvenient fact that they are two separatre and distinct deities from different cultures, and there is no reason to do it whatsoever. The work then plods through a buffet of Near Eastern religions and cults, grabbing on to anything which even remotely resembles gospel accounts and considers it as absolute evidence that all of Christianity is a fraud. Pagan philosophers are called 'sages' while early Christian wirters, saying much the same thing, are referred to as 'mouthpieces'. While the authors concentrate on surface details, the major differences between minor fertillity deities and Jesus are completely overlooked.
Rating:
Summary: Scholarly and Very Thought Provoking.......
Review: This book, with literally hundreds of references to original texts, will challenge what you feel you've known about Christianity for your entire life. Central to this book is the question of whether or not Jesus was a real, flesh and blood, historical individual or only a pagan god made real by those seeking power and political gain. For so many of us, this question has never truly entered our minds. Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, however, not only introduce us to this thought, but show us overwhelming evidence that Jesus may not have been a real human being. I'll admit to you, that when I finished this book, I was not completely convinced that Jesus had never existed. However, as an open-minded individual, this book did make me question Jesus' existence and has clearly made me want to learn more about early Christianity. I feel compelled, after reading this book, to read more like it and to satisfy, in my own mind, what the actual evidence shows to be the most likely scenario. Some of the ideas supported by evidence in this book are: that the enormous similarity between the Jesus story and those of Pagan gods who preceded him is not mere coincidence, how many of the teachings of Jesus are the same as those of pre-existing Mystery teachers (again, not mere coincidence), how sacred scripture is similar to ancient myths, how passages of the New Testament may have been altered for political gain, how there were many Gospels that never made it into the New Testament, and much more. This book is also an excellent introduction to "Mystery" religions. Freke and Gandy thoroughly explain what a Mystery religion is, introduce us to Gnosticism and other forms of Mysteries, and show us the complex interaction of Mystery and other religious beliefs covering hundreds of years before and after the period during which Jesus Christ was supposed to have lived. If urge anyone who is Christian or who wants to learn about Christianity to read this book and see the evidence that shows us so much about early Christianity and the establishment of the Roman Catholic Church from a very different angle than was presented in Sunday School. This book is a scholarly and objective attempt to synthesize the evidence gleaned from reading and analyzing hundreds of original texts. Each text has been analyzed relative to the time period in which it was written, whom it was written by and what motives there may have been to create forgeries. Each conclusion has been logically drawn based on a sound understanding of the evidence from each original source. The authors clearly establish their scientific approach to addressing the question of whether or not Jesus ever existed in the flesh. Let me add that I was raised in a strict Catholic household, but I do not find the ideas presented in this book to be offensive in the least. In a genuine search for truth, I am not afraid of what evidence may reveal about the history of the church I grew up with or the man I was taught to believe was the savior. If you are like me, and believe that the truth will ultimately make your faith stronger, this book is an absolute must for you.
Rating:
Summary: I've Found The Christ In Me!!!!!
Review: I found this book very intriguing. From the first page, to the last. I just couldn't stop reading it. The more I kept reading, the more I wanted to find the gnosis through its pages. This Book really helped me to see that "Christ in Me". It helped me to see this so-called Jesus story from another different point of view and also the numerous myths from many other cultures and their respectives dying-godmans. Definitively this book is a "Must-Have" for an open-minded person, it's truly enlightening.
| 
