Welcome Jandus. You sound an awful lot like me. I've done a lot of research myself and still am doing it. I go over Acharya, Spong, Price, Harpur, etc with a highlighter, even take notes. Sometimes I feel I'm obsessed by it. I even have notes in the margins and alike. It gets to be insane sometimes and sometimes my older son accuses me of being obsessed.
Somehow I knew through everything I've studied Acharya was right, as well as Harpur, Spong, and all the rest of them. In the last few years, I've come to the same conclusion as Price- there is no historical Jesus or if there ever was, he's too buried in myth to find. It's nothing but rewritten myth and doesn't seem real to me anymore- or at least no more real than reading a North and South or Hercules.
Which has led me sort, only in a more mature outlook, back to my childhood thoughts, but also to Humanism. Not to mention, years of observing the religious and how cruel they can be to others.
However, just as I was ashamed to call myself a Christian, when I was one, due to their behaviours, I'm ashamed to call myself an atheist because of some of the behaviours I see there. I prefer the term non-theist.
I don't know what she's expounded on, but the remaining questions I had left, she answered and then some- then I came up with new question.
So, yes, I guess we are in the same boat.
So again, welcome aboard.
You just reminded me that I really need to expand my library on this topic. It's been years since I really sat down and went over the material and I'd really like to do it again - I'm sure I'll be grabbing Acharya's books to see where that goes.
I couldn't agree more with you regarding atheists. I do consider myself one but the more I listen to other atheists, for the most part, the more disgusted I get. Don't get me wrong, there are, I'm sure, quite a few out there that are respectful and are really around to learn but over at IIDB I constantly asked myself: "Is this really what an atheist is?" - Honestly, they're just as closeminded and sure of themselves as the christians they demonize IMHO.
Now, to ask a question that I did see over there in one of the threads - I remember one of the members pulled Acharya's bibliography and was tearing it apart due to the age of some of the scholars - Massey and Kuhn being among them. Since when does the age of a scholar's work have anything to do with the argument being presented?
But to be fair, have modern scholars truely answered the points that both of them (and I'm sure Acharya) has brought up? From what I've read it's always just the usual ad hominem attacks and red herrings that have absolutely nothing to do with the points being made and more about how 'incredibly ridiculous' they sound.
Educate me a bit