Astrology claims from acharya s/d m murdock, do any hold water?
Posted on: April 15, 2008 - 2:35pm

Astrology claims from acharya s/d m murdock, do any hold water?
I noticed Rook and others stating that the claims about Christianity in the Zeitgeist film are not scholarly claims.
My question is, which ones are not scholarly claims? Or in other words, does any of it hold water? At least the whole '3 kings' and resurection of the sun over 3 days stuff seems to make sense how it could evolve into the myth... Are there any good resources for this?
































Which ones do not hold water? Short answer: All of them.
The best to you,
Rook
----------------------------------------
Please help me get my resources so I can finish my book more quickly.
My wish list.
Et suppositio nil ponit in esse.
"You act ridiculously," said Ion, "to doubt everything. For my part, I should like to ask you what you say to those who free possessed men from their terrors by exorcising the spirits so manifestly. I need not discuss this: everyone knows about the Syrian from Palestine, the adept in it, how many he takes in hand who fall down in the light of the moon and roll their eyes and fill their mouths with foam; nevertheless, he restores them to health and sends them away normal in mind, delivering them from their straits for a large fee. When he stands beside them as they lie there and asks : 'Whence came you into his body?' the patient himself is silent, but the spirit answers in Greek or in the language of whatever foreign country he comes from, telling how and whence he entered into the man; whereupon, by adjuring the spirit and if he does not obey, threatening him, he drives him out. Indeed, I actually saw one coming out, black and smoky in color." "It is nothing much," I remarked," for you, Ion, to see that kind of sight, when even the 'forms' that the father of your school, Plato, points out are plain to you, a hazy object of vision to the rest of us, whose eyes are weak." - Lucian, Lover of Lies
When the man's right, he's right. The parallels between myths are well documented - that isn't exactly news. But to reach a conclusion that converges on Jesus is loose, to say the least.
Will: no gyration without funkstification.
I would even be cautious about suggesting that parallels are well documented. I would not say that Horus was similar to Dionysus, or that Horus had a mother named Mari (which he didn't), or anything remotely like this. Horus and Dionysus did not have 12 disciples, they were not crucified, nor were they in "Hades" or the "Underworld" for three days before rising again. Are there some similarities? Between Dionysus and Jesus yes, but not to the point where people are smacking their foreheads going "Holy shit, that's it!" There are more similarities, and in greater numbers, to Jesus and Moses than there are any similarities between Pagan Gods, and even between Pagan Gods themselves (for example, Krishna and Jesus).
This is partly why the claims that Acharya makes warrant scholars to distance themselves from her. It certainly is not because she is female (despite what crap she makes up about that), as all one has to do is look at Mary Ann Tolbert, Elaine Pagels and Paula Fredriksen to know that female scholars are well respected based on the work that they do, just as male scholars are. She is simply not respected because her research is amateurish and generally inaccurate. She could write a new book and prove me wrong...but I do not think she is in it for the facts. Her fan base will attest to that.
----------------------------------------
Please help me get my resources so I can finish my book more quickly.
My wish list.
Et suppositio nil ponit in esse.
"You act ridiculously," said Ion, "to doubt everything. For my part, I should like to ask you what you say to those who free possessed men from their terrors by exorcising the spirits so manifestly. I need not discuss this: everyone knows about the Syrian from Palestine, the adept in it, how many he takes in hand who fall down in the light of the moon and roll their eyes and fill their mouths with foam; nevertheless, he restores them to health and sends them away normal in mind, delivering them from their straits for a large fee. When he stands beside them as they lie there and asks : 'Whence came you into his body?' the patient himself is silent, but the spirit answers in Greek or in the language of whatever foreign country he comes from, telling how and whence he entered into the man; whereupon, by adjuring the spirit and if he does not obey, threatening him, he drives him out. Indeed, I actually saw one coming out, black and smoky in color." "It is nothing much," I remarked," for you, Ion, to see that kind of sight, when even the 'forms' that the father of your school, Plato, points out are plain to you, a hazy object of vision to the rest of us, whose eyes are weak." - Lucian, Lover of Lies
Hmm, then I guess I shouldn't worry about reading the book I bought 6 months ago "The Suns of God" - http://www.amazon.com/Suns-God-Krishna-Buddha-Unveiled/dp/1931882312/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208347391&sr=8-1
Which book is it that talks about the parallels between the greek heros/gods on the point scale? Robert Price mentions it in The God Who Wasn't There I think...
Otherwise, any other good books that talk about parallels that ARE well documented?
I would stay away from all books dealing with parallels between Greek Gods and Jesus all together. At least until I can publish my book on the subject which is going through review (something no book we currently have on the subject has done before). I would also recommend the book The Messiah Myth, by Thomas L. Thompson. It is a much better book and a lot more thorough and he is a well known scholar.
----------------------------------------
Please help me get my resources so I can finish my book more quickly.
My wish list.
Et suppositio nil ponit in esse.
"You act ridiculously," said Ion, "to doubt everything. For my part, I should like to ask you what you say to those who free possessed men from their terrors by exorcising the spirits so manifestly. I need not discuss this: everyone knows about the Syrian from Palestine, the adept in it, how many he takes in hand who fall down in the light of the moon and roll their eyes and fill their mouths with foam; nevertheless, he restores them to health and sends them away normal in mind, delivering them from their straits for a large fee. When he stands beside them as they lie there and asks : 'Whence came you into his body?' the patient himself is silent, but the spirit answers in Greek or in the language of whatever foreign country he comes from, telling how and whence he entered into the man; whereupon, by adjuring the spirit and if he does not obey, threatening him, he drives him out. Indeed, I actually saw one coming out, black and smoky in color." "It is nothing much," I remarked," for you, Ion, to see that kind of sight, when even the 'forms' that the father of your school, Plato, points out are plain to you, a hazy object of vision to the rest of us, whose eyes are weak." - Lucian, Lover of Lies
I guess I'm less careful on here, since I assume a sort of understanding that they're myths, rather than something you can really hang your hat on. Even IF there were as many parallels as claimed, or that shit about Virgo and the M (wtf?), it wouldn't be surprising to find parallels, it just that they wouldn't mean anything either. But I understand that it would be frustrating for someone who's actually studying the history and the myths closely to hear someone make completely outlandish statements and reach a sudden and unsopported conclusion based on them. It made me laugh, because it seemed so much like satire (along the lines of The Number 23-style paranoia) that my response certainly wasn't measured. The idea that you can go in a straight line from Horus to Jesus or any of the others is pure fiction, agreed. That kind of argument banks on the audience's ignorance and unwillingness to research.
I don't think they have to distance themselves from her, she seems to distance herself from scholarship pretty quickly. That whole part about Horus was a huge stretch. Huge. I thought the astrology bit was cute, but again, more along the lines of comedy than serious scholarly work.
It often puzzles me that people are motivated to lie about this stuff. Do they just want to fool people? Do they actually believe it? I mean, her material is SUCH a stretch. Every connection made in that movie is a huge leap in logic. If I said, "rutabegas are both Jesus and the reason the twin towers fell" I'd be making just as much sense. So maybe I'm so thrown by the idea that that kind of thing could be taken seriously.
Will: no gyration without funkstification.
There are a great many resources on the multiple subjects Dorothy-- aka 'Acharya', both a bastardization of the Hindu word 'acarya' meaning 'guru' and the last name used by at least one theosophist author in the early 20th century-- attempts to cover in her books and other self-published writings (yes, she owns the only publisher that prints her work). There are whole disciplines of academic study on Greek, Asian, African, Mesoamerican, and Egyptian culture and mythology, and her work consistently ignores key aspects of each and every realm of study her work tries to touch. As Rook said, the scholarly community distances themselves from her not because she's a woman (there are several contemporary Egyptologists from Europe who are women who equally have nothing to do with her) but because her arguments are untenable.
However, some of the claims she's made that are outright false:
Horus-related ones
Other misses
Another one in the film that is complete fiction that Dorothy may or may not have contributed is the appearance of the Southern Crux (Cross) constellation. The Southern Crux was not discovered until the sixteenth or seventeenth century by explorers in the southern hemisphere, and it was not considered any kind of constellation in the centuries prior to that time (and not during the alleged time of Jesus).
These are just a few of the blatant mistakes within Dorothy's work, whether her self-published rubbish or her collaborative efforts (as with the conspiracy film Zeitgeist). There are hundreds more similar mistakes, but for the sake of brevity and clarity I've stuck with the subject matter I've studied the most (ancient North African and Mid-Eastern history). I agree with Rook that the story of Jesus is one that represents a sort of hybrid Hellenistic-Jewish midrash, a work on its own that has some semblances and direct references to myths that come before it, but is focused heavily on its Hebrew heritage and rife with Hellenistic influences contemporary to the times in which the gospels were written. Trying to weave those fairly well-documented things into some over-reaching conspiracy theory has been the failing of many would-be (or wannabe) 'scholars', and in many cases over the last two centuries such attempts have been coupled with movements of a social or political nature that carries too much baggage and a chip on its collective shoulder to be capable of maintaining intellectual honest or withstanding serious scrutiny.
That said, this doesn't mean I am urging anyone away from reading Dorothy's work and enjoying it, I'm simply pointing out that just because it appears in a written format that it is unadulterated fact. She may very well claim to have some 'truth' in her work, but then again so do most churches. I'm less concerned with 'truth' than I am with fact, which is an element I find in only small amounts throughout her work. If you're really interested, I can supply you with some reference material for the different kingdoms throughout Egyptian history (more than three millenia of history doesn't condense easily or seamlessly), as well as several good books on Sumerian, Babylonian, and Jewish history (the latter of which can bring you to date on contemporary Judaism). Interestingly, you may even find that some books I suggest are similar or the same as those Dorothy claims to get her information, though you'll find a different picture when reading source material and concordances from actual experts on the subject matter.
Cool subject and thanks again RRS. I don't know jack. Most of what I read and see on ancient religion is a lot of guessing, and wishful thinking .... obviously.
I support the Z movie simply because it gets religious people to think, by challenging their ideas .....
I have seen my christian friends jaws drop in embarrassment .... as they watched part one of the Z movie
..... Hey, is there such thing as a "good" lie ?
??? Ummm, Lie and save the world ???
[ can a MOD fix the text stretch in this thread ? ]
I'm guessing what you're referring to is Lord Raglan's Scale.
Baron Raglan wrote a book called "The Hero" in 1936. In that book he identifies 22 common characteristics of "mythical" heroes, identifying patterns that all of our heroes seem to possess throughout history. One of his contentions was that actual historical figures never seemed to have more than 6 or 7 of these characteristics (at the most) while "mythical" figures often had 2 or 3 times that, which he felt led to a system of determining who was "myth" and who has "actual history".
For instance:
Moses holds 20 of the typical hero characteristics
Hercules: 17
Gilgamesh: 15
Robin Hood: 13
Jesus and Dionysus: Both 19
This scale has been referred to often over the last 80 years.. probably in hundreds of books.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
Yeah , yep , and on and on it goes AmericanIdle ....
Shit dogma, when all is ONE
Genme, well said. Glad to see you're still around. I would only make one suggestion, that you shy away from the bastardized term "midrash", mainly from New Testament scholars who confuse the actual definition that Hebrew Bible scholars have for it, and instead use the term "mimesis" or "allusion"; both technically the same thing, said different ways. Glad to see you're back. Hope you stick around.
----------------------------------------
Please help me get my resources so I can finish my book more quickly.
My wish list.
Et suppositio nil ponit in esse.
"You act ridiculously," said Ion, "to doubt everything. For my part, I should like to ask you what you say to those who free possessed men from their terrors by exorcising the spirits so manifestly. I need not discuss this: everyone knows about the Syrian from Palestine, the adept in it, how many he takes in hand who fall down in the light of the moon and roll their eyes and fill their mouths with foam; nevertheless, he restores them to health and sends them away normal in mind, delivering them from their straits for a large fee. When he stands beside them as they lie there and asks : 'Whence came you into his body?' the patient himself is silent, but the spirit answers in Greek or in the language of whatever foreign country he comes from, telling how and whence he entered into the man; whereupon, by adjuring the spirit and if he does not obey, threatening him, he drives him out. Indeed, I actually saw one coming out, black and smoky in color." "It is nothing much," I remarked," for you, Ion, to see that kind of sight, when even the 'forms' that the father of your school, Plato, points out are plain to you, a hazy object of vision to the rest of us, whose eyes are weak." - Lucian, Lover of Lies
Any ideas regarding the influence of mushrooms on the ancient writers? The art seems to suggest yes. Hell, I don't know what history opinions to believe half the time.
Fun movie to show the Xains, anyhow .... 
"The Pharmacratic Inquisition" , 3.5 hrs broken into 7 segments http://www.gnosticmedia.com/DL.html --- or full length http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4555365073003895154
some quick reading, "The psychedelic secrets of Santa Claus"
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/3136.html
http://botit.botany.wisc.edu/toms_fungi/dec99.html
I liked Zeitgiest for the same reason. I just finished Jordan Maxwell's The Naked Truth which Zeitgeist seemed to based by and goes through more of the astrotheology.
The problem is how do you verify the claims made by these films? I saw no first hand sources quoted but a lot of ideas from these egyptian gods that seem to be carried on by other religions.
The Gnostic film Sex: Secret Garden of Eden also has a lot of interesting ideas and pictures that made me think of how symbolism is carried on by other religions. I didn't agree with the views of sex as only for procreation.
The Pharmacratic Inquisition is another good one. I do see a lot of similarities from the mushroom aminita muscaria and the garb that Roman catholic clergy use. Also the manna that the Israelites ate could have been magic mushrooms...who knows?
The questions I came up watching all these videos:
Who came up with the Zodiac?
Where can I find reliable information about Horus? First hand writings, second hand, etc.
***
These are videos I can watch again and take notes on. It needs a critique from a variety of experts.
-RR
Choose Reality - http://www.churchofreality.org
Desiree Alliance - http://www.desireealliance.org
$pread magazine - http://www.spreadmagazine.org
Rev. Real , Thanks very much for the movie and interesting links. I will definitely check it out.
Hey there, Rook. I'm still popping in and about sometimes, but like I mentioned before my specialties in study are slightly different from what most of you guys here study, and as such I'm usually not obligated to comment much outside of my experience in study except when commenting on my personal philosophy (which isn't remarkably different from many of you guys anyway). I lurk mostly because while I find the philosophical parts of the discussion interesting I don't usually have much to add.
That's a good point about the term midrash, especially since the gospels weren't necessarily written by Jews and they don't include all of the aspects of a Jewish midrash. They're definitely a Romanized version of the Jewish mystical/historic tale, granted with a mostly Jewish cast, but a Romanized version nonetheless (in other words: you're correct).