Rating: Summary: A good starting point and summary of the issue Review: I read through this book with much excitement because I find the topic so fascinating. The authors do a good job of summarizing and making their point; their "thesis" is definitely consistent throughout the work. Like some have said, this is NOT a definitive work on the #1 anti-Christian question today (I don't know if such a work exists). A few examples of significant flaws will suffice. Critics of the Jesus-myth thesis argue that it was fluid paganism that adopted from Christianity, and not vice versa. This argument is actually supported in the illustration section of the book! It shows a crucified Osiris-Dionysius dated to the 3RD CENTURY(!) as well as a crucified donkey ("animal nature") dated at the same time. How is that "proof" of Christian borrowing? The second example is from p. 116. Here you have two authors and an editor who completely miss this mistake: "...if all the numbers of the Greek alphabet are added together they come to 888." Obviously, that's not true. Omega itself is valued at 800 and Psi at 700, so the correct number would be in the thousands. What they meant was that the Greek alphabet has 8 letters representing ones, 8 tens, and 8 hundreds. Very basic, yet all those people missed it. On the same page, "The Greek name Iesous is an artificial and forced transliteration of the Hebrew name Joshua." Yet, Iesous is what the Jews used to translate Joshua into the Septuagint, so who's doing the forcing and why? I'm sure I and others could go on and on. However, I don't think it would be possible to refute all of the claims made in this book; at least I've never seen a good "apologetic" explanation of the big questions: (1) why is there no proof that Jesus even lived? (2) why are there so many similarities between paganism and Christianity which we must admit (given that Justin Martyr et al. admitted and defended them with his "satanic foreknowledge" argument)?, (3) and why, if Christianity is "true," does the undeniable history of the first four centuries of its existence contain so much confusion, violence, fraud, and cult-like mentality? As I read elsewhere, "don't make any big life decisions based on this book." However, you'd be a fool to simply dismiss it. If Christianity does not come up with a better explanation of these charges, it will lose credibility except for the mindless masses who will continue to hold on despite all evidence to the contrary (probably claiming that the devil is using scholarship such as this to deceive; and that's a hard argument to counter because you can't prove it either way).
Rating: Summary: Fabulous and flawed first draft Review: Be the first person to write a review for this? What happened to the other reviews that were already here for this book, including mine? This fascinating, complex, flawed book has had several reviews posted, including one by me which claimed it was a good first draft. One should really buy it for the footnotes, for the writers work from a thesis that they push forward quite tactlessly. Their referencing and logic is faulty, and their rhetoric is often shameless or at least lacking in historical understanding. I have no argument with their thesis, just the way they arrive at it. For instance, they will argue that many of Paul's letters are forgeries, as if the concept of "forgery" is similar to the one we have. From their research, the writers know perfectly well that authors wrote in someone's name. They correctly identify which are the scholars' bets as to which of the letters are genuinely Pauline (although these letters have had several hands on them). Nevertheless, when the writers of other letters say something that satisfies their case, the writers call him "Paul." If he doesn't, they claim that the letter was forged. They also scatter footnotes throughout the page, but will then come up with a conclusion that leaps over a wide gulf. This sloppy annotation is annoying and needless; the authors have cited a tremendous number of valuable resources, and they don't have to disguise their work in a writing style that sounds like a shrill web site. Although I am sure they want to direct you to their site, and their workshops, and their lectures, etc. The polemic of "conspiracy" in almost Oliver Northish tones also disguises one of the weaknesses of gnostic thought according to orthodoxy, and one that Elaine Pagels speaks to well in her "Gnostic Gospels." There are arguments for what would be called the "orthodox" point of view, and I think that a pro-gnostic could answer them, but these writers do not. Another weakness here is that the authors seem to not know Christianity from a viewpoint where they could find more arguments for their case or more subtle points - not that they want subtle points, I guess. In the end, I would encourage the reader to plow through the polemic, study the footnotes, argue with the writers when you read, read as many of the resources as you can, and do read "Jesus and the Lost Goddess", especially if you want to find out more about the "how" of ancient gnosticism. One of the reviews that had been posted was an unfortunate one (who would not read the book and we are all sinners, etc). As we look at the world around us today, we can see the kind of world we need to struggle with when many people profess to have the last word on who God is and what God thinks. Diversity should not terrify us so much, seeking should not terrify us so much, and yet it does. This is not a perfect book, but it collects a lot of valuable resources together and adds to the conversation.
Rating: Summary: A fascinating first draft - and sloppy Review: Oh, how I wish this book had been written more carefully. The thesis is wonderful, but the authors get so lost in their polemics and their own excitement that they forget to add a reference or footnote where one should go and then sink to the exclamatory remarks referred to in the Publishers' Weekly review. (By the way, read the book's footnotes; these alleviate some of the above criticism.) So the tone is often of a smug web site. I gather that the authors haven't been to church in a while (for obvious reason, perhaps, although often the best place to practice paganism..or review theories...). If they had, or possessed better knowledge of church history and liturgy, or had some familiarity with the catholic (or episcopal) mass history, they would have recognized more arguments that would have struck chords with a wider audience than just "the choir". Things like the mass of the catechumens and the mass of the faithful being focused on people with different levels of understanding. Or they might have been more articulate about the Easter Vigil service, rather than refer to it with a footnote (obviously they didn't know what they meant; that itself is worthy of a chapter). The authors also seem more intent on knocking the historicity of Jesus than building up the spiritual integrity of the "competition". Once a reader understands the premise, what does the reader do? There is such a hunger for mature spirituality, which the church does not require for membership, that I feel that the writers missed an opportunity. I assume that what they wanted to write is what made them feel comfortable. Some readers might be sent into an abyss. Their understanding of how the gnostics are currently criticized by the church is accurate - and I've attended seminary. It is very simplistic and embarrassing to hear the arguments. However, there is one very compelling argument FOR the orthodox Christian viewpoint, and that is the understanding of matter charged with divinity, a paradox of the eucharist that the common can become the uncommon and that matter is holy. Gnosticism is so misunderstood; the educated Christian needs to hear more of the "other side". But as to the sloppiness, one can read along and grow interested in the well cited text, but then the writers draw a conclusion drawing on another unmentioned factor and not footnote it. Incredibly frustrating. Also, they will criticize one group and then praise another group for the same thing, so that it is easy to feel uncomfortable that their arguments are not well thought out. Their book begins with a thesis that they write toward. That is not helpful. The result is that people who agree based on their reading will agree and love the book and consider it valuable, and people who think they are out of their minds to write it can point to the sloppiness and rhetoric. One might also note that many of the references are old; there are reasons for this, but it means that the books in the bibliography are not so easy to get. Those that I do own I could check - and the footnotes were accurate. But guess what -- they left a lot out! What the intelligent Christian world needs is a book that takes them through all this evidence in a way that they can understand and respect. This isn't it, but by gum, I sure enjoyed it. I might point out that when you look up related subjects on the Web, many of the sites refer to this book, which shows how popular and well used it is these days. Not a bad thing. Just, if only...
Rating: Summary: Fascinating...yet, lacking detail Review: This book offends me as a writer. As a technical writer, I have to know where these guys discovered the cool idea for their very useful index! Very fascinating material, but not very convincing due to a lack of details. I found myself intrigued, but wondering more than feeling informed.
Rating: Summary: MUST-Read Book on this world-altering religion Review: One of my "specialty" interests is the origin and history of the Jewish and Christian religions. I have a big library on these subjects, and I'm always looking for books which stress the real facts behind the stories. I just finished reading The Jesus Mysteries, truly one of the most life-altering books ever. It is about the origins and early history of Christianity. It's chockfull of info you don't normally hear about (but it's all out there, esp if you're familiar with early Greek and Roman writers' works, and aren't we all??) It places Christianity in the context of the other Mystery religions that were so widespread and popular throughout the Greco-Roman world at the time, explains Gnosticism (which few folks really know boo about, sad...), and details the early history of conversions in Rome, how the Bible came together, and collects Pagan reactions from the time. Simply outstanding and I can't stress enough how much LIGHT it sheds on this religion which changed the world.
Rating: Summary: Best book that I have yet read on this subject! Review: Out of only 3 books, Jesus Puzzle, Christ Conspiracy, and this one, Jesus Mysteries is the best written and most comprehensive.
Rating: Summary: Christianity will never be the same! Review: This is not the first book I've read regarding the origins of Christianity. It is, however, the first to provide such an extensive number of references (62 pages of footnotes) and an unbiased account of what others have to say regarding the Greatest Story Ever Told. It is interesting to note that Philo (10BCE - 40CE), a well-respected Jewish historian, never mentions Jesus. Or that authors in the early days of Christianity call it a rip-off of existing Pagan beliefs. If you're looking for the definitive book on Christianity's origins, you've come to the right place. I believe no Christian could read this book and maintain their current beliefs. The authors do not seek to bash Christianity, but simply to expose its roots - and Christians and non-Christians alike should be flocking to these pages, if for no other reason than to learn about such a fascinating myth that is Jesus. I have read many books which claim to refute Christianity, but this one serves to show where the idea originally came from, much to the chagrin of modern-day Christians. They will not care to hear of their truly Pagan roots, but society will be better for having this myth exposed, with exaustive research, for what it truly is: a rip-off of an older Pagan idea. This is the only book you'll ever need to understand why Christianity came to be, and why "Jesus" is the most popular mythical god of our day.
Rating: Summary: Not great. Review: It reads more like a novellette based on circumstancial evidence rather than facts and proof, and though the subject matter is interesting, anyone with half a brain and a decent command of mythology can see the cultural similarities between Christ and figures like Mithras, Dionysus, Etc. They don't go far beyond the obvious and lack strength to thier argument. In other words, there are better books on the subject.
Rating: Summary: The Jesus Mysteries raises some very interesting questions b Review: The Jesus Mysteries tries to prove the historical figure of Jesus Christ to be false and tries to link his origins to a number of pagan godmen figures notably 'Osiris-Dionysus'. This book raises a number of interesting questions but fails to answer any of them adequately, for example it fails to answer the question why Jews would want to make up a human godman in the first place as the Jews were far too stubborn to believe in a human God. The authors completely neglect all evidence to the contrary, and just present their side of the debate without putting over opposing views. They rely heavily on quotations from secondary sources, and they neglect to take another look at their primary sources. The book reflects a poor knowledge of the bible, and of Jewish history. The authors are fanatical with their desire to promote a Gnostic agenda. They see all Gnostics as always good. Literalist Christians who believe in the historical figure of Jesus, who came to earth for the good of mankind 'the word made flesh', are seen as the uncompromising villains. The idea that the original Christian community was Gnostic is ridiculous. the first Christian community was that of the Jewish Christians which with James, Jesus's Brother, as leader which is evident from the chapter of James in the New Testament. The book is full of similar offhand treatments of the sources, and should not be taken as a serious attempt to discuss the evidence. They 'conveniently' fit all the pagan resurrecting god stories into one unified account, when there are actually huge differences, and choose to ignore the huge gulf that separates the pagan and Christian stories; and they begin to rely heavily on assumption and generalisation for example one of the main themes of this book is that the religion that has became know as Christianity was a result of the pagan beliefs is similar godman characters that were myths, however the first Christians were Jews, not Gnostic Christians as they make out, and they saw in Christ a continuation of the history of God's chosen people, not a break with their Jewish past. The mission of the early Christians was to persuade fellow Jews to acknowledge Christ as the fulfilment of the Old Testament, a 'new covenant' between God and Israel. If you would have asked Jesus or any of his disciples what religion they were preaching they would have said pure Judaism, the first disciples of Jesus were God-fearing Jews; strict Monotheists and frequently they recited the Shema: 'Hear Oh Israel the Lord Our God is ONE Lord' (Deuteronomy 6:4) as did Jesus. It is clear form Jesus's teachings that he was the promised messiah of the Old Testament and that he had not come to set up a new religion but to fulfil the prophecies that the prophets preached ' Do not think I have come to remove the Law and the Prophets. I have not come to remove them but to fulfil them. I tell you this: as long as heaven and earth last, not the smallest letter or stroke of the Law will change until all is fulfilled' (Matthew 5:17) Jesus here does not refer to the commandments. Rather he affirms that the religion founded on the Old Testament's Scripture was a temporary, yet necessary, step in the history of salvation. The prophecies had to be fulfilled; the rites and sacrifices of that religion expressed in a veiled manner the mystery of sin and mercy that would be fulfilled in the person and works of Jesus. With him comes the Perfect and Definitive fellowship of God with humankind. Something that this book completely ignores. One major floor in this book which highlights why it is a very week example of scholarly work is that it concludes by telling us that the historical Jesus was a myth, which no serious scholar would agree with. The auhthors try to make out that there is very little evidence to suggest that there was ever a historical figure called Jesus Christ who walked the earth and who preached the Kingdom of God and forgiveness of sins. But they fail to draw on number of sources that do prove his existence. One of, which is the Jewish Talmud, which is a variety of Jewish rabbinical writings, compiled about AD200, which acknowledges Jesus as a Jew. And also I cannot believe they did not even mention the Qur'an. At least some attention should also be allowed to those attributed to Jesus as preserved in the Holy Qur'an. Not only does it contain a great deal of references to Old Testament figures such as Joseph, Abraham, and the prophet Moses, Jesus is refereed to around twenty times. From the very time of Muhammad Jesus was recognised as an honoured prophet of Islam, on par with Abraham, although quite emphatically no more than this. However the authors fail to use this as a source and others such as Tacitus, (a Roman historian), Pilny the Younger, (Roman Governor of Bithynia AD110-113) and the major works of the Jewish historian Josephus, to prove the existence of Jesus which again just adds to the fact that it is not a serious scholarly work. One good thing that came out of this book is that it does show how some pagan rituals and beliefs influenced the shaping of Christianity, and this can only be expected of a religion which spread from the heart of Palestine to the four corners of the earth. There are bound to be some outside influences practised by individual cultures that were likely to influence Christianity, evident from Celtic Christianity, however this would not undermine its original Jewish teachings and those of Jesus. This is a fun read and should not be taken as a serious attempt to answer the question its raises! I would recommend 'Are these the words of Jesus' by Ian Wilson for anyone interested in knowing more about questions raised in this book.
Rating: Summary: old hat Review: Nothing new in this wah-wah book, but what else would you expect from two authors whose background is in New Age mysticism and spiritualism. The bibliography is packed with texts that are nearly a hundred years out-of-date, e.g., The Mysteries of Mithra by Francis Cumont, published in 1903. So if you want the latest scholarly opinion on the relationship between pagan religions and Christianity this book is not the place to look! Whilst sources contemporary to the period bieng written about are ignored or quoted selectively (e.g., Justin Martyr). Wads of respected modern biblical scholars are also ignored (e.g., J. D. Crossan, R. T. France, Raymond Brown). I could go on, but I think you get the picture...
|