Rating: 
Summary: OUTSTANDING SCHOLARSHIP AND GREAT READ!
Review: Contrary to specious claims on this page, this book is NOT "ridiculous," nor is it "full of irrelevant facts." The Christ Conspiracy is a carefully woven story of how the masters of priestcraft pulled off one of the world's biggest scams. There are no "New Age gurus" in it; rather, many of the quotes are taken from Christian authorities. The comment below about Margaret Sanger is itself irrelevant and speciously attempts to associate the Christ Conspiracy with "infanticide." (Such a writer is likely a Christian, which hardly makes him an impartial critic of such a monumental work as the Christ Conspiracy.) As concerns the disparagement of Godfrey Higgins, Kersey Graves and Gerald Massey, these men were actually outstanding scholars and thinkers--much more than their disparagers will ever be. (Obviously, this writer also is a Christian, so, naturally, he would not like the book and would write spurious comments.) As concerns the SHOUTING below, it matters not that the book is not a "new revelation." First of all, it's not a pretentious religious book passing itself off as "revelation." Also, the book is extremely important because 99% of the populace is unaware of its information and it is written in a style that is accessible to the masses, unlike the books of the authors (Doherty and Price) subsequently plugged. Furthermore, regardless of Price's absurd and obviously jealous putdown of her book (his own book sells very poorly), Acharya's work debunking the bogus James ossuary has been published in a three-part series in Secular Nation magazine, which has on its board of supervisors one Dr. Robert Price. Obviously, despite his knee-jerk reaction to her book, which is the best-selling of the mythicist works, he finds merit in her work. Finally, there's a REASON why the Christ Conspiracy is the best-selling in its field, folks. To put it simply, it's a great book that will continue to enlighten for many decades to come. If you haven't read it, do so now so you can spare yourself a whole lot of wasted time.
Rating: 
Summary: Truth Seekers Beware!
Review: I have been reading books on this topic for years and am fully convinced that Jesus Christ is a mythical character for a number of reasons. However, if you're pursuing this subject, I strongly recommend you don't waste your time on this ridiculous book. It's filled with irrelevant information, quotes from New Age gurus and feminist icons, and the author apparently expects us to believe that Jesus Christ is mythical for no better reason than the fact that Margaret Sanger (the founder of the infanticide group Planned Parenthood, who was also an admirer of Adolf Hitler!) found Christianity "oppressive." Fortunately, there have been a number of scholarly books expounding upon the mythicist position that are both well research and well written. This book is neither. Please save your money for more worthwhile endeavors.
Rating:
Summary: Common Misconceptions
Review: This book has a thesis which no Roman historian would support and uses sources that no reputable scholar would touch -- "Christianity was created artificially out of older religions to consolidate Roman state control over those religions." (pg iii). Unfortunately for her readers, Acharya relies heavily upon worthless sources such as the debunked Kersey Graves, the outlandish Godfrey Higgins, and the unsupported Gerald Massey. As a consequence, the information in her book isn't any more reliable.
Nevertheless, it does have value -- for Christians interested in training themselves in the field of apologetics. This is because it contains a good collection of false information about Christianity, (such as radically late dates for the Gospels, pg 34, and the common misconception that there aren't any non-Christian references to Jesus until the third century, pg 49) which anyone actively defending the faith will encounter. If you are a Christian who falls into this category, get Acharya's book, as well as some great reference books such as the BAKER ENCYCLOPEDIA OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS and A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE BIBLE by Norman Geisler, THE HISTORICAL JESUS by Gary Habermas, THE HISTORICAL RELIABILITY OF THE GOSPELS by Craig Blomberg, and THE TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT by Bruce Metzger. Then, start studying. This is a great way to prepare yourself to be "ready with an answer" (1 Peter 3:15).
Rating:
Summary: RECYCLED EARLIER MATERIAL
Review: THIS BOOK IS NOT A NEW "REVELATION" AS MOST OF THE REVIEWERS THINK. MOST OF THE CLAIMS COME FROM EARLIER SOURCES. I RECOMMEND "JESUS PUZZLE" BY EARL DOHERTY INSTEAD OR "DECONSTRUCTING JESUS" BY ROBERT PRICE. INTERESTINGLY, ROBERT PRICE, AN AGNOSTIC HIMSELF, HAS CRITICIZED THIS BOOK FOR ITS POOR SCHOLARSHIP, THAT SHOULD TELL YOU SOMETHING, DARE TO INVESTIGATE THE MATTER YOURSELF.
Rating: 
Summary: a strong and thorough read
Review: Don't be fooled by the critics or the light-hearted new age cover. This is a raucous, yet refined, analysis that is meticulously researched and thoroughly reported. The author pulls from many different sources and weaves an intriguing, if not blistering, synopsis of the gospels. There are over four hundred pages of illuminating ideas served up in a slightly (no, majorly) caustic and bitter manner. What makes this approach so tolerable is her incisive analyses and comparative understanding of the most relevant issues. The sleeve claims this author is experienced in several different fields. The read proves this beyond any reasonable doubt. ...
Rating:
Summary: aboslutely awful
Review: last year i decided to take a serious, analytical look at christianity, so i read several books that each took a different stance on the subject, some being arguments for, some neutral, and some that tried to debunk the whole thing. i was deeply disappointed in this particular book. i was looking for a high quality analysis that would make a strong case against christianity, but what i found was a childish rant that built it's case on dubious sources and played out the same old tired arguments. the author's style is heavily tainted by both immaturity and a arogance which makes each page a more painful experince than the last. i don't know who gave this book high star ratings, but clearly i was looking for something different than these other reviewers. never-the-less, i recommend that you avoid this book at all costs.
Rating:
Summary: Replaces historical Jesus by materialist astrology
Review: Acharya's long book has several parts and aspects that need to be judged as distinct components. Similar to Freke & Gandy's book The Jesus Mysteries and its companion Jesus and the Goddess, and unlike Doherty's book The Jesus Puzzle, Acharya not only makes a case for the nonhistoricity of Jesus and absence of a single individual as the kernel for the Jesus figure, she also proposes an interpretation of what, positively, the original Jesus figure meant to the earliest Christians and proto-Christians. Her presentation of the case for the negative half of the project, debunking the historicity of Jesus, is good, is standard, and strengthens the case made by the other mythic-only Jesus scholars. By providing a positive scenario of the real, original, esoteric meaning of Jesus, in addition to debunking the received history, Acharya is more ambitious than Doherty. However, her proposed explanation of the Jesus figure as a matter of initiation, myth, and esotericism is a 1-dimensional, literalist, materialist, and debased version of astrology. She conceives of astrology as a study of physical bodies rather than as being also an allegorical system of psyche development grounded in the mystic state of consciousness. She thus misreads the nature and spirit of that which she proposes as a replacement for Jesus' historicity, astrology. Freke & Gandy have a better feel for the psychological and mystic-state emphasis in esoteric mystery initiations and myth. Her lack of recognition of the mystic-state psychology emphasis in astrology is all the more remarkable because it contrasts with her own short section about visionary plants. In that section she again uses the term 'initiation', but doesn't describe what initiation is about. That section on visionary plants is also oddly not integrated into the rest of the book, because it states that the Jesus figure was merely one aspect of the Jesus myth and Christ conspiracy, which incorporated virtually everything at hand. If this isolated, insightful statement of Acharya is correct, it contradicts, as too limited and too literalist, her own proposed positive explanation of the real original meaning of Jesus in the rest of the book, which she consistently portrays as strictly meaning the literal, physical sun within a conception of astrology that knows nothing of the divine experience of the bright mystic sun in the psyche during initiation. Thus her book contains the necessary elements to portray astrology as a series of psychological, mystic-state initiation experiences integrated with external materialist, cosmological teachings, but she doesn't put the pieces together. Instead, the bulk of the book consistently portrays literal cosmological bodies as the only concern of astrology -- against all scholars of Western esotericism, who are unanimous that astrology is at least as concerned with nonordinary experiencing and divine development of the psyche, as with physical cosmological bodies. This is an ambitious and at times overambitious book in that Acharya is unable to put forth a coherent and compelling positive explanation of what the Jesus figure originally meant in its cultural context. She fumbles the ball of esotericism, reducing it to a materialist, that is, non-psychological and non-mystical, conception. She also misportrays the character of mythic and mystic thinking in ancient wisdom traditions in that she portrays astrology as an isolated esoteric sacred science. Fideler's book Jesus Christ, Sun of God: Ancient Cosmology and Early Christian Symbolism provides a more accurate, multifaceted view of how astrotheology functioned as one esoteric thematic school among many. I especially applaud her revealing that the Paul figure is not historical. More research is needed here, following the lead of the 19th-Century Dutch Radical Critics. In the last chapters of the book, Acharya commits the common fallacy of postulating an ancient and materialist origin of religious ideas, rather than recognizing that religious ideas spring from the ever-available mystic altered state of consciousness. Because the origin of the ideas in psychological experiences during the mystic state isn't recognized, such nonmystical scholars as Acharya only have recourse to one type of explanation: a literalist, materialist, non-psychological historical origin of religious ideas. She relies too heavily on a single type of scholar, such as Doane in the 19th century, before Jung; she seems unaware of the Jungian or mystic-state theories of the origin of mythic thinking. The only way she could succeed at convincing skeptics of Jesus' nonhistoricity is by providing a fully compelling positive alternative of what the mystic Jesus figure originally meant. In proffering a materialist version of astrology, she needs to state her position on the Jungian subconscious or mystic state psychological phenomena as an explanation for the origin of the mythic Jesus figure. This is a highly readable book for a popular audience. Those wanting a more scholarly convincing argument should also read Doherty's book The Jesus Puzzle. Those wanting a more insightful characterization of ancient astrology as psyche-centered should also read Fideler's book Jesus Christ, Sun of God, and those wanting a more experiential characterization of mystery-religion initiation should also read Freke & Gandy's books The Jesus Mysteries and Jesus and the Goddess. The goal of the book is to establish was Jesus wasn't (a historical individual serving as the kernel for the eventual Jesus figure) and what Jesus was. It is stronger on the first project than the second, because what Jesus was was -- as she states in one isolated spot but otherwise neglects -- a composite figure formed from many themes, not just from a physicalist type of astrology. The goal of such a revised and corrected understanding is to change popular and scholarly understanding of the original meaning of the Jesus figure, which will then help prevent a continuation of the destructiveness that is supported by a literalist misconception of Christianity. Acharya only partially achieves this goal of providing an accurate understanding of the original Hellenistic meaning of the Jesus figure, and thus this book is of limited efficacy in switching the world away from a literalist to a truly esoteric comprehension of Jesus and Christianity.
Rating:
Summary: Nope, don't buy it!
Review: I guess she made her case, if you like that sort of thing. The wacked out Astrology references? Whatever. I think some things just need to be taken on faith, and I'll continue to believe. I am a college-educated, intelligent person that hasn't made this decision blindly. The author attempts to explain a lot of things, but some things can't be explained. I have made an informed decision to be a Christian and despite the smugness of others who scoff, let them. My beliefs are sound and safe and work for me. Amen!
Rating:
Summary: Main Stream American Need their own copy
Review: This is a book that has such a wealth of information in it I have purchased at least 6 copys (One the Author autographed) and given them to friends and coworkers.
If you have any doubts about organized religion this book will help you put "blind faith" to rest where it belongs.
Rating:
Summary: This Could be True!
Review: This book was so interesting I read it in just 48 hours. Some of the ideas are covered in other books on the subject but others are unique. I did a little of my own research and the facts seem to line up. When I first heard about the book I thought it was some kind of radical idea but when you do the research on your own, it looks like the author really knows what she's talking about. This book could really change how you see the world.
| 
