Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

[Flann 5]

I have to agree with you Robert, Flann5 appears to be a type of "moronic fundy troll" who has clearly not read through this thread at all or he would realize all of his arguments have been quite thoroughly and decisively debunked to the point of utter embarrassment.

I will not waste my time with such trash from a troll. I have no interest in a pissing contest with a troll like Flann5. Acharya S has passed away and cannot defend herself from such trolls.

Hi again,FTL. I did read through the whole thread. The critique was of D.M.Murdock's views as found in her book "The Christ Conspiracy." You posted links to her writings and I responded to this with the criticisms of her book and it's contents. Do you expect that these should not be challenged at all?

I accept that she had a tough battle with cancer which must have been hard for her and her family and friends. At the same time her published mythicist views should not be immune from criticism, as to how accurate and factual they are.

Keep in mind that Jonathan Burke, like so many other mythicist critics, has absolutely no relevant qualifications or degrees whatsoever:

Burke was pointing out that mythicism and astrotheology are not take seriously by historians and N.T. scholars, which is a fact. He did go through a few scholars like Carrier who have mythicist views though they differ with each other on particular points.
Even Robert M Price is more agnostic than hard skeptic on the historicity of Christ.

When Were the Gospels Written?

Bart Ehrman: Gospels not written by eyewitnesses, no Jesus in historical record

Liberal and conserative N.T. scholars all agree that the gospels were all written within the first century not the late second century as claimed in her book.
Conservatives date them earlier but my point in citing Ehrman is that he's not a Christian apologist. I'm aware of his views and of course he wrote a book defending the historicity of Christ,so I'm not sure how you got the impression he questioned this.

No one can date the gospels with certainty but the scholarly consensus is first century.


Well qualified conservative textual critics like Dan Wallace have debated Ehrman on other issues such as the transmission and reliability of the N.T. texts.
Here's why conservative scholars date them earlier than liberals.

http://www.bethinking.org/bible/the-dat ... -testament

"Apart from the New Testament writings and later writings dependent upon these, our sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus are scanty and problematic"

- F.F. Bruce, a founder of the modern evangelical movement, Who Was Jesus?, page 84, by Murdock

Well that's an interesting quote FTL, but if you want to put it in context here's Bruce's entire book; The New Testament documents are they Reliable?
http://www.ncbible.info/MoodRes/Transmi ... -Bruce.pdf

It's a pretty good assessment though a bit dated. His broad acceptance of the Q source hypothesis may be questioned on later studies, but overall it's still relevant.

"...Christian scholars over the centuries have admitted that ... "there are parallels between the Mysteries and Christianity"1 and that "the miracle stories of the Gospels do in fact parallel literary forms found in pagan and Jewish miracle stories,"2 "...According to Form Criticism the Gospels are more like folklore and myth than historical fact."3

In fact these form critical theories are losing favour in contemporary scholarship of all stripes, and as I said elsewhere the more recent studies of Bauckham and Burridge have moved scholarship more towards the view of the gospels as being of the genre of historical biography.

"The Gospels are neither histories nor biographies, even within the ancient tolerances for those genres."

- Dr. John Dominic Crossan, Who Was Jesus? 24

While I would seriously disagree with Crossan on many things,in fact Crossan is on record as saying the crucifixion of Christ by Pilate is among the best attested of all historical events.

"The only definite account of his life and teachings is contained in the four Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. All other historical records of the time are silent about him. The brief mentions of Jesus in the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations; in Jewish writings there is no report about Jesus that has historical value. Some scholars have even gone so far as to hold that the entire Jesus story is a myth…"

- The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Who Was Jesus? 84

If this encyclopedia did say this then they are mistaken. Take Tacitus' reference to Christ for instance, it's simply false that this has been generally regarded (by scholars) as not genuine but an interpolation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ

You have provided lot of other links I'll have to get around to looking at later.

It's too bad Acharya is no longer alive to defend herself from the trash and malicious smears by trolls:

I've argued against Doherty,Carrier and other mythicist's views and that's the main issue.

I will concede that it may have been a bad choice to link J.P. Holding's article,not because I think he's wrong but the tone is at times ridiculing these views, and that's probably inappropriate in view of her relatively recent death.
He wrote it while she was alive.

[DB Roy]

FTL is right.

[Robert Tulip]

Hi FTL and Tat, nice to see you commenting here. Booktalk tends to be free and easy about allowing moronic fundy trolls to post, as long as they are not too rabid in their insults to reason. I would not quite put Flann5 in that category since he is generally polite and mostly factual and intelligent within his religious framework. That framework does however have a few major areas of stupidity, such as rejection on principle of a naturalistic worldview, belief in Biblical inerrancy, creationism and a supernaturalist interventionist God, failure to appreciate that scriptural meaning is more symbolic than literal, and interest in kooky sites such as Tektonics. Given those limits, you might find it challenging to have a constructive conversation with him.

I have to agree with you Robert, Flann5 appears to be a type of "moronic fundy troll" who has clearly not read through this thread at all or he would realize all of his arguments have been quite thoroughly and decisively debunked to the point of utter embarrassment.

My comment above does not say Flann is a moronic troll, although we have had a few of them around here from time to time.

The difficulty with astrotheology is that almost no one takes any interest in it, and most people who are interested in theology, mythology and religion more broadly are brainwashed by literalism. There is little benefit in getting angry about it, but the reality is that the debate on these topics is traumatised to the point that Acharya’s investigation of solar and cosmic allegory is simply dismissed out of hand using the fallacious method of guilt by association. The imperviosity of faith to reason is a problem requiring psychoanalysis.

With more than 40% of Americans believing the universe is less than ten thousand years old, and many more holding evidence-free opinions about God and Jesus, there are big social, psychological, cultural and political issues at play which need careful thought. The debate is not advanced by insults alone.

However, it is an objective scientific fact that YEC belief is stupid, so it is unfair to rule this rational critique out of the debate just because some idiots feel insulted. Instead we should analyse why people hold false beliefs that are impervious to evidence, and why people are immune to readings of mythology that don’t take the absurd stories literally. Acharya was a pioneer in the search for deeper symbolic meanings within mythology, compatible with a scientific worldview. But the path to truth is narrow and hard, while the way of delusion is broad and easy.

I will not waste my time with such trash from a troll. I have no interest in a pissing contest with a troll like Flann5. Acharya S has passed away and cannot defend herself from such trolls.

I personally think that Acharya was ahead of her time, and her reputation will only grow as more people engage with her uncompromising critique of false religion. It is entirely possible for people who agree with Acharya’s scholarship to engage in reasoned conversation with critics like Flann, although the objective should be dissection of the tumour of false belief, not venting of anger.

Those links Flann5 posted were written by Christian apologist extremists out to shore up their Christian faith and euphoria at all costs - even if it means being dishonest. Besides, the quotes and links posted throughout this thread debunk both articles. All Flann5 did was take a big dump in this thread posting very disrespectful misinformation and malicious smears about Acharya when she is no longer alive to defend herself.

All true.

It makes this entire forum look bad and certainly doesn't encourage me to post here at all.

FTL, are you aware of any discussion boards on the internet where there is a sustained courteous engagement on astrotheology? I am not. Flann’s views can be dissected and rebutted, but simply calling them embarrassing is only a starting point and does little to persuade a broader audience. Suggesting that such views should be censored only serves the pervasive polarisation of society where people retreat into echo chambers where they only encounter views they share. Part of the liberal ethos of booktalk.org is the acceptance of a diverse range of opinions.

[DB Roy]

I don't think that was his point.

[youkrst]

Burke was pointing out that mythicism and astrotheology are not take seriously by historians and N.T. scholars

I would like to point out that people who think the shed blood of Jesus the Son of God can actually wash away their sins are not taken seriously by anyone who can think.

[FTL99]

Flann5's post had absolutely nothing to do with this thread as he admits:

Flann5: "The critique was of D.M.Murdock's views as found in her book "The Christ Conspiracy." You posted links to her writings and I responded to this with the criticisms of her book and it's contents. Do you expect that these should not be challenged at all?"

So, Flann5 admits his post had nothing to do with this thread. His intention was simply to bring in whatever trash he could find to "challenge" a book that has nothing to do with this thread - thanks for proving my point. Flann5 has just admitted precisely what I said - Flann5 had no intention of any type of honest discussion and chose to troll and inflame instead with some of the most untrustworthy and dishonest sources. This entire section is about her book "Christ in Egypt," not "Christ Conspiracy" and even still nothing he said had anything to do with "Christ Conspiracy" either.

Flann5 is definitely a prime example of a troll here at least in this case as another red flag is the fact that he never deals with any of the facts brought forth throughout this thread for discussion - he omits them to post more misinformation instead of addressing the issue or facts at hand. Flann5 claims to have read this thread yet, makes no mention of a single point in it and instead posts unrelated trash to take a dump in this thread and troll it up and it is working thanks to the help of others here who should know better. Flannn5's posts have nothing to do with dissent as he never addressing any facts from this thread and instead chose to inflame and hi-jack the thread - again, with the help of others here who should know better.

Take note how Flann5 omits the fact that Jonathan Burke has absolutely no relevant qualifications or degrees whatsoever and neither does JP Holding. Burke's article is a one-sided, bigoted piece of trash written for other bigoted trolls like Flann5. An honest person would be ashamed to post such garbage here same as the JP Holding trash. Take note how Flann5 also deflects away from the quotes I provided by Christian New Testament scholars including Bart Ehrman who admits: "Gospels not written by eyewitnesses, no Jesus in historical record." Also, take note how Flann5 omits the quotes from very highly respected biblical scholars and astronomers who literally prove Flann5 embarrassingly wrong - Flann5 omits it and does the old standard routine of deflection and then repeats the same garbage again - that's why it's impossible to have an honest or legit discussion with such a willfully ignorant and dishonest person like Flann5 and it's embarrassing to watch others here support it. Flann5 never dealt with a single fact or quote throughout this entire thread proving once again he is just another Christian fundy moronic troll.

"This book is a slightly revised version of my doctoral dissertation entitled “Solar Worship in the Biblical World” which was submitted to the Graduate School of Yale University in the Spring of 1989. As may be judged from the title of that work, I had at one time planned to cover more territory than sun worship in ancient Israel, but found the material pertaining to ancient Israel so vast that I never got beyond it."

- Rev. Dr. J. Glen Taylor, "Yahweh and the Sun: Biblical and Archaeological Evidence for Sun Worship in Ancient Israel" (1993)

"At Stonehenge in England and Carnac in France, in Egypt and Yucatan, across the whole face of the earth are found mysterious ruins of ancient monuments, monuments with astronomical significance. These relics of other times are as accessible as the American Midwest and as remote as the jungles of Guatemala. Some of them were built according to celestial alignments; others were actually precision astronomical observatories ... Careful observation of the celestial rhythms was compellingly important to early peoples, and their expertise, in some respects, was not equaled in Europe until three thousand years later."

- Dr. Edwin Krupp, astronomer and director at Griffith Park Observatory in Los Angeles

Flann5: "Burke was pointing out that mythicism and astrotheology are not take seriously by historians and N.T. scholars, which is a fact."

LOL, not much of a fact at all when one understands a few basics:

"...It is imperative to keep in mind that there are no mythicists with Ph.D's because there are no courses teaching it and there's not any type of "Department of Astrotheological and Mythological Studies" for them to teach in or receive a Ph.D. and scholars know this fact. So, the argument below couldn't be any more fallacious! This quote from Dr. Bart Ehrman is a prime example:

"... there is not a single mythicist who teaches New Testament or Early Christianity or even Classics at any accredited institution of higher learning in the Western world."
- Bart D. Ehrman, "Did Jesus Exist", Huffington Post, March 20, 2012

"Ehrman raises a straw man here because he knows there is no such course teaching the case for mythicism and mythicists are not typically going to be hired, in fact, if anybody comes out of the mythicist closet they're more likely to be fired - for example: Fired for Saying Adam and Eve Mythical? A news report about a professor at a community college in Iowa who claimed he was fired for stating in class that the biblical Adam and Eve were mythical."

"New Testament (NT) scholars are so narrowly focused on the NT that they don't spend much time in comparative religion to investigate parallels, 'borrowing' or syncretism from other pre-Christian religions as well as trends. It's also significant that it's not a requirement for New Testament scholars or students to examine the case for mythicism or the Mythicist Position in order to receive a PhD. Don't believe me? Here it is straight from the horses mouth; one of the most well-known New Testament scholars:

"Writing Did Jesus Exist was an interesting task. For one thing, before writing the book, like most New Testament scholars, I knew almost nothing about the mythicist movement."
- Dr. Bart Ehrman

"Bart Ehrman also confesses on page two in his book, "Did Jesus Exist?," that for 30 years he never even thought to consider to question the existence of Jesus as real historical character because it was a question that he "did not take seriously." Bart goes on to say, "I discovered, to my surprise, an entire body of literature devoted to the question of whether or not there ever was a real man, Jesus ... I was almost completely unaware - as are most of my colleagues in the field - of this body of skeptical literature."

- Mythicism and the Ph.D.: A Brief History

So, to re-cap, Ehrman admits that he and other New Testament scholars know almost nothing about the case for mythicism - which is where trolls like Burke get his info.

The garbage posted by Flann5 was just that - trash meant to inflame and it has obviously worked and some here who should know better are falling for it. Flann5 is by definition a TROLL:

"In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion,[3] often for their own amusement."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

Another red flag with Flann5 is the fact that anyone or any sources that disagrees with him or proves him wrong are automatically "mistaken" - because Flann5 is a bigot who assumes he is always right while everybody else who doesn't believe in Jesus is automatically wrong and must work for Satan or something.

The posts starting with Flann5 should be removed or at least moved over to a trash thread for all the trolls if this forum prefers keeping the trolls happy over any real discussion. Thanks for ruining a really great thread. I am not encouraged to post here ever again - might as well delete this entire section since trolls whose intention are merely to inflame are far more important here.

Again,

Star Worship of the Ancient Israelites

These below are from Acharya's blog:

Zodiacs on the Floor of Synagogues

2,750-year-old solar-aligned temple discovered in Israel

Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

"This book is a slightly revised version of my doctoral dissertation entitled “Solar Worship in the Biblical World” which was submitted to the Graduate School of Yale University in the Spring of 1989. As may be judged from the title of that work, I had at one time planned to cover more territory than sun worship in ancient Israel, but found the material pertaining to ancient Israel so vast that I never got beyond it."

- Rev. Dr. J. Glen Taylor, "Yahweh and the Sun: Biblical and Archaeological Evidence for Sun Worship in Ancient Israel" (1993)

"At Stonehenge in England and Carnac in France, in Egypt and Yucatan, across the whole face of the earth are found mysterious ruins of ancient monuments, monuments with astronomical significance. These relics of other times are as accessible as the American Midwest and as remote as the jungles of Guatemala. Some of them were built according to celestial alignments; others were actually precision astronomical observatories ... Careful observation of the celestial rhythms was compellingly important to early peoples, and their expertise, in some respects, was not equaled in Europe until three thousand years later."

- Dr. Edwin Krupp, astronomer and director at Griffith Park Observatory in Los Angeles, 'In Search of Ancient Astronomies,' page xiii. Also quoted in "Suns of God," page 26

"I find it undeniable that many of the epic heroes and ancient patriarchs and matriarchs of the Old Testament were personified stars, planets, and constellations." "I find myself in full agreement with Acharya S/D.M. Murdock"

- Dr. Robert Price, Biblical Scholar with two Ph.D's

Earl Doherty defers to Acharya for the subject of astrotheology:

"A heavenly location for the actions of the savior gods, including the death of Christ, would also have been influenced by most religions' ultimate derivation from astrotheology, as in the worship of the sun and moon. For this dimension of more remote Christian roots, see the books of Acharya S"

- Earl Doherty, Jesus: Neither God Nor Man, (2009) page 153

"Your scholarship is relentless! ...the research conducted by D.M. Murdock concerning the myth of Jesus Christ is certainly both valuable and worthy of consideration."

- Dr. Ken Feder, Professor of Archaeology

"...In recent months or over the last year or so I have interviewed Frank Zindler and Richard Carrier and David Fitzgerald and Robert Price all on the issue of mythicism ... when I spoke to these people I asked for their expertise collectively and what I got, especially from Fitzgerald and Robert Price, was that we should be speaking to tonights guest D.M. Murdock,author of 'Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver'."

- Aron Ra, The Ra Men podcast EP10 - Did Moses Exist? with D.M. Murdock

"I've known people with triple Ph.D's who haven't come close to the scholarship in Who Was Jesus?"

- Pastor David Bruce, M.Div

"...I have found her scholarship, research, knowledge of the original languages, and creative linkages to be breathtaking and highly stimulating."

- Rev. Dr. Jon Burnham, Pastor

"I can recommend your work whole-heartedly!"

- Dr. Robert Eisenman

Stone Age Zodiac by National Geographic



Jesus Christ, Sun of Righteousness

[Flann 5]

Flann5's post had absolutely nothing to do with this thread as he admits:



Quote:
Flann5: "The critique was of D.M.Murdock's views as found in her book "The Christ Conspiracy." You posted links to her writings and I responded to this with the criticisms of her book and it's contents. Do you expect that these should not be challenged at all?"

If you think "The Christ Conspiracy" book has nothing to do with "The Mythicist Position" I find that very strange.

Flann5 is definitely a prime example of a troll here at least in this case as another red flag is the fact that he never deals with any of the facts brought forth throughout this thread for discussion - he omits them to post more misinformation instead of addressing the issue or facts at hand.

I would have thought "the issue or facts at hands" are the published views of D.M.Murdock who you constantly cite and provide links to.

I don't think it is misinformation at all but a critique of mythicism and particularly astrotheology which you promote.

1 The mythicist position as presented in Murdock's works are that of claimed parallels between pagan deities and the life of Christ as portrayed in the gospels.
2 The claim that Christ in the gospels is actually an anthropomorphized allegory of the sun with particular emphasis on Horus as a pagan parallel example of this.

3 An astrotheological interpretation of the gospel accounts based on 1 and 2.

This is generally presented as for example, Horus supposedly being born of a virgin on December 25th,having twelve disciples and being crucified and resurrected among other alleged parallels.
The problem here is that none of these major claims can be found in the primary Egyptian sources themselves, but rather what contradicts them.
They don't even get the Egyptian myths themselves right.
D.M. Murdoch stood over these claims as presented in the movie Zeitgeist.
Here's why this is completely erroneous. http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/HORUS.htm

Quote:
"This book is a slightly revised version of my doctoral dissertation entitled “Solar Worship in the Biblical World” which was submitted to the Graduate School of Yale University in the Spring of 1989. As may be judged from the title of that work, I had at one time planned to cover more territory than sun worship in ancient Israel, but found the material pertaining to ancient Israel so vast that I never got beyond it."

- Rev. Dr. J. Glen Taylor, "Yahweh and the Sun: Biblical and Archaeological Evidence for Sun Worship in Ancient Israel" (1993)

The bible itself says that the Israelites departed from Yahweh and the covenant at times and worshiped the Sun,Moon and stars, so
this just confirms that.

Take note how Flann5 also deflects away from the quotes I provided by Christian New Testament scholars including Bart Ehrman who admits: "Gospels not written by eyewitnesses, no Jesus in historical record."

It's well known that her books take quotes from N.T. scholars but when put in overall context these scholars advocate nothing like what they are presented as advocating.
Ehrman wrote a book supporting the historicity of Christ for example!

Another red flag with Flann5 is the fact that anyone or any sources that disagrees with him or proves him wrong are automatically "mistaken" - because Flann5 is a bigot who assumes he is always right while everybody else who doesn't believe in Jesus is automatically wrong and must work for Satan or something.

I linked a Wikipedia article on scholarship in relation to Tacitus in response to an encyclopedia article which you quoted as saying that Tacitus' reference to Jesus was generally regarded (by scholars) to not be genuine but an interpolation.
You can always correct it then,so do that.
Who are all these classical historians and Tacitus scholars who dispute the authenticity of the passage? Carrier would be one.

I'm pretty sure I've addressed Carrier's take on this but he has even more problems when it comes to explaining Josephus' account of "James the brother of Jesus who was called Christ".

His lame and convoluted attempted 'explanation' was thoroughly dismantled by Tim O' Neill who happens to be an atheist and no "moronic fundie troll"
Here again is O' Neill's general essay on Jesus Mythicism, though I can find his specific piece on Carrier and James the brother of Jesus who was called Christ, if you would like to see it.

http://www.armariummagnus.blogspot.ie/2 ... again.html

An honest person would be ashamed to post such garbage here same as the JP Holding trash.

"...I have found her scholarship, research, knowledge of the original languages, and creative linkages to be breathtaking and highly stimulating."

- Rev. Dr. Jon Burnham, Pastor

So here's a quote from "The Christ Conspiracy": "In Sagittarius,Jesus was wounded in the side by the Centaur or centurion."

As Holding points out the Greek word for centurion is "hekontarches" which has no similarity or connection with the English word centaur.
The gospel was written in Greek not English, and there is an obvious fallacy in taking two similar English words to argue that the original gospel had anything remotely like this similarity in it.

Rather than just dismiss everyone who disagree with you as bigoted trolls, why don't you debate the actual arguments presented and explain why Holding is wrong here?

[Robert Tulip]

I don't think that was his point.

First Prize for a post that is totally meaningless due to complete absence of any context.

[youkrst]

i thought it was pretty straightforward

[youkrst]

Flann5 had no intention of any type of honest discussion and chose to troll and inflame instead with some of the most untrustworthy and dishonest sources.

i think Flann thinks they are his "allies in defence of the faith" kinda deal, probably doesn't realise they make some of us vomit with their flatulent disregard for veracity

over the years though Flann has shown himself a reasonably well meaning fellow so most here would probably agree that he's not out to intentionally be like ant.

the fact that Flann is woefully out of step with any understanding of the matters at hand is something i put down to the fact that his faith has blinded Him. (but i still like Him well enough).

He probably prays that the Lord will open our eyes =)

well that's better than a slap in the face with a wet fish i suppose, though there are some similarities.

it's like trying to explain to a nickelback fan why they suck

oh and thanks for the great posts as usual FTL99, yeah Burke and Holding WTF! ROFL BBQ!