Rating: 
Summary: intriguing topic that could be more scholarly done
Review: this book raises an interesting issue that I did not know about. I quite enjoy learning it. however, the book could be more scholarly written.1) first of all, the book can use fewer exclamation points. some passages read like continuous shouting. 2) it could also use more neutral words, to replace many judgemental terms like "propagandist", "bigoted", etc. 3) the authors sometimes are too assertive in their conjecture without elaboration. e.g., they asserted that the Ebionites (Jewish followers of Jesus/Yeshua) were gnostics. this is the first time I have heard such a view. all other literature I have read say that Ebionites were "Judaizers". they were law-observent Jews who denied virgin birth; i.e.; they believed that Jesus was a natural son of Joseph. they also opposed to deification of Yeshua. Hence they were considered heretics by Roman Church. They also considered Paul an apostate. These do not seem gnostic to me so the authors could use more elaboration. 3) in one chapter, the authors use gnostic views in Paul's epistles to support that the origin of Christainity is gnostic. However, having established that some epistles are not authentic Pauline, the authors go on to cite Epistle of Hebrew to support their theory. But Epistle of Hebrew is considered not by Paul by most biblical scholars (it is also not an epitle but more like a sermon). I consider this not rigorous enough. The authors could have explained that althougth it is not authentic Pauline, its main theology is Pauline nonthless. therefore, it is legitimate to use this epistle as confirmation of their view. 4) I prefer that the authors use Yahweh (YHWH or YHVH) instead of Jehovah as God of Isreal. (a minor opinion of mine)
Rating: 
Summary: Outstanding
Review: I highly recommend this book to anybody serious about religion and spirituality. It contains the stuff you weren't told in sunday school or in Sunday sermons related to the history of the early church. Essentially, Christianity borrowed from the religious ideas of the time. Christianity was never meant to convey a literal, historical religion, rather, it is an allegory used to describe an inner experience, one that is more real. Literal Christianity came about as a result of a need to control. Well written. Easy to understand. A great Christmas present for fundamentalist Christians.
Rating:
Summary: A revolutionary book
Review: I read this book this September(for 15 days).
This book was known to me through a book this August16 for the
first time.
So I had some knowledge of the content of the book, but wanted
to read the original. After getting it, i started delving
into the masterpiece. As for me, a lot of ambiguous parts in
the Bible seemed to disappear.I thihk the book is very convinc-
ing.
While reading, i felt several raptures. Of course, it is very
difficult to decide whether the historical Jesus was or not.
I venture to agree to the authors' view.
Rating:
Summary: It's all true
Review: Really lets look at the facts people. The early Christians wanted a personal god so they came up with all of the fake writings and fake events and based there "god" of of our Dionysos.
Rating: 
Summary: Jesus Was Real
Review: While there can be no doubt that ancient pagan practices were incorporated into the practice of Christianity -- such as was done with Dec. 25 as the Birthday of Christ, or the incorporation of some Irish saints from earlier Druid gods/goddesses -- the reality of a literal Jesus The Man comes from no less an authority than Josephus the great Jewish historian, who refers to Jesus as having been a real man in his history of the Jewish War with Rome (66 C.E to 70 C.E.). Gnosticism has existed side-by-side with traditional Christianity almost from the beginning. Could it be that the early church fathers condemned the practice of Gnosticism because it was (1) often life denying (the physical world was evil) rather than life affirming; and (2) the early church fathers condemned Gnostism simply because it had it wrong? The idea of needing special knowledge (Gnosticism) in order to find salvation is an old story of humans finding the Divine on their terms rather than the Divine coming to us. We cannot control the Deity and the so-called enlightenmnet Gnostism claims to offer is nothing more that a new name for Magic which allows humans to feel they can control the Deity as they once thought they could control the old gods. These authors are offering nothing new, only rehashing an old pagan argument that man is supreme and can find his/her own way to salvation by his/her own effforts.
Rating:
Summary: A must read for Christians and non Christians alike.
Review: This book is a must read for absolutely any understanding of the origins of Christianity. It is not only thoroughly researched but also contains hundreds of footnotes and references for the reader to check out for themselves.Logical and easy to read for the layman the authors systematically destroy the specious, misleading and fallacious foundation of Christianity that has been deceitfully promulgated by pious frauds for the last 2,000 years. Freke and Gandy demonstrate how the existence of Jesus Christ as a historical character has been doubted since its inauguration and how the actual "person" of Christ is in actuality a conglomeration of a number of ancient godmen myths, who were born of virgins,were sons of gods, and who performed a number of miraculous and supermundane acts such as healing the sick and raising the dead,being persecuted by some tyrant before being hung on a stake, tree or cross, dying and then resurrecting in all their wondrous glory. Did I forget to mention that these were all preceding the advent of Christianity? This book makes a convincing as well as educated argument that Christianity is nothing but a facsimile of these older myths. Freke and Gandy demonstrate the fact that these myths were acknowledged by the early church fathers and quotes them claiming that these prior myths that so closely resemble their own mythology were created by diabolical mimicry i.e. the devil had anticipated the "coming" of Christ so had created anterior belief systems with similar stories and practices so as to make people believe that all Christianity was was a simulacrum of older "pagan" beliefs. If it was the other way around and it was the pagan religions that stole from Christianity wouldn't these church fathers have simplified the argument by saying so?
The Jesus Mysteries demonstrate how Christianity is nothing more than another pagan mystery religion with only one difference to distinguish it from the others; Christianity is under the impression that it is derived from an actual historical figure. As for so called profane historical accounts of Jesus Christ, Freke and Gandy articulate critically and with clarity how they are not contemporaneous with a human being that should have rocked the ancient world if he did so exist and did the things he supposedly did, but written sixty to over a hundred years after the alleged death of Jesus as well as why the "evidence" is not substantial or very efficient as well as demonstrate how the gospels themselves cannot be considered as accurate depictions of history with all their contradictions and mistakes, not to mention the timeline in which they were written.
They don't stop there though, Freke and Gandy postulate a different theory as to how the gospels came about, what they mean in their original state i.e. as allegorical tales containing esoteric meanings, who the first and true Christians were, how Christianity went from being a unhistoricized Jewish mystery religion to a historicized religion, how it became a Jewish mystery religion in the first place, how the gospels are almost entirely greek in philosophy and belief and how they cannot be understood unless read within the context of the age in which they were written.
Although nearly everything in the Jesus Mysteries has been argued before (the argument that Jesus never existed and why has been rehashed over and over since the genesis of Christianity) that does not in any way take away from the efficiency of its argument.
Rating:
Summary: The Devil authored it?
Review: I thought this book was an excellent expose of the ancient mythos that became "Christianity". Also, the other title "Jesus and the Lost Goddess" is an excellent overview of the original, uncorrupted christianity that was dubbed "gnosticism" by the literalists and sophists. I wanted to add some information in the review section for this book which is extremeley important to it's impact on literalist christians. As one who was formally a seminarian, thoroughly educated in traditional dispensational and reformed evangelical theology, I wanted to let you know of a little contradiction that I'd discovered when listening to the proposed refutations of the things Mr.Freke, Mr.Gandy and others have discovered and written about.
A common argument is made by Christian apologists that is echoed in ancient times by Justin Martyr. He states: "It having reached the Devil's ears that the prophets had foretold the coming of Christ, the Son of God, he set the heathen Poets to bring forward a great many who should be called the sons of Jove. The Devil laying his scheme in this, to get men to imagine that the true history of Christ was of the same characters the prodigious fables related of the sons of Jove."
The problem with this logic is this: the Devil, in Christian theology, is considered a created being. Because of this, he is not omniscient - he CANNOT read the future and he does not KNOW all things. He could of read the Old Testament scriptures, granted, but the startling fact that I realized was that many of the similarities between the 16 crucified saviors and Jesus could NOT have been known by Lucifer through merely having the writings of the prophets "reach his ears". It would have been impossible for him to know such detail about future events because "the prophets had foretold" none of the things I show in the examples below.
A few examples of these things are: that he would be born on Dec. 25th; that 3 kings would bring him gifts at his birth; that his birth would be signaled by a star in the east; that he would teach in a temple at the age of 12 and be baptized at 30 having disappeared for 18 years; that he would raise one called eL-azuras from the dead; that he would be crucified between two thieves; that his father would be a carpenter; that he would be transfigured in front of his disciples; that he would feed multitudes with five loaves and two fish; that he would walk on water. I could list many more, but I'm sure you get the point I'm making.
The Devil, because he is defined in traditional theology as a created being, could NOT have known information concerning events that, at the time the earlier myths were written, predate Christianity by thousands of years. He would not have been privy to such knowledge mentioned above because none of it was written in the Old Testament...and believe me, as an Ex-Seminary student, I almost had the OT memorized. There is nothing written in prophecy of the above instances. Moreover, most of the Old Testament was written AFTER the majority of theSumerian, Babylonian and Sumerian mythos were constructed.
So, we see that the Devil could not have "pre-penned" or "set the heathen Poets to bring forward" in such detail about the life of Jesus. Theology states that no creature other than God can know the future. Therefore, he couldn't have known these intimate details of the life of Jesus. As you can see, their argument shoots itself in the foot.
When theological apologists see that their own argument, first promoted by Justin Martyr, is defeated by their own theology, maybe then they will accept the wake-up call of the true Spirit in all things.
Rating: 
Summary: Great writing, but the content is pure fiction
Review: ...The book is a complete joke. Well, not completely but rather rather only the believability of the content. Nothing depicted here is anything but creative spin on already known information that has been available for centuries. The twists and stretches required to postulate such nonsense breaks under even a quick glance at the logic employed. Only spend your money on this book if you like conspiracy theory and are an avid mystery reader. As fiction, its not bad.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing
Review: The subject of the book is fascinating. I was looking forward to reading it. Unfortunately, it was written the wrong authors. Anybody who has done any serious reading re. the historical Jesus vs. the Jesus of the modern church will easily spot the gross historical inaccuracies & lack of up-to-date research. Many of the same old silly arguments are made, just with a lot more exclamation points. There are some interesting items, which may make it worth a read, but mostly this book is not very useful to anybody seriously researching this subject. In a nutshell, this book seriously suffers from lack of competent scholarship.
Rating:
Summary: the ole' bait and switch
Review: I felt this book started out well enough but half way through it changed. The authors seem to be promoting the Gnostic faith. I would suggest to the reader to borrow this book from a friend or go to the libary and check it out.
| 
