Freethought Nation

presented by Acharya S and TruthBeKnown.com, online since 1995

It is currently Sat May 25, 2013 9:31 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 398 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 6:38 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:24 pm
Posts: 4338
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
^ Here's a quote from that review:

Quote:
"I can understand why Ehrman would want to respond to the best material from the mythicist movement. If you're going to write a book critiquing a point of view, you ought to respond to its best defenders. I have mixed feelings about it, though, because although D.M. Murdock (aka Acharya) how been shown by many people (even Robert Price) to be utterly incompetent, she has nevertheless been very influential among internet mythicists where most of the movement is taking place. These are the people who need responses. They're reading people like D.M. Murdock and watching films like Zeitgeist and being convinced by it."

Well yeah, and for good reason.

The New Zeitgeist Part 1 Sourcebook Transcript (2010)

Rebuttal to Dr. Chris Forbes concerning 'Zeitgeist, Part 1'

Zeitgeist Part 1 & the Supportive Evidence

Here's just one example of the utter incompetence of Dr. Bart Errorman: The phallic 'Savior of the World' hidden in the Vatican

Maybe someone would post the above with the links as a comment to that review?

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 7:20 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:09 pm
Posts: 1956
On the second page of this Sam Harper's person other reviews, he admits: "Okay, I'll admit it. I'm a fundamentalist." I think we figured out why he's pretending to be an expert on my work and declaring me "utterly incompetent." What he meant to say is "utterly effective," which is why I'm being singled out all over the place.

It's amazing how desperate a fundamentalist must be to give a book four stars (Ehrman's) that essentially disproves his faith. Jesus is no longer the divine, supernatural Son of God and wonderworker but a mere mortal Jewish prophet who barely left a mark. But that's okay with this fundie, so long as the book bashes me!

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:01 am 
Offline
Hercules

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:46 am
Posts: 79
I did see that review on smelling good on amazon. Perhaps bought a used copy and was afraid of smoke smell or something? There are very interesting viewpoints that come up on the reviews, aren't there?

_________________
I am the Wind that blows over the Sea;
I am the Wave of the Deep;
I am the Bull of the Seven Battles;
I am the Eagle upon the rock;
I am a Tear of the Sun;


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 10:47 am 
Offline
Hercules

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:46 am
Posts: 79
Robert Tulip wrote:
Re Freke and Gandy, you may have seen Neil Godfrey's recent commentary at http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/27/ ... flections/

I enjoyed the commentary here, having never heard of the author before. Others good commentaries from blogs I have never heard of are linked to in the Carrier articles.

I must say that this discourse on the Peter/cock controversy has certainly "mushroomed".

_________________
I am the Wind that blows over the Sea;
I am the Wave of the Deep;
I am the Bull of the Seven Battles;
I am the Eagle upon the rock;
I am a Tear of the Sun;


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:04 am 
Offline
Hercules

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:46 am
Posts: 79
Tat Tvam Asi wrote:
VOR wrote:
Tat Tvam Asi wrote:
A Q specialist? Get the f**k out town Hoffman! A speculation specialist rather. Does this nimrod think that he's going to firm up Errorman's assertions about Q into something certain?








Thanks for posting this, Tat Tvam Asi. This is a very interesting hypothesis.

_________________
I am the Wind that blows over the Sea;
I am the Wave of the Deep;
I am the Bull of the Seven Battles;
I am the Eagle upon the rock;
I am a Tear of the Sun;


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:35 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:24 pm
Posts: 4338
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
OH SNAP, I didn't see this coming ... there weren't any comments to that review when I looked and now there are a dozen including one by Dr. Price and other outstanding responses by D. Martin, MW D. Sexton and Deirdre Simone. You guys rule! Special thanks for those comments! 8)

Quote:
Robert M. Price says:
"I once pointed out some difficulties in Acharya's first book, but she has progressed very far and most impressively in the decade since then. I can only admire her indefatigable and amazingly thorough research. Her books are filled with otherwise neglected important information. I tried my best to have her included in the one-time Jesus Project, but to no avail. If the JP is ever revived, and if I have anything to say about it, she is in like flint."

Robert M. Price

Quote:
MW says:
"Amen. It seems Ehrdman and his supporters are afraid to tackle and deal with her actual research and information. Instead they slander her and call her incompetent or unqualified as if that is all to be said and settles it. It doesn't."

Quote:
MW says:
"Here is a quote from another review of yours, "Okay, I'll admit it. I'm a fundamentalist." That explains a lot! But I have more to say:

I find your comments about Acharya S to be horribly insulting and slanderous. She is far from incompetent. Nobody has "shown this." You are full of it. I find Ehrman's and your own comments about mythicists to be incredibly close minded and arrogant. Their case against the literal existence of Jesus is hardly irrelevant. Ehrman has been proved wrong about everything he has said about D.M. Murdock's work and others yet the character assassination of her still goes on. His, yours, and other's defamation is sickening to me. This woman KNOWS what she is talking about and is NOT incompetent nor has anyone proved she is. To say so is a lie. She must really pose a threat to Ehrman and his supporters because he and others have gone out of their way to slander her. Have you even bothered to read anything she has written? Are you, Ehrman, and others afraid of her extremely well researched books being read at all? I suspect there is also some misogyny involved. It is very dishonest to dismiss someone when you really aren't familiar with their work at all. What is even worse is to spread lies which in fact has been done and is still being done. I have read works by authors from both sides of this issue not just hers alone. It sickens me how low members of the academic status quo will go when they feel they feel threatened because their arguments simply will not hold up under the proper scrutiny. Some of your comments are outright malicious as has those of the egotistical Ehrman. To slander and spread lies is not cool.

I hope Ms. Murdock will not mind me quoting her here. If so, I will delete this portion of my comment. It's just that she can express herself, her ideas, and defend herself much better than I can. I have nothing but the up most respect for this woman unlike Ehrman. yourself, and other detractors.

"What I demonstrate through thousands of pages put together over a period of almost 17 years online is simple:

The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and historical. A composite of multiple people is no one. When the mythological and midrashic layers are removed, there remains no "historical" core to the onion.

The "kernel" you are looking for - the nonexistent "historical" core to the onion - is a handful of sayings that are part of a genre called "Logia Iesou" or "Logia Kuriakou." These "Sayings of Jesus" existed BEFORE the common era and are attributable to many individuals. If we are to hang the gospel story on a handful of pre-existent sayings, we are in some slippery territory indeed. What percentage, then, of the gospel story is supposedly based on a "historical" figure? 10%? How is that stripped figure of relative nothingness a "real person?" As I have demonstrated in my books, practically the entire story can be explained by the stringing together of Old Testament scriptures, Pagan mythological motifs and pre-existent sayings that are part of an ancient genre of "logia."

I maintain that there remains nothing "historical" under these layers. That's not an "obsession," that's a position based on ALL the evidence and facts, in multiple languages from antiquity into the modern era, which I have spent countless hours bringing to the forefront, despite the constant calumny and misrepresentations of my work."

Quote:
D. Martin says:
"Sam...I take strong issue with your comments about DM Murdock. She is so "influential" because she is familiar IN DEPTH with scholarship from a variety of disciplines, and she articulates well a very logical and coherent argument for the mythicist position. She has published numerous responses and refutations to Ehrman's nonsense as well as others...but my suspicion is that you have not read her at all. Direct question: have you read any of her published works? Your honest answer must be: NO. And I know why...you are arrogant elitist who is in the same boat as Ehrman as a "credentialist." I hold an advanced degree in biblical studies and theology from Emory University/Candler School of Theology. A very reputable academic institution. I was a biblical expositor for over 25 years. I can assure you that the so-called "discipline" of biblical studies is NOT scientific, it is parochial and "a scholarship of convenience" just as Ehrman accuses mythicists of being. EVERY theory of NT epistemology is based on what can only be truthfully called conjecture...there are no original source documents, no extra-biblical proof of the existence of any NT authors (even Paul's authorship is questioned)...well, if you are an honest person, you know this. The ONLY way people like Ehrman can attack or criticize DM Murdock (or Carrier or Price) is to insult them, call them "uncredentialed" or "scholars of convenience"...and not actually deal with the actual research. You make an intersting statement..."Whenever a mythicist comes across a source that goes against their position, they claim it is an interpolation." I could make that same argument about Ehrman and other "credentialed" NT scholars. NT "scholarship" is only considered such by those already within the Christian tent. It does not merit academic respect. The only people who will claim that mythicism is not a valid interpretation of Christian religion are those who are Christian, and don't want their religion questioned. So...all of us dumb asses out here in internet world, where Acharya has such influence...well, to us you guys look like monkeys in a cage. But, we are not "credentialed" to be able to have an opinion, apparently. KMA! "

Quote:
M. Sexton says:
"Do not believe the negative reviews you have read about DM Murdock. A.k.a. (Acharya S.). Her work is not utterly incompetent, as posted by Bart Ehrman and Mr. Haper. Almost everything Bart Ehrman has criticized about her work is completely wrong and she has been able to show that Bart Ehrman is wrong. This is what happens when someone has pretended to have studied DM Murdocks work. She is the most positive, and influential person on these issues. This negative review on her work is completely WRONG and anyone who believes it is really missing out on her great work. I've been following her work for for a few years now. She and her work has always been able to debunk any negative reviews , if you take the chance to read her work and not take someone's uneducated guess about her work. If you take the chance and read her work, you will then know, she is the one who is correct on these issues. I recommend studying up on ANY issue you question about her work, due to someone's negative reviews. You will find out who is right. I guarantee it. "

Quote:
Deirdre Simone says:
"Mr. Harper, I don't seem to have the ability you have to know whether a book is worth reading by, as you put it, "...it smelled good". But I will use the old saying: "I smell a rat" to refer to your pathological unwarranted vicious attack on DM Murdoch/Acharya S. You doth protest too much. I suggest you go to her website TRUTHBEKNOWN.COM, if you don't want to read her monumentally researched books, and you will see for yourself how she surpasses any religious "scholars" reasearch in historical Jesus studies. It is time to look elsewhere, outside the New Testament, with its "frauds", "forgeries" and "misquotes" as Bart Ehrman discovered himself, to find the real or mythical Jesus. And that's where DM Murdoch/Acharya S goes, and to me, finds the truth. At first it was hard for me to believe a non-existent Jesus, but in my graduate studies in psychology I learned of something called "a paradigm shift" , it is a mental shift in the brain that breaks the grip of long-held beliefs that have been proven wrong. An example would be when humanity accepted that the earth was round and not flat. Ironically, it was Ehrman's books about the gospels inconsistencies that led me to read Acharya's CHRIST CONSPIRACY--which fortunately resulted in my own paradigm shift. My mind is free of dogma now and my free thoughts can easily pick out frauds and fools...and Murdoch is NOT one of them. "


elbuho1 wrote:

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 12:09 pm 
Offline
Hercules

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:46 am
Posts: 79
Freethinkaluva22 wrote:

Here's just one example of the utter incompetence of Dr. Bart Errorman: The phallic 'Savior of the World' hidden in the Vatican

Maybe someone would post the above with the links as a comment to that review?


It just dawned on me that the universally hated subject of grammar and sentence structure is what went wrong here. I was an ace at this in elementary school, but still wondered how it would ever affect my life. Now I know how it could!

Quote:
Bronze sculpture hidden in the Vatican treasury of the Cock, symbol of St. Peter.


What is the subject of the sentence: Bronze sculpture (of the Cock)
What is the predicate: hidden in the Vatican treasury, symbol of St. Peter

_________________
I am the Wind that blows over the Sea;
I am the Wave of the Deep;
I am the Bull of the Seven Battles;
I am the Eagle upon the rock;
I am a Tear of the Sun;


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 12:14 pm 
Offline
Hercules

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:46 am
Posts: 79
Freethinkaluva22 wrote:

Quote:
Deirdre Simone says:
you will see for yourself how she surpasses any religious "scholars" reasearch in historical Jesus studies. It is time to look elsewhere, outside the New Testament, with its "frauds", "forgeries" and "misquotes" as Bart Ehrman discovered himself, to find the real or mythical Jesus. And that's where DM Murdoch/Acharya S goes, and to me, finds the truth. At first it was hard for me to believe a non-existent Jesus, but in my graduate studies in psychology I learned of something called "a paradigm shift" , it is a mental shift in the brain that breaks the grip of long-held beliefs that have been proven wrong. An example would be when humanity accepted that the earth was round and not flat. Ironically, it was Ehrman's books about the gospels inconsistencies that led me to read Acharya's CHRIST CONSPIRACY--which fortunately resulted in my own paradigm shift. My mind is free of dogma now and my free thoughts can easily pick out frauds and fools...and Murdoch is NOT one of them.



Beautiful!

_________________
I am the Wind that blows over the Sea;
I am the Wave of the Deep;
I am the Bull of the Seven Battles;
I am the Eagle upon the rock;
I am a Tear of the Sun;


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 2:24 pm 
Offline
Thor

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 6:41 pm
Posts: 28
Troll aka Apologist aka Fortigurn aka Johnathan Burke Identified and caught deliberately MISREPRESENTING [LYING about] the claims of Mythicists[Again]!

This is the same person GodAlmighty took his thunderbolts to:
Bart Ehrman's Book 'Did Jesus Exist?'


Image

How could Ehrman possibly have read the books he cites?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 7:00 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:45 am
Posts: 525
^Yeah, I saw that too, but since I'm not familiar with Well's material, I'll just have to be a spectator on this. Thanks for linking. As I said, being wrong seems to be his modus operandi.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 8:11 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:09 pm
Posts: 1956
Would we be surprised if some such person turned out to be the assistant who provided Ehrman with the Cliff Notes about my book? And perhaps Earl Doherty's as well?

In the "Acknowledgements" section of his book, Ehrman thanks a number of people, including his students and "research assistants extraordinaire" Maria Doerfler and Jason Combs. By that fact alone, we know he did have research assistants, according to one of whom, it is alleged, Ehrman did not read the books in question but had them research for him.

In any event, this Burke person seems to have much vested in this enterprise. He could just as well be a very devoted fan of Ehrman's.

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:45 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:45 am
Posts: 525
That's the weird thing, he's voiced criticism against Ehrman before, so there seems to be no love loss. But you know what they say, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so, whatever.

Anyway, I had posted here earlier how myself and at least one paying member have had comments censored on Ehrman's site, comments which contained no objectionable material.

Seems Neil Godfrey has joined that club too, which makes me wonder how many others there are as well.

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/29/bart-ehrman-bans-this-comment-from-his-public-forum/

I know that in my own experience here at Freethoughtnation, we do NOT censor critical comments here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 1:55 pm 
Offline
Hercules

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:46 am
Posts: 79
A funny thing happened on the way to the forum...

Tat has a couple of times mentioned Roo.Bookaroo's derogatory comments. Last night I was surfing on amazon.com and found his lengthy review on The Christ Conspiracy, which was a book in itself and way too much for me to deal with.

I thought I would look around at some of his other book reviews and found one on Ken Humphreys' Jesus Never Existed. In fact, Roo.Bookaroo is the only review on amazon regarding this book and there were an astounding 45 comments on it.

Having noted that Roo often comments on his own reviews, I decided to take a look and found a debate between him and Kristopher R. Key over the historicity of Jesus with Roo taking the Mythicist position.

Whoever Key is, and it says that is his real name, he mopped the floor with Roo, apparently to the point that Roo later deleted some of his posts.

There was way too much there for me to closely read, but I somehow came up with the information that Key is from Georgia and says he does not hold a degree, but that this is only a hobby for him. However if you read his list of references and obvious familiarity with them, that is hard to believe.

Does anyone know who he might be? He sounds suspiciously like Ehrman himself!

The last post was made Dec. 29, 2011, though Key promises Roo to monitor the discussion to make sure that Roo does not go back and edit his responses (apparently he was caught doing so).

That this was a review on a book that answers Ehrman's question Did Jesus Exist? with Jesus Never Existed I found it very ironic, almost a practice session for a real debate of some kind.

Many, many scholars and authors are mentioned in the course of the discussion, including Ehrman, Carrier, and Price. And again, the high emphasis on degrees, peer review, and what publishing house was used. It was just strange in the context of happening immediately prior to the release of Ehrman's book.

Its a long read, but might be beneficial for someone else in the context of researching the exact arguments used for a historical Jesus.

_________________
I am the Wind that blows over the Sea;
I am the Wave of the Deep;
I am the Bull of the Seven Battles;
I am the Eagle upon the rock;
I am a Tear of the Sun;


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 2:18 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:09 pm
Posts: 1956
karmachameleon wrote:
It just dawned on me that the universally hated subject of grammar and sentence structure is what went wrong here. I was an ace at this in elementary school, but still wondered how it would ever affect my life. Now I know how it could!

Quote:
Bronze sculpture hidden in the Vatican treasury of the Cock, symbol of St. Peter.


What is the subject of the sentence: Bronze sculpture (of the Cock)
What is the predicate: hidden in the Vatican treasury, symbol of St. Peter

You are correct that my sentence was not grammatically elegant.

I seem to have done it that way in order to set apart "the Cock, Symbol of St. Peter," by breaking the lines up. If I were to rewrite it, I might make it something like:

Bronze phallic statue of a cock in the Vatican
(The cock is said to be a symbol of St. Peter)

Clumsier, but less ambiguous, although I thought the link break would suffice to set it apart. It is probable, however, that Ehrman and these others never even saw the caption before concluding that I had stated the statue, not the cock, was a symbol of Peter.

In the meantime, however, it wouldn't surprise me if the priapus gallinaceus was chosen as a symbol for Peter, for obvious reasons, including the cock but also the whole pater/peter/phallus connection elsewhere discussed. Moreover, the Vatican, seat of St. Peter's Papacy, would likely have displayed this artifact with this connection in mind, since it is interested in all things peter, so to speak.

The connection is suggestive, but I do not insist upon it. Nor did I state as much explicitly anywhere.

If not already done, someone like GA could do a more thorough study of this subject. (I apologize if I've overlooked it in any of your lengthy posts here. I'm severely time-constrained at the moment and somewhat weary.)

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 2:19 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:09 pm
Posts: 1956
As the title says, another response to Bart Ehrman. That's several down, with more to go!

Councils for God and the development of the biblical canon: Another response to Bart Ehrman

The bottom line is that, rather than having been set in stone by the infallible finger of God from the beginning, the biblical canon has been changed by men over a period greater than a millennium, and, indeed, to this day remains different in the Catholic and Protestant Bibles. These facts provided evidence that the Bible has a very human origin and does not represent "God's Inerrant Word" filled with "accurate history" written down by "infallibly inspired" scribes.

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 398 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group