http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0932813747//ref=pd_ka_1/104-5706548-4111142?v=glance&s=books&vi=reviewsYou Are Being Lied Too, April 1, 2001
Drawing together an amazing amount of research, Acharya S...demolishes the facade of Christianity, showing that it is 100% mythology.
From the Author
"The Christ Conspiracy" contains over 1200 footnotes that cite archaeological, historical and literary documentation by a wide variety of sources, including many Christian authorities extending back to the beginning of the Christian era. The book is a scholarly work that presents scientific analysis and facts, not "opinions."
The dating of the gospels to the last quarter of the second century is based on the work of Judge Charles Waite, from his detailed study in "History of the Christian Religion to the Year Two Hundred," which shows conclusively that the canonical gospels could not have existed earlier than 170-180 CE. Another excellent source of this information is Cassell's "Supernatural Religion," an 1100-page tome that goes into great detail, analyzing early Church fathers' works line by line.
Excerpted from The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold by Acharya S. Copyright © 1999. Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved
Regarding the dating of the canonical gospels, lawyer Joseph Wheless states:
"The gospels are all priestly forgeries over a century after their pretended dates.... As said by the great critic, Salomon Reinach, 'With the exception of Papias, who speaks of a narrative by Mark, and a collection of sayings of Jesus, no Christian writer of the first half of the second century (i.e., up to 150 A.D.) quotes the Gospels or their reputed authors.'"
In "The Christ Myth," John Remsburg elucidates:
"The Four Gospels were unknown to the early Christian Fathers. Justin Martyr, the most eminent of the early Fathers, wrote about the middle of the second century. His writings in proof of the divinity of Christ demanded the use of these Gospels, had they existed in his time. He makes more than 300 quotations from the books of the Old Testament, and nearly one hundred from the Apocryphal books of the New Testament; but none from the four Gospels. Rev. Giles says: 'The very names of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, are never mentioned by him (Justin) - do not occur once in all his writings.'"
And Judge Charles Waite says:
"At the very threshold of the subject, we are met by the fact, that nowhere in all the writings of Justin, does he once so much as mention any of these gospels. Nor does he mention either of their supposed authors, except John. Once his name occurs; not, however, as the author of a gospel, but in such a connection as raises a very strong presumption that Justin knew of no gospel of John the Apostle."
Waite further states:
"No one of the four gospels is mentioned in any other part of the New Testament.... No work of art of any kind has ever been discovered, no painting, or engraving, no sculpture, or other relic of antiquity, which may be looked upon as furnishing additional evidence of the existence of those gospels, and which was executed earlier than the latter part of the second century. Even the exploration of the Christian catacombs failed to bring to light any evidence of that character.... The four gospels were written in Greek, and there was no translation of them into other languages, earlier than the third century."
The Gospel of Luke (170 CE)
The Gospel of Luke is acknowledged by early church fathers to be of a late date. As Waite states:
"...Jerome admits that not only the Gospel of Basilides, composed about A.D. 125, and other gospels, admitted to have been first published in the second century, were written before that of Luke, but even the Gospel of Apelles also, which was written not earlier than A.D. 160."
The Gospel of Mark (175 CE)
Like Waite, Mead also does not put Mark first: "It is very evident that Mt. and Lk. do not use our Mk., though they use most the material contained in our Mk..."
The Gospel of John (178 CE)
The Gospel of John is thought by most authorities to be the latest of the four, but Waite provides a compelling argument to place it third and reveals its purpose not only in refuting the Gnostics but also in establishing the primacy of the Roman Church:
"So strong is the evidence of a late date to this gospel, that its apostolic origin is being abandoned by the ablest evangelical writers.... Both Irenaeus and Jerome assert that John wrote against Cerinthus. Cerinthus thus flourished about A.D. 145. here is evidence that in the construction of this gospel, as in that of Matthew, the author had in view the building up of the Roman hierarchy, the foundations of which were then (about A.D. 177-89) being laid.... There is a reason to believe that both were written in the interest of the supremacy of the Church of Rome."
The Gospel of Matthew (180 CE)
Although it was claimed by later Christian writers to be a "translation" of a manuscript written in Hebrew by the apostle Matthew, the Gospel of Matthew did not exist prior to the end of the second century and was originally written in Greek. As Waite says:
"The Greek Gospel of Matthew was a subsequent production, and either originally appeared in the Greek language, or was a translation of the Gospel of the Hebrews, with extensive changes and additions. There is reason to believe it to have been an original compilation, based upon the Oracles of Christ, but containing, in whole, or in part, a number of other manuscripts."
Book Description
Controversial and explosive, The Christ Conspiracy marshals an enormous amount of startling evidence that the religion of Christianity and Jesus Christ were created by members of various secret societies, mystery schools and religions in order to unify the Roman Empire under one state religion! This powerful book maintains that these groups drew upon a multitude of myths and rituals that already existed long before the Christian era and reworked them into the story the Christian religion presents today-known to most Westerners as the Bible. Author Acharya makes the case that there was no actual person named Jesus, but that several characters were rolled into one mythic being inspired by the deities Mithras, Heracles/Hercules, Dionysus and many others of the Roman Empire. She demonstrates that the story of Jesus, as portrayed in the Gospels, is nearly identical in detail to those of the earlier savior-gods Krishna and Horus, and concludes that Jesus was certainly neither original nor unique, nor was he the divine revelation. Rather, he represents the very ancient body of knowledge derived from celestial observation and natural forces. A book that will initiate heated debate and inner struggle, it is intelligently written and referenced. The only book of its kind, it is destined for controversy.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
