It is currently Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:25 pm

All times are [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 41 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 12:01 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
On Encyclopedias / Wikipedia:
Quote:
"Speaking of sources, it often appears necessary to repeat that searching encyclopedias will not yield adequate results when it comes to deep research, particularly since until lately most of the encyclopedias in English were written and edited by Christians who would hardly be keen on including obvious parallels to Christ in their various entries on gods and men.2 Moreover, flipping through encyclopedias will not make an expert of anyone; thus, caution is required when reading hasty rebuttals from fervent believers—such commentaries tend to be inadequate, representing a cursory scan by those who are rarely experts. Such interpretations may sound impressive at first to the untrained eye; however, with serious, time consuming research digging into long-forgotten and buried archives, most if not all of these shallow encyclopedia - rebuttals can be put to rest, as demonstrated in this present work."

- Christ in Egypt, page 7

Footnote 2:

"Encyclopedias provide for some consensus of opinion and a valuable starting point for research. In such generally short entries, of course, only a small portion of a subject can be addressed, and encyclopedias thus tend to be sanitized of controversial material. Older encyclopedias may contain material that has been omitted not because it is erroneous but because it is not popular with mainstream authorities. Some encyclopedias are simply better, regardless of their age, particularly in consideration of "timeless" subjects such as religious ideology. One such example is the renowned Encyclopaedia Britannica of 1911, which is still considered to be exemplary. Another is the Catholic Encyclopedia, which, although in some entries a century old, remains highly valuable not only because, other than in places where faith does not permit, it tends to be fairly accurate, but also because of its many admissions against interest."

- Christ in Egypt, page 7

Quote:
"In reality, a number of the mythical motifs regarding Horus and other Egyptian deities startlingly resemble characteristics and events attributed to Jesus Christ, indicating that the gospel story is neither original nor historical. As may have been expected, many of these correspondences are not widely and neatly found in encyclopedia entries and textbooks, so they have often been dismissed without adequate study and with extreme prejudice."

- Christ in Egypt, page 44

Quote:
"When reading this type of synopsis of the myth of Horus, one needs to keep in mind that it is the contention of those who claim Jesus to be a mythical construct that bits and pieces of the myths of these various other gods were pulled out of context and woven together to create the gospel story. One does not find, for instance, this tale as above outlined in an ancient Egyptian encyclopedia. Those who have been attempting to explain the creation of the Christ myth have been back-engineering the story. In other words, in explaining the various mythical motifs utilized in the gospel story, some have retold the story utilizing the original god or gods, in a gospel-like manner.

"Let us take some examples. When it is said in the paragraph above from ZG that Horus was "crucified," it was not part of his myth that he was held down and nailed to a cross. Rather, Horus is depicted in cruciform, with his arms outstretched, as we find in images, and as Egyptologist James Bonwick says, "With outstretched arms he is the vault of heaven." (Egyptian Belief and Modern Thought, p. 157) What comparative mythologists and Jesus mythicists are claiming is that these various mythical motifs already in existence as being revered long prior to the Christian era, such as the god with outstretched arms, were utilized in the weaving of the Christ myth . We are not necessarily stating that the Christians took an already fully formed myth and simply scratched out Horus's name and wrote in Jesus. There is no doubt that these mythical motifs were combined with Jewish scriptures, rendering a unique telling of the tale in the gospel story. However, the preceding mythical motifs remain and are real, and were commonly known enough prior to the creation of the Christ myth that they were quite likely utilized therein.

"It is a bit misleading, therefore, to say that Horus was "crucified," as the word "crucified" invokes the image of a man being held down and nailed to a cross. However, one could say of the "God Sun" that "he" was crossified, at the vernal equinoxes - and that motif, we contend, is at the basis of the gospel "crucifixion."

viewtopic.php?p=5619#p5619

Quote:
"As is the case with the other main characteristics of Horus that have been associated with Jesus, the claim that Horus had 12 "disciples" has been assailed because it cannot be easily found in encyclopedias, to which detractors run in their haste to find debunking material. It appears necessary to repeat continuously that searching through encyclopedias will not yield satisfactory results when it comes to "deep research," particularly since until lately most of the encyclopedias in English were written and edited by Christians who would hardly be keen on including obvious parallels to Christ in their various entries on gods and men.

"Moreover, flipping through encyclopedias will not make an expert of anyone, so be wary when you read these hasty rebuttals from fervent believers - they are generally entirely inadequate, representing a cursory scan by those who are clearly not experts. They may sound impressive at first to the untrained eye, because many people won't even do the 10 minutes' work that these "experts" have put into their research. Nevertheless, with serious, time-consuming research digging into long-forgotten and buried archives, most if not all of these shallow encyclopedia-rebuttals can be put to rest, as demonstrated in my previous posts.

"Again, the claim that Horus was never associated with 12 individuals, whether or not we call them "disciples," is another of these erroneous assertions based on encyclopedia-scanning. "

viewtopic.php?p=5667#p5667

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:32 am 
Made an update on the wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.M._Murdock#Reception


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 12:06 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
What did you change?

It's a good idea to post it here in case the detractors try to "undo" whatever one has tried to add or fix.

Acharya's Wiki page needs a lot of work. It reads like it was written by critics & others who've never read her work.

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 9:34 pm 
Quote:
Robert M. Price wrote a critical review of Murdock's first book. He has, however, revised this critique, after having retracted it previously from his website, for reasons unknown currently. He has been supportive of her subsequent work, promoting Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled in a recommended reading list of Dr. Price's along with promoting the same book in The Pre-Nicene New Testament: Fifty-Four Formative Texts penning the foreword to Who Was Jesus: Fingerprints of the Christ and writing a positive review of Christ in Egypt.


The changes I made are in bold


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:43 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Oh good, thanks for doing that, VOR.

I can tell you that Dr. Price didn't revise that book review of The Christ Conspiracy, he simply removed it from his own website in 2004 because he could no longer stand behind it anymore. It was a petulant review full of knee-jerk reactions and professional jealousy that overlooked many of the great things brought up in that book - many things Dr. Price himself agrees with.

Dr. Price also got tired of it being used to bludgeon Acharya to death. Frankly, I think he became embarrassed by it. It was not any sort of review becoming of such a great scholar. He has since that first review come to his senses, as you rightly pointed out, and written positive reviews of her later works and even written the foreword to Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ.

This is what has been up on Price's website ever since he removed it in 2004:
Code:
"Until a revision can be posted, the review of The Christ Conspiracy is no longer available on this site."
http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/rev_murdock.htm

Here's the thread with Acharya & Dr. Price on the Infidel Guy Radio Show

Dr. Robert Price's 'Christ Conspiracy' Review

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 18, 2011 10:27 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Researchers Say Wikipedia has Gender Bias

"University of Minnesota researchers say that there’s a gender bias on the popular online encyclopedia, Wikipedia....."

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:49 pm 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:22 pm
Posts: 5
I was thinking to set up a Mythicism.
"If it's not on Wikipedia, it doesn't exist"
I just wouldn't know how to go about doing it. I signed up for Wikipedia, but it's more complicated than I previously imagined!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:08 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
We certainly appreciate the effort, KingRedcastle. It certainly can be complicated because they talk a Wiki language over there. My advice would be to start small and just learn the ropes. You'll need to earn their trust and credibility or they'll just ban you before you ever get a chance to really do anything.

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 12:25 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Wow, I am in total shock: :shock:

I was just about to address this particular Wiki Christ myth theory page and the utter biases in another thread, which I will still do, but to my surprise someone finally added information about the mythicist position. I don't know who did that but, they just did it yesterday so, they're going to need all the support they can get to keep it up there due to all the biased Christians and even biased atheists trying to either change it or remove it altogether.

I'm going to quote it in case it disappears:

Quote:
The terms "mythicism" and "mythicist" may be new to many people, even though they have been around for a couple of centuries. "Mythicist" was first coined in German and English to describe people who doubted the historical veracity of the Judeo-Christian Bible. The word is used these days particularly to define scholars, researchers and others who investigate whether or not the New Testament character of Jesus Christ was a real, historical person or a myth along the lines of the gods, godmen and heroes of other cultures, such as Hercules, Mithra or Horus.
D.M. Murdock/Acharya S, in "What is a Mythicist?

Mythicism represents the perspective that many gods, goddesses and other heroes and legendary figures said to possess extraordinary and/or supernatural attributes are not "real people" but are in fact mythological characters. Along with this view comes the recognition that many of these figures personify or symbolize natural phenomena, such as the sun, moon, stars, planets, constellations, etc., constituting what is called "astromythology" or "astrotheology." As a major example of the mythicist position, it is determined that various biblical characters such as Adam and Eve, Satan, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, King David, Solomon and Jesus Christ, among other entities, in reality represent mythological figures along the same lines as the Egyptian, Sumerian, Phoenician, Indian, Greek, Roman and other godmen, who are all presently accepted as myths, rather than historical figures.
D. M. Murdock/Acharya S. in Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection (2009)

I will also post the comment from the 'discussion' page:

Quote:
The most negatively biased content:

"Undoubtedly, this is the most negatively biased content I have ever read on the topic of Christ mythology. It appears to have been written by a Christian apologist with a clear agenda to clumsily discredit all scholarly work by mythologists with nothing more than quotes from other biased Christians, and most of those quotes rely heavenly on Argumentum ad Hominum (attacking the person instead of the issue) fallacy insults against anyone who states that "no man named Jesus Christ, as depicted in the Gospels, ever existed". Never once has the author of the topic used scientific methodology to prove his assertion, and never once did he attempt to disprove through the use of scientific methodology, logic, or reason even one scientifically demonstrable claim of any mythologist, past or present. This topic should have been named "Anti Christ-Myth propaganda" (as it contains an absolute lacunae of readily available scientific theory or fact on this topic.) Most of the text needs to be replaced with demonstrably provable claims of the mythologists themselves, links to sites on mythology, etc., so that the readers can actually read exactly what the mythologists are really saying, (along with their evidence), rather than allowing an anti-mythologist Christian dominate the topic with biased personal opinions and quotes from mostly unqualified, unscholarly, Christian book authors. In short, give readers both sides of the debate, and let them decide for themselves what to believe." ---Ersatzreifen 24 February, 2013

So far, Ersatzreifen has been given a thumbs up:

Quote:
You might have a point. The content of this article has been questioned before, see the discussion above. On Wikipedia in similar situations, you can add a Template:POV above the article. Here on Wikiquote you can add a Template:Npov template, if you want. -- Mdd (talk) 00:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

If Ersatzreifen joins here or reads this I hope he or she will add "The Mythicist Position" in bold just above "Mythicism represents the perspective..."

Try to work in the mythicist position video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63BNKhGAVRQ

Also try to get these links added:

Why I am A Mythicist

The "No Serious Mythicist Scholar" Fallacy

The Mythicist Challenge Petition [Draft]

Over 80 Rebuttals to Bart Ehrman's Anti-Mythicist Book 'Did Jesus Exist?'

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 4:27 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Wikipedia and its editors are engaging in cyber-stalking and bullying behavior. Acharya's Wiki page reads like it was written by Christian apologists, critics and trolls. A little help please...

"Dorothy" is back up again, and footnotes 1 & 2 should be removed, AGAIN. Whoever keeps doing that should be BANNED from working on this article. Please remove all mentions of "Dorothy" from the article talk page too. There should never be ANY mentions of "Dorothy" anywhere at all - EVER. Critics insist on spreading around what they think is Acharya's real name basically to harass and intimidate her to get her to shut up and stop producing her work on the subject of Astrotheology. Acharya has contacted Wikipedia and asked them to remove it but, they REFUSE!!! It's just evil and conniving. I think it's time to sue.

The meaning of "Acharya" should be more reflective of the information in the link below as "Acharya" means many things - teacher, master, priest of the sun, guru etc."

Why does Acharya S use a pen name?

Quote:
2009

"Just an FYI - I HAVE NEVER REVEALED MY FULL NAME IN PUBLIC. If you see a site claiming to know my "real name," do not believe it - and do not send me familiar "howdy, yada, yada" messages using it. The attempts at outing my personal information are entirely against my will by typical disrespecters of persons, and are obviously designed to endanger me and my family."

- Acharya S

Quote:
November 18, 2013:

"Dear friends: If ever you see someone pretending to know my "real name," please feel free to ignore that person. I have never revealed my first name publicly, and anyone pretending to know my real name is doing so fallaciously. In most cases, what people believe is my real name is being used in order to abuse, terrorize and bully me into submission. I don't appreciate the contemptuous familiarity AT ALL. To those who think they know my real name, no, you don't. You have heard an internet rumor but nothing from me. Those who are using what they think is my real name in internet writings are doing so unethically and with hostility against my person. That sort of poor character should not be given any credence or credibility."

"I have been advised by LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES not to disclose ANY personal information, because I was the victim of VIOLENT CRIME that included the felonious abduction of my small child. So, any and all attempts at publicizing what is believed to be my real name will be construed as a form of TERRORISM and BULLYING. "

- Acharya S


https://www.facebook.com/acharyasanning ... 9762361439

Quote:
January 8, 2014

"For the past several years, editors and vandals on Wikipedia have been tormenting me and my family, including endangering us with private information, and posting an endless stream of libelous and threatening remarks. My friends/supporters and I engaged successfully in a stressful, yearlong battle previously, now to no avail. I've circulated my problem with some lawyers, but I really need some help from a sympathetic legal eagle. If you can help with a possible emotional distress/libel action, please contact me ASAP at acharya_s@yahoo.com.

It's difficult enough to do this challenging work, with few resources and only word-of-mouth publicity. I do not need the constant menace from this website hanging over my head."

- Acharya S

https://www.facebook.com/acharyasanning ... ream_ref=1

Now this was already dealt with in the past:

Quote:
"It's not Wikipedia's job to find out what her real name is then publish it, while scouring Google Books to find a quote to make it stick. Wikipedia is the prominent source for this information and that's backwards. ... WP:BLP and WP:V are core policy and they both apply here.

* Biographies of living persons (BLPs) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy.
* Be wary of feedback loops, in which material in a Wikipedia article gets picked up by a source, which is later cited in the Wikipedia article to support the original edit."
- James, 16 April 2010

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Achar ... Name_Issue

Quote:
"The vast majority of references to this person do not mention the disputed name. The subject expresses a clear preference against, which can be verified by any OTRS volunteer at ticket 2010010110011483. Whether intentionally or not you are antagonising the subject for no obvious encyclopaedic benefit, since the article is essentially about the work done under the pen name anyway."
- Guy, 30 April 2010

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Achar ... preference

Quote:
"There are certain things which a subject has a right to be the authority on. Her own name should be fairly high on that list ... the subject has specified that she is made exceptionally uncomfortable by the printing of her alleged first name."
- Tom Morris, 13 December 2013

"Why is it so important to put her "real name" in the article? She does not use it, she prefers her initials. Per WP:BLPNAME: When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context.
- Raquel Baranow, 26 December 2013"

"There simply are not reliable sources for her first name. The fact that this a contentious issue is reason enough to exclude her first name."
- John Reaves, 26 December 2013

"Acharya S responded on her Facebook page that due to her occupation she feels duress from stalkers knowing her "actual name." Per WP:BLPNAME: When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. I ask that we remove the name."
- Raquel Baranow, November 2013

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Achar ... ctual_name

Here is the latest example posted at the 'Christ Myth Theory' page:

Quote:
"(D.M. Murdock: included her first name as she sometimes uses that in her books)"
- Radath, 1 February 2014

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... on=history

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myt ... _Acharya_S

That quote by Radath above is completely false as Acharya herself explained in the quotes above.

Other work that needs to be done at Wiki:

* Please remove "Masks of Christ" and James McGrath, Mark Foreman, Joel McDurmon and Mike Licona as they are only cited to get free advertizing to sell their Christian apologist books and are not in any way experts on the work by Acharya S due to the fact that they have never read her work; they simply misinform and assassinate the character of Acharya S and her work in order to shore-up their faith and euphoria at all costs - even if it means being dishonest.

^ Joel has no clue what he's talking about as Acharya addressed that years ago:

http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/vie ... 4835#p4835

* Remove: "Her theories have received negative commentaries from academic scholars.[7][8][9]"

This is another derogatory comment that should be removed because she's had positive commentary from academic scholars too. That criticism, were it legit, would belong in the "Reception" section anyway and Footnote 7 comes from a blog by Bart Ehrman and according to Wiki, blogs are not suppose to be used as 'reliable sources.' It looks like blogs are ok so long as they attack Acharya, proving the utter biases at play here. It's also contradictory to the quote below by Ehrman claiming her work is "not really even known" by scholars so, how could she receive "negative commentaries from academic scholars" if they are so unaware of it, which is it?, can't have it both ways. It just proves that the article was written by critics, hacks and trolls with a malevolent agenda. Why did the critics fail to provide this quote from Ehrman admitting he and NT scholars know nothing about mythicism?:

Quote:
"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. I think mythicists themselves find this very frustrating, that their work is not taken seriously – in fact is not really even known – by precisely the scholars they would most like to convince. But that’s just the way it is."

- Dr. Bart Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist as Part One
viewtopic.php?p=18804#p18804

Ehrman again:

"New Testament scholar Bart D. Ehrman discusses The Christ Conspiracy which he calls "the breathless conspirator's dream". Ehrman says "all of Acharya's major points are in fact wrong" and her book "is filled with so many factual errors and outlandish assertions that it is hard to believe the author is serious." Taking her as representative of some other writers about the Christ myth theory, he generalizes that "Mythicists of this ilk should not be surprised that their views are not taken seriously by real scholars, mentioned by experts in the field, or even read by them."[27]"

Why should those smears be cited when Acharya proved Bart Ehrman wrong and other academic scholars took her side? Ehrman also got caught LYING about Acharya's work by Richard Carrier. Historian Dr. Carrier defended Acharya S against the attacks by Bart Ehrman but, apparently, that's not worth citing ... only the trash against her is.

The phallic 'Savior of the World' hidden in the Vatican
http://www.freethoughtnation.com/contri ... tican.html

and

'Bart Ehrman and the Quest of the Historical Jesus of Nazareth: An Evaluation of Ehrman s Did Jesus Exist?'

Publisher: American Atheist Press; April 2013
(ISBN: 978-1578840199)
http://www.amazon.com/Ehrman-Quest-Hist ... uthbeknown

The book above should also be added to the "Publications" section since 'Acharya S' is cited as one of the authors. Citation 36 is provided here as nothing more than a smear and must be removed. Ehrman's book 'Did Jesus Exist?' does not deserve its own Wiki article either. Dr. Robert Price, a 30-year scholar with two Ph.D's, called Ehrman's book a "HACK JOB."

Over 80 Rebuttals to Bart Ehrman's Anti-Mythicist Book 'Did Jesus Exist?'
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1149&p=25719#p25719

Footnote 8 is from Mike Licona and should be in the 'Reception' section, where it used to be, not the opening section. Plus, her response to Licona http://www.truthbeknown.com/licona.htm has been removed along with her responses to others.

Footnotes 9 and 33 are exactly the same and come from Dr. Price's critique of her first book from 1999 and is outdated and irrelevant as he removed that review himself in around 2004 - 10 years ago. He now supports her work. Footnotes 7, 8 & 9 only serve as smears to attack her.

Wiki has refused to allow positive comments from 30 year scholars such as:

Quote:
"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
http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/ ... _egypt.htm

Quote:
"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. Kenneth L. Feder, Professor of Archaeology

The opening statement should read:

D.M. Murdock, also known by her pen name Acharya S, is an author and one of the leading modern proponents of the Christ myth theory, the mythicist position and astrotheology. She has authored several books in support of the those subjects and operates the websites named Truth be Known, Freethought Nation, Freethought Examiner and her publishing company, Stellar House Publishing. Acharya S/Murdock created the first succinct, clearly explained comprehensive position for mythicists known as the mythicist position.

In her various books, she describes the New Testament as a work of mythic fiction within a historical setting. She claims that the story of Jesus Christ is a retelling of various pagan myths, representing "astrotheology", or the story of the Sun, and also incorporates the science of archaeoastronomy. She asserts the pagans understood the stories to be myths, but Christians obliterated evidence to the contrary by destroying and controlling literature.

She argues that Christianity is founded on earlier myths and the characters depicted in Christianity are based upon Roman, Greek, Egyptian, and other myths and that the canonical gospels represent a middle to late 2nd-century CE creation utilizing Old Testament "prophetic" scriptures as a blueprint, in combination with a collage of other, older Pagan and Jewish concepts, and that Christianity was thereby created in order to compete with the other popular religions of the time.

Murdock compares Jesus' history to other "savior-gods" such as Mithra, Horus, Adonis, Krishna, Quetzalcoatl, and Odin, claiming the similarities result from a common source: the myth of the sun-god or solar deity.

Acharya's work was used significantly in the documentary entitled, Zeitgeist part 1, which was viewed over 300 million times worldwide in nearly three dozen languages.

(The critics used to cite historian Dr. Chris Forbes until Acharya wrote a rebuttal, which debunked him so completely that now, they removed it altogether both Forbes and her response - lord forbid anybody see Acharya debunk these academic scholars with primary sources and scholar commentary on them: Rebuttal to Dr. Chris Forbes concerning 'Zeitgeist, Part 1')

In the "Life" section it should say "...American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Greece where Acharya served as trench master in Crete where she performed archaeology work.12

Acharya S/DM Murdock is the Co-Chairperson for the "Human Rights for Atheists, Agnostics and Secularists" organization, the first project of which is a petition to abolish blasphemy laws. Murdock and the others have gotten many celebrities to sign the petition.

As blasphemy laws claim more victims, petition gains support from celebrities

http://blasphemylaws.net

UN "Blasphemy Resolution"
viewtopic.php?p=29158#p29158

In the "Writing career" section:

"As a writer she publishes under the title of acharya, a term from Hinduism for the teacher or leader of a religious group.[13]"

So here we go again, another jab as even Wiki's own source for that in the footnote section doesn't say "leader of a religious group":

Footnote 13: "Narayanan, Vasudha (2010). Hinduism. Understanding Religions series. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group. p. 50. ISBN 978-1-4358-5620-2. "The term acharya usually denotes the formal head of a monastery, sect, or subsect, or a teacher who initiates a disciple into a movement."

Still, it is not something Acharya S takes seriously as explained here: Why does Acharya S use a pen name?

Publications

Murdock, D.M. (as Acharya S) (1999). The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold. Kempton, Illinois: Adventures Unlimited Press. ISBN 0-932813-74-7.
Murdock, D.M. (as Acharya S) (2004). Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled. Kempton, Illinois: Adventures Unlimited Press. ISBN 1-931882-31-2.
Murdock, D.M. (2007). Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ. Stellar House Publishing. ISBN 978-0-9799631-0-0.
Murdock, D.M. (2009). Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection. Stellar House Publishing. ISBN 978-0-9799631-1-7.
Murdock, D.M. (2009). The Gospel According to Acharya S. Stellar House Publishing. ISBN 978-0-9799631-2-4.
Murdock, D.M. (2011). Kindle e-book Jesus as the Sun throughout History. Stellar House Publishing.

Acharya S/Murdock has two chapters in the 2013 book, Bart Ehrman and the Quest of the Historical Jesus of Nazareth: An Evaluation of Ehrman s Did Jesus Exist?. Publisher: American Atheist Press ISBN 978-1578840199

Murdock, D.M. (2014). Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver. Stellar House Publishing. ISBN 978-0979963186

-------

There really should be a section entitled, the Mythicist Position:

"Mythicism represents the perspective that many gods, goddesses and other heroes and legendary figures said to possess extraordinary and/or supernatural attributes are not "real people" but are in fact mythological characters. Along with this view comes the recognition that many of these figures personify or symbolize natural phenomena, such as the sun, moon, stars, planets, constellations, etc., constituting what is called "astrotheology." As a major example of the mythicist position, various biblical characters such as Adam and Eve, Satan, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, King David, Solomon & Jesus Christ, among other figures, in reality represent mythological characters along the same lines as the Egyptian, Sumerian, Phoenician, Indian, Greek, Roman and other godmen, who are all presently accepted as myths, rather than historical figures."

- Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection (2009), page 12

Mythicist Position
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Acha ... t_Position

What is a Mythicist?
http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/mythicist.html

Evemerist vs. Mythicist Position
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2160

Why I am A Mythicist
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4344

The Mythicist Position video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63BNKhGAVRQ

-------

Zeitgeist Part 1

As a related aside, the Zeitgeist Wiki page also contains errors and omissions and reads like it was written by critics of the movie. Some omissions are:

In the section, "Regarding the origins of Christianity," citations 23, 24 and 25 are all missing the responses that have been removed. They should never have been removed as, without the responses, the section misleads the readers.

Response to 23:

Skeptic Mangles ZEITGEIST (and Religious History)
http://stellarhousepublishing.com/skept ... geist.html

Response to 24:

Rebuttal to Dr. Chris Forbes concerning 'Zeitgeist, Part 1'
http://truthbeknown.com/chrisforbeszeitgeist.html

Response to 25:

Mark Foreman - REFUTED
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=3977

-------

Christ Myth Theory

Another related aside, parts of the Christ Myth Theory also read like it was written by critics.

* The following quote belongs in the 'Criticism' section not the opening:

"Proponents of the Christ myth theory constitute a tiny minority of modern historical-critical biblical scholarship.[6][7] According to American New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman, "virtually every competent scholar of antiquity" now agrees that Jesus existed.[8] A strong consensus thus favors the historicity of Jesus and stands against the Christ myth theory.[9][10][11][12][13]"

There's a rebuttal to those claims at Acharya's forum anyway: Religion and the Ph.D.: A Brief History

* First of all, Acharya/Murdock should come before Rene Salm as she is far more notable and popular, plus, the fact that Rene Salm is not a mythicist.

* It's a misrepresentation of Acharya's work to claim she: "revives the early 19th century theories of Godfrey Higgins and Robert Taylor," as that sounds like it was written by another critic who has not read her work - like something McGrath (above) would claim. So, that paragraph should read:

Acharya S/D.M. Murdock maintains the position that the canonical gospels represent a middle to late 2nd-century creation utilizing Old Testament "prophetic" scriptures as a blueprint, in combination with a collage of other, older Pagan and Jewish concepts, and that Christianity was thereby fabricated in order to compete with the other popular religions and politics of the time.

* "Her views have been challenged by other mythicists such as Richard Carrier."

So what? He has never actually proven anything of her false probably due to the fact that Carrier has also never read her work. This is just another jab to attack Acharya.

* Acharya is the ONLY mythicist who has created a comprehensive mythicist position and it should be posted in the 'Christ Myth Theory' (CMT) as well as on her own Wiki page. In fact, Acharya deserves her own section at the CMT article:

Quote:
The Mythicist Position:

"Mythicism represents the perspective that many gods, goddesses and other heroes and legendary figures said to possess extraordinary and/or supernatural attributes are not "real people" but are in fact mythological characters. Along with this view comes the recognition that many of these figures personify or symbolize natural phenomena, such as the sun, moon, stars, planets, constellations, etc., constituting what is called "astrotheology." As a major example of the mythicist position, it is determined that various biblical characters such as Adam and Eve, Satan, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, King David, Solomon and Jesus Christ, among other entities, in reality represent mythological figures along the same lines as the Egyptian, Sumerian, Phoenician, Indian, Greek, Roman and other godmen, who are all presently accepted as myths, rather than historical figures."

- Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection, page 12

What is a Mythicist?
http://stellarhousepublishing.com/mythicist.html

The Mythicist Position video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63BNKhGAVRQ

Evemerist vs. Mythicist Position
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2160

Why I am A Mythicist
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4344

Religion and the Ph.D.: A Brief History
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=3110

Scholars and others who've actually read Acharya's books are quite supportive of her work:

"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
http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/ ... _egypt.htm

"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

"I can recommend your work whole-heartedly!"
- Dr. Robert Eisenman, James the Brother of Jesus and The New Testament Code, RobertEisenman.com

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

"Acharya S has done a superb job in bringing together the rich panoply of ancient world mythology and culture, and presenting it in a comprehensive and compelling fashion."
- Earl Doherty, review of 'Christ Conspiracy'
http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/BkrvTCC.htm

"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, North Park Seminary, Chicago, HollywoodJesus.com

"Thirty years ago, when in divinity school, I might have had second thoughts about becoming an Episcopal priest if a book like D.M. Murdock's 'Who Was Jesus?' had been available to me."
- Bob Semes, Retired university professor of History and Religion, Founder and Executive Director of The Jefferson Center

"...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, Presbyterian Church, Houston, TX

"...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
viewtopic.php?p=29432#p29432

"The Christ Conspiracy—very, very scholarly and wholly researched—is a book for today..."
- Rev. B. Strauss, ex-Catholic Priest, Chicago, IL

Quote:
"Again, if you cannot keep the malicious hate speech, derogation and falsehoods by people who have not even read my books off this page, I request that it be deleted for good. I will be posting this information in my blog and circulating it to draw attention to the problem. If one or more of my supporters were allowed to work on the page, that would provide one solution. Their banning is egregious, as it leaves me open to constant LIBEL."

- D.M. Murdock/Acharya S

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:02 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
I saw this news piece this morning and felt I needed to post it here because it is relevant to us here as we have our own horrendous experience with Wikipedia and some editors at Acharya's Wiki page. People who try to help set the record straight and remove the libel, smears and falsehoods get banned and their edits deleted just as described in the video in the link below. Acharya's Wiki page reads like it was written by critics who know absolutely nothing about her or her work, plus, it appears that some editors may even be getting paid to ruin her Wiki page. I would guess possibly by: "WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia."

I'd like to see the video added to Youtube but you can view the video in the link below:

Dark Side of Wikipedia

Full Measure: The Dark Side of Wikipedia

90% of Wikipedia medical entries are inaccurate

six in ten articles on Wikipedia contain factual errors

The dark side of Wikipedia

Wikipediocracy

Full Measure Episode 29: April 17, 2016 (P1)


_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 41 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Truth Be Known | Stellar House Publishing
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Live Support