Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 3568
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Post by neilgodfrey » Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:17 pm

xplosion wrote: you're probably already aware of this, but Robert Price has changed his mind about Acharya S and now considers her a developed and decent scholar even though she has not moved away from her astrotheological views

"To me, the most interesting aspect of Acharya’s work is her pursuit of old, now ignored theories by comparative religionists and mythologists suggesting that Christianity embodies a perennial theology of the heavenly bodies, their motion and the common reflection of this astrotheology in the myths of all nations. "
I have little argument with Price's own methods of argument. But despite what he says it is evident that Acharya is promoting more than a simple scholarly hypothesis. She certainly is not doing so in a scholarly manner when she accuses anyone critical of her work of being bigoted etc.

xplosion wrote: though I doubt she has ever heard of Acharya S, a "renegade" Israeli historian gives some indirect support to Acharya S hypothesis about Jesus being invented by northern israelites:

So who were the real authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls? Elior theorizes that the Essenes were really the renegade sons of Zadok, a priestly caste banished from the Temple of Jerusalem by intriguing Greek rulers in 2nd century B.C. When they left, they took the source of their wisdom — their scrolls — with them. "In Qumran, the remnants of a huge library were found," Elior says, with some of the early Hebrew texts dating back to the 2nd century B.C. Until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest known version of the Old Testament dated back to the 9th century A.D. "The scrolls attest to a biblical priestly heritage," says Elior, who speculates that the scrolls were hidden in Qumran for safekeeping.

http://content.time.com/time/world/arti ... z2xJiQcrCS
All of this is beside my own point. If Acharya - or Robert - were prepared to argue their hypotheses as hypotheses according to normal methods of logical principles and what is described as the hypothetico-deductive method (that Robert insists they do) then there would be no controversy. I would find such an engagement rewarding. But that's not how any of this is argued. We have logical fallacies and errors of fact and insults spat at us when we point these out -- suddenly we are "persecuting" or writing "hate" messages attacking them personally. And then we have this dogmatism that she/Robert "will be proved right". That's not how one approaches a scholarly investigation.

Robert has clearly expressed his view that someone such as myself is "wilfully" stubborn and blind to his "Truth". That's fundamentalism. That's cultism. It is not the way to engage in scholarly discussion. He persists in logical fallacies -- at least what the rest of the world agrees are logical fallacies. That makes a nonsense of his arguments.

It makes no difference what Price says about someone who has become a personal friend. His friendship only explains why he would want to backtrack on what he said before. It doesn't justify anything in relation to the fallacies and personal attacks on those who disagree or criticize her views.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science

xplosion
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2014 1:15 pm

Re: Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Post by xplosion » Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:10 pm

I posted the relatively complex Zadokite information not so much in response to you (other than to point out this trickle of potentially "new" hjstorical information though actually already well-known to previous researchers for centuries might in the end tend to help to confirm Acharya's take on the invention of Jesus) but also so as to put it up on this forum

going further and more simply put for those who might be interested, Justin Martyr, born in Judea, considered himself a gentile pagan convert. He never once quotes directly from Luke, Matthew, John or Mark to prove his points about Jesus. Instead he quotes hundreds of times from the Old Testament. Living and writing in Rome (died 160 AD), and even though he is considered the supreme Christian apologist of his day, he seems completely ignorant of the idea that Peter established the Roman church. If t was northern Israelites who actually wrote much of Paul, that might explain "Paul" ascribing Jesus to the line of Melchizedek (in keeping with the original Zadokite messiah blueprint/Last Jubilee document found among the Dead Sea Scrolls). Luke by using such words as deacon and physician may betray himself as a member of the Therapeutan order (the existence of which USED to be acknowledged by traditional historians, who often questioned whence they disappeared . . . the answer quite possibly being into the Christianity they created)

If you accept the idea of the Therapeuts as a sort of umbrella organization for a certain set of concepts (such as Logos or the Word, which the jewish historian Philo equated with the Therapeuts and going back all the through the college of Pythagoras to Pythagoras himself), the concept of Luke as a Therapeut essentially overseeing the creation of a religion and bringing together its disparate elements ultimately jibes quite well with how traditional historians view Luke: as the gospel that ties all the other gospels together, or corrects the other gospels inconsistencies or mistakes

though Luke itself creates inconsistencies including a major one that even the Jesus Seminar could not resolve -- that of Luke placing the birth of Jesus during the census of Quirinius, the problem being that historically this census appears to have occurred AFTER Herod died.

Luke refuses to grapple with the so-called Slaughter of the Innocents which is contained only in Matthew and nowhere else in history, Christian or otherwise. Josephus for instance you would THINK he'd have made mention of such a major Herod crime as killing all the infants in a region, since he lists many lesser Herod crimes. If such a thing had actually happened historically, you would THINK that there would have been a major uprising against Herod recorded by the historians of the day, as it is inconceivable the majority of the population would have taken this lying down. Luke does explicitly countermand (or conflict with) Matthew in one major instance: Matthew's claim hat the Jesus family fled to Egypt to escape the Herod's, whereas in Luke the family stays in Nazareth the entire time.

Luke also states that Jesus was praised in the temple immediately as the messiah after his birth; how did that escape the notice of Herod, who Matthew claims did not learn of the birth of jesus until the latter was about two years old?

User avatar
stephan happy huller
Posts: 1480
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Post by stephan happy huller » Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:34 pm

Isn't it amazing how all these jokers come at us one at a time like the bad guys in a low budget karate film. If there really was this army of nutbars who can't find a single flaw in anything Acharya has ever written, why haven't they taken over the forum in a coordinated assault? You know just swamp the forum with 10 or 15 of these zombies who repeat everything Acharya says. My guess is that all these characters - 'xplosion,' 'Maximos,' etc - all come down to Acharya, Robert Tulip and maybe another minion. I am starting to think 'unsuccessful cult' is a better description of this group.

What's the point of coming to this forum? I still don't get this. They don't have any ideas to share or better yet to be discussed in any reasonable manner. They don't want to have a rational discussion about their beliefs. Robert Tulip comes closest and that I think is because he uses his real name. When you use a fake name it's hard to be shamed by anyone. They have to see your face for you to feel real shame.

So on and on this continues. The drip, drip, drip of fake personalities all professing the virtues of this lady. I just don't get why they want to come here. It's not like they are going to convert anyone. They haven't had much luck anyway otherwise they wouldn't be wasting their time inventing new personalities and making appearances at a forum like this. A failed mystery cult is a better description of the group. It's pathetic.

And the fact that Acharya can't show her real face here is another odd thing. All these 'minions' are on this evangelizing mission but the 'great leader' is always too busy to actually show her face. Really? What's she doing? She's on the phone with the Dalai Lama? There is an obvious concerted effort in this small group to penetrate the forum. I find it difficult to believe that the 'Grand Master' isn't aware of this 'outreach effort.'

I'd bet almost anything she's one of these 'made up personalities.' The manner in which they take personally the scorn directed at the work of another person is so unusual.
Everyone loves the happy times

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5377
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Post by Peter Kirby » Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:47 pm

It's possible, stephan, but might not be Ockham's first choice.

"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." - H. L. Mencken
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

Robert Tulip
Posts: 331
Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Post by Robert Tulip » Sat Mar 29, 2014 12:39 am

You are funny Stephan.

Robert Tulip
Posts: 331
Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Post by Robert Tulip » Sat Mar 29, 2014 1:08 am

stephan happy huller wrote:the fact that Acharya can't show her real face here is another odd thing. All these 'minions' are on this evangelizing mission but the 'great leader' is always too busy to actually show her face. Really? What's she doing? She's on the phone with the Dalai Lama? There is an obvious concerted effort in this small group to penetrate the forum. I find it difficult to believe that the 'Grand Master' isn't aware of this 'outreach effort.'
She does not like you. She has better things to do than engage with people she thinks are stupid and hateful. She writes books, which you should read before criticising her. I disagree with her on her assessment of the low value of this forum.

There is no coordination regarding posting by supporters of astrotheology at this forum as far as I am aware. All the posters are different individuals. Moderators normally check IP addresses to make sure people don't have duplicate sock puppet accounts, despite the florid conspiracy theories of yourself and Roger Pearse. You can go to the Freethought Nation Forum to find what other discussion there is. If you are polite, you can even post there.

As another point of my disagreement with Acharya, I think it should be illegal to post on the internet using a pseudonym. I had a letter published in The Australian to that effect. But I am happy to agree to disagree.

User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2767
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Post by DCHindley » Sat Mar 29, 2014 7:07 am

While mindlessly searching for folks who claimed to have been contacted by aliens in the 1950s, and who in the process enjoyed a certain amount of notoriety and cult following, I came across this website:

WE HAVE CONTACT!
https://webspace.utexas.edu/cokerwr/www ... hers.shtml

Relax, the author of the webpage is a skeptic. The principal ones were George Adamski, Truman Bethrum (the most interesting to me, because of the invisible to Earth planet Clarion and the 4 foot tall but perfectly proportioned female captain Aura Rhanes), George Van Tassel (influenced by the 1951 movie The Day the Earth Stood Still*), Daniel W Fry (aliens are refugees from the lost continent of Lemuria, which was governed by the principals of theosophy), Orfeo Angelucci, George King, Buck Nelson, and he also includes Betty Hill (later in her life).

I also found interesting the fact that the real-life people that comprised the UFO cult that was investigated by Leon Festinger (When Prophecy Fails) and served as the kernel of his theory of Cognitive Dissonance, were influenced by George Adamski, and the Book of Oahaspe (discussed in a different thread, which was supposedly transmitted from the beyond via the phenomenon of "automatic writing," also used by the cult leader), Theosophy and even Dianetics. The details are given by Diana G. Tumminia, in Alien Worlds: Social and Religious Dimensions of Extraterrestrial Contact (2007). She teaches sociology at California State University, Sacramento, and is also author of When Prophecy Never Fails: Myth and Reality in a Flying-Saucer Group (2005).

I mention all this, although D Murdoch is not about Aliens, because of the persistence of true believers to defend their key figures. The UFO contactees had relatively large followings, gave well attended lectures, and even attended annual conventions to promote their various books and accounts. As these persons' accounts were different enough to suggest they could not all be true, their followers raised very vehement defenses.

DCH

*In the movie the humanoid alien Klaatu is accompanied by the powerful policeman robot Gort, who was impervious to all human weapons and could destroy the earth if they get too "uppidy". In Van Tassel's book I Rode a Flying Saucer! (1952) he gives this message he claims to have received May 2, 1952: "Greetings. I am Clatu, 2nd projection, 4th wave, 3rd sector patrol, realms of Schare (the spaceships in which reside the race that once originated on Schare, or Earth). Are you prepared for us to alight? We know the orders are to destroy us, shoot us down if necessary to discover how we are made. I am instructed to inform you we cannot be shot down. Your pentagon recently arrived at a conclusion that we are of a higher intelligence; they did not decide, however, that we also are of a higher authority! They will decide that in the very near future. In your next four months, commencing now, watch the skies, look to the East. Rest assured, when we descend we will not be able to carry on a personal conversation with most of those in official capacity. We shall land. Discontinue [channeled transmission].” [ http://www.scribd.com/doc/467760/I-Rode ... Van-Tassel ]

User avatar
spin
Posts: 2075
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Post by spin » Sat Mar 29, 2014 7:15 am

Robert Tulip wrote:You can go to the Freethought Nation Forum to find what other discussion there is. If you are polite, you can even post there.
Rubbish. You know that that is not true.
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes

Robert Tulip
Posts: 331
Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 2:44 am

Re: Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Post by Robert Tulip » Sat Mar 29, 2014 12:43 pm

spin wrote:
Robert Tulip wrote:You can go to the Freethought Nation Forum to find what other discussion there is. If you are polite, you can even post there.
Rubbish. You know that that is not true.
Spin, you were banned from that forum because of your long history of rude comments about Murdock at the Free Thought and Rationalism Discussion Board. It is simply untrue that Murdock and the moderators of the Freethought Nation board reject any criticism. Reasoned dialogue is welcome. But this topic lends itself to baseless, uninformed and impolite assertions which are entirely unproductive. Goading from flaming trolls produces more heat than light. Some of the contributors to this thread would struggle, in my opinion, to conduct themselves politely since their views are so fixed.

I support the moderation standards applied by the Cosmoquest Astronomy Discussion Board, where criticism of other posters is grounds for infraction. I understand that this board is more freewheeling, but it is good to aspire to rules of accountability, transparency, rationality, courtesy, politeness, responsiveness and use of evidence.

Roger Pearse
Posts: 383
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:26 am

Re: Acharya S and the real Christ Conspiracy

Post by Roger Pearse » Sat Mar 29, 2014 1:37 pm

Peter Kirby wrote:It's possible, stephan, but might not be Ockham's first choice.
I'm with Stephan here.

I monitor posts online about Mithras from time to time. I have sometimes noticed someone, from the Acharya camp, posting her stuff. It's a very distinctive posting style (I won't indicate the fingerprint here, for obvious reasons, but it does not rely on prose style issues) and ... the name at the top varies.

Precisely how many people are actually involved is another question.

That said ... my own interest is not whether Acharya S chooses to post under a hundred names, but whether what she has to say is true. Whenever I test it, I find that it is not. When I query it, I get abuse and troll tactics. Thus, inevitably, I conclude that her theories need not be attended to.

Not, of course, calling for a ban. On the contrary: it's all interesting.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Post Reply