Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Share your thoughts on the written word.
Razell
New Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:58 am

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Razell » Mon Mar 28, 2016 5:32 am

Say what you like Gord, but your circular reasoning and failure to demonstrate why D.M. Murdock's work is fantasy righting continues to be evident. You clearly have no time to demonstrate otherwise or read her work, but request and endless list from me. Continue on your high horse alone. Of course her work merits a proper defence Poodle.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29084
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Gord » Mon Mar 28, 2016 7:26 am

Gawd, I have to demonstrate it now? Hasn't that been done to death already? I got sick of it years ago, and I'm still sick of it now.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8104
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Poodle » Mon Mar 28, 2016 8:42 am

Razell wrote:... Of course her work merits a proper defence Poodle.


Yes - I assumed that's why you are here. But you haven't provided it yet. Pyrrho unlocked the thread on the off-chance that you may begin a discussion rather than the diatribe you have so far delivered. The book title itself is a case in point. The first part seems OK - 'Did Moses Exist?' Well, that's a start. But the next part - 'The Myth of ...' rather gives the game away, don't you think? Even allowing the more charitable definition of the word 'myth', it's a pretty prescriptive title. The myth is there for all to see in several sources.

Here's a good starting point - why should I read this book? What does the author say that has not been said before? Make me want to read it.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby TJrandom » Mon Mar 28, 2016 8:03 pm

Razell wrote:... fantasy righting ....


Is that what you are doing? :D

Razell
New Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:58 am

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Razell » Fri Apr 01, 2016 7:41 am

As requested by Gord, a list of authors citing the work of D.M. Murdock a.k.a. Acharya S, including the citations (with some links provided) and references in bibliography:

Arthur, James
Barnwell, F. Aster
Bennett, Clinton
Boyd, Gregory A.
Danforth, Loring M.
Doherty, Earl
Eddy, Paul Rhodes
Freeman, N. M.
Hendrie, Edward
Irvan, Jan
Kaminski, John
Lewis, Seon M.
Kick, Russ
Madise, Mokhele J.S.
Mulligan, John
Murphy, Derek
Picknett, Lynn
Price, Clive
Rutajit, Andrew
Sayler, Kent
Shah, Bipin R
Sherlock, Michael A.
Thomas, Kenn
Thomas, Robert Steven

Razell
New Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:58 am

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Razell » Fri Apr 01, 2016 7:43 am

Acharya S / D.M. Murdock cited in published books:

"An essential book (referring to The Christ conspiracy) for anyone who wants to know the reality behind the world's dominant religion." - Russ Kick, You are being lied to (2001). page 272.

"Great chronicler of the conspiracy known as Christianity." - Kenn Thomas, Parapolitics: Conspiracy in contemporary America (2006), pages 15 and 127.

"Acharya S. ventures that 'the creators of the Christ myth did not simply take an already formed story, scratch out the name Osiris or Horus, and replace it with Jesus' (p. 25). But I am pretty much ready to go the whole way and suggest that Jesus is simply Osiris going under a new name, Jesus, 'Savior,' hitherto an epithet, but made into a name on Jewish soil." - Paul Rhodes Eddy and Gregory A. Boyd, The Jesus legend: A case for the historical reliability of the synoptic Jesus tradition (2007), page 134.

"A heavenly location for the actions of the savior gods, including the death of Christ, would also have been influenced by most religions' ultimate derivation from astrotheology, as in the worship of the sun and moon. For this dimension of more remote Christian roots, see the books of Acharya S"
- Earl Doherty, Jesus: Neither God nor man (2009), page 153.

"D.M. Murdock (Acharya S) has also written books dissecting Christianity. The Christ conspiracy is an excellent book on the forgery that depicts itself as Christianity and how astrotheology is appilied to the origins of religion." - Jan Irvian and Andrew Rutajit, Astrotheology and Shamanism (2009), page 12.

"The 72 actually represent the decans or dodecani, divisions of the zodiacal cirle into 5° each, also considered constellations. In addition, it takes 72 years for the precisiion of the equinoxes to move one degree - The Christ conspiracy by Acharya S, 1999" - Jan Irvan and Andrew Rutajit, Astrotheology and Shamanism (2009), page 34.

"Acharya S points out that "Eve is one with Isis-Meri and therefore, the Virgin Mary and the constellation of Virgo, as well as the moon [and oceans]. In the original astrotheological tale, as Virgo rises she is followed or bitten on the heel by Serpens, who, with Scorpio, rises immediately behind her." - The Christ conspiracy by Acharya S, 1999" - Jan Irvan and Andrew Rutajit, Astrotheology and Shamanism (2009), page 129.

"One of the greatest crimes in human history was the destruction in 391 of the library at Alexandria perpetrated by Christian fanatics under Theophilus, bent on hiding the truth about their religion and it's alleged founder. Because of this villainy, we have lost priceles information as to the true state of the ancient world, with such desolation also setting back civilization at least 1000 years." - The Christ conspiracy by Acharya S, 1999" - Jan Irvan and Andrew Rutajit, Astrotheology and Shamanism (2009), page 185.

"...They soon recognized the unsound historicity of much of the New Testament Gospels and the many glaring parallels between their depiction of Jesus and pagan gods and heroes... More recent exponents are... "Acharya S.," or Dorothy M. Murdock (The Christ conspiracy, 1999)..." - Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince, The masks of Christ: Behind the lies and cover-ups about the life of Jesus (2008), page 59.
https://books.google.co.za/books?id=XIh ... &q&f=false

"D.M. Murdock (pen name Acharya S), Jesus as the Sun Throughout History, pp. 19-20 informs us of the following: “Moreover, this sun-son word play has been noted many times previously in history by a variety of individuals, including English priest and poet Robert Southwell in the 16th century and English poet Richard Crashaw in the 17th century. English poet and preacher John Donne (1572-1631) and Welsh poet and priest George Herbert (1593- 1633) likewise engaged in the son/sun pun as applied to Christ. In discussing Donne, Dr. Arthur L. Clements, a professor at Binghamton University, remarks that the "Son-sun pun" is "familiar enough." - John Mulligan, Birthright, sceptre, loaves and fishes (2013). page 13 (including pages 14, 27, 31, 47, 54, 69, 71, 76, 77, 78, 83, 85, 152, 216, 217, 234, 225, 226, 227, 229, 230, 231, 233, 234, 237, 244, 418, 674 and 812).
http://www.nazareneremnant.org/birthrig ... hes-us.pdf

"No other people have ever been so conscious of ultimate primacy through supernatural intervention. This has given them cohesion and courage to persevere in the face of persecution and decimation. The conviction that every Jew will one day share in his divine destiny as a member of the world's ruling race has made him proud and has enabled him to survive unassimilated among the nations of the earth." "Included in the promised inheritance was a deliverer or messiah to bring about "the kingdom." This messiah would be either a temporal, human leader who with his armies would overthrow the enemies of Israel, or a supernatural being who would do likewise, establishing an "everlasting" Jewish kingdom as well." "The Jewish imperialism would thus come as the awaited deliverer destroyed the enemies and gave their booty to Israel. As Larson says, 'This Messiah shall bring judgment upon the Gentiles and they shall become the slaves of Judah..." The above two paragraphs were excerpts taken from The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold by Acharya S. © 1999 taken from pages 325 and 326" - Joy of Satan ministries, Exposing Christianity (2005, 2013), page 150.
http://webzoom.freewebs.com/spiritualwa ... ianity.pdf

"As A Bibliography (and recommended reading list) I am listing authors by name rather than by works because each of the following authors should be read in their entirety. - Aaronson, Bernard, Acharya S..." - James Arthur, Mushrooms and mankind: The impact mushrooms on human consciousness and religion (2003), page 96.
https://books.google.co.za/books?id=qSL ... on&f=false

Razell
New Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:58 am

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Razell » Fri Apr 01, 2016 7:44 am

Acharya S / D.M. Murdock cited in (published) bibliography:

"Acharya S, The Christ Conspiracy the Greatest Story Ever Sold, Adventures Unlimited Press, Illinois, 1999" - Seon M. Lewis, From Mythology to reality: Moving beyond Rastafari (2013), pages 329 and 343.
https://books.google.co.za/books?id=0n4 ... ri&f=false

"History, Origins of Christianitanity... Acharya S. (a.k.a., D.M. Murdock). Suns of God, Kempton, Illinois: Adventures Unlimited Press, 2004." - F. Aster Barnwell, Hidden treasure: Jesus’s message of transformation (2011), page 301.
https://books.google.co.za/books?id=Qin ... on&f=false

"Bibliography / References / Recommended reading... Books / Academic references... Acharya S/D.M. Murdock. the origins of Christianity and the Quest for the Historical Jesus Christ (excerpt from Murdock, D.M. The Christ Myth Anthology.) Seattle: Stellar House, 2009." - N. M. Freeman, The story of Q.: Inspired by actual events (2011), page 249.
https://books.google.co.za/books?id=-74 ... ts&f=false

"Acharya, S., and D.M. Murdock. 2009. "Islam Is against Our Past, Present, and Future." Islam-watch.org, September 1." - Loring M. Danforth, Crossing the kingdom: Portraits of Saudi Arabia (2016), page 229.
https://books.google.co.za/books?id=gpW ... 0s&f=false

"6. Acharya S, Sons of God, 39" - Kent Sayler, Journey into truth (2010), page 167.
https://books.google.co.za/books?isbn=0557498791

"The Christ conspiracy, Acharya S" - Robert Steven Thomas, Intelligent Intervention (2011), page 252.
https://books.google.co.za/books?id=f4- ... &q&f=false

"685. Acharya S, Osiris The Lord: Out of Egypt, at http://www.truthbeknown.com/osiris.htm ... (excerpt from Acharya S, Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ unveiled)." - Edward Hendrie, Solving the mystery of Babylon the Great (2011), page 354.
http://www.whale.to/c/SolvingMysteryofB ... sHDRHL.pdf

"Modern names cited... Acharya S, 75..." - Derek Murphy, Jesus Potter Harry Christ: The fascinating parallels between two of the world's most popular literary characters (2011), page 375.
https://books.google.co.za/books?id=Rgd ... &q&f=false

"Acharya S and Murdock DM: 2011. The origins of Christianity and the Quest for the historical Jesus Christ. Stellar House Publishing. com" - Mokhele J.S. Madise, Inaugural lecture (2013), page 15 (Mokhele J.S. Madise is the author of The development of the black ministry in the Methodist Church of South Africa from the apartheid era to the post apartheid era (1948-1998) 1999).
http://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle ... sequence=1

"35. Christianity and various articles:Acharya S/D.M.Murdock." - Bipin R Shah, Lord Jesus, Apollonius of Tyana, apostle Paul, Julia Damano, council of Nicaea and great Constantine-formulative stage of Christianity and its connection to ancient India, page 53.
http://www.academia.edu/5050845/Lord_Je ... ient_India

Razell
New Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:58 am

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Razell » Fri Apr 01, 2016 7:45 am

Acharya S / D.M. Murdock cited by established authors in their online articles:

"There is alluring evidence that ancient cultures actually possessed much more realistic religions than our own contemporary society. And they were developed by studying the sky. During the day, it was obvious that all life depended on the beneficent properties of the Sun. And during the fearful night, humans studied the stars for their cues to survival, and projected their own thoughts onto these phenomena. These two things form the basis of all existing religions, according to Acharya S." - John Kaminski, Detoxifying self-deception (John Kaminiski is the author of The founders on the founders, Federalists and antifederalists and A necessary evil?: Slavery and the debate of the constitution.)
http://www.rense.com/general67/detox.htm

"...Initially, I too was one of her critics, and in a bid to expose her “poor scholarship”, I bought her largest piece of work, Christ in Egypt. I combed through every page, I examined every citation, which numbered in the thousands, and when I finally reached the end of this encyclopaedic compendium, I realized that I had been completely wrong about this classicist. Although I myself am not a mythicist, and despite the fact that I do not agree with all of the conclusions she arrived at as a mythicist, I am no longer a critic, but an admirer..." - Michael A. Sherlock (author of I am Christ, 2012).
https://michaelsherlockauthor.wordpress ... acharya-s/

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29084
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Gord » Fri Apr 01, 2016 10:26 am

Razell wrote:"An essential book (referring to The Christ conspiracy) for anyone who wants to know the reality behind the world's dominant religion." - Russ Kick, You are being lied to (2001). page 272.

And here's the problem I mentioned earlier about this sort of crap being spread around. The Christ Conspiracy is terrible, and yet it gets spread around the internet like a plague. The pro-Acharya people have essentially spammed the internet with it (intentionally or not) to such an extent, I can't even find the critical reviews I used to go to whenever someone asked me about the book. The only one I can still find easily is Miekko's.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Razell
New Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:58 am

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Razell » Fri Apr 01, 2016 4:50 pm

According to Bob Price and Miguel Conner D.M. Murdock's work (after The Christ conspiracy) improved greatly, but I'm well aware those who don't care to read her work throw the baby out with the water.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29084
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Gord » Fri Apr 01, 2016 7:39 pm

Razell wrote:According to Bob Price and Miguel Conner D.M. Murdock's work (after The Christ conspiracy) improved greatly, but I'm well aware those who don't care to read her work throw the baby out with the water.

I threw the bathwater out, only to discover there was very little baby to begin with, and it was in a better basin anyway. That was my original point in this entire thread: Why look to D. M. Murdock when there are better sources of information? Murdock poisoned her own well with her crappy books; maybe her later books are better, but how can I trust reviewers who think her early books are "essential reading"?

Also, who are Bob Price and Miguel Conner?
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4811
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Austin Harper » Fri Apr 01, 2016 8:50 pm

I'm assuming he means Robert M. Price, a biblical scholar (and ex-preacher, now atheist) who hosts The Bible Geek podcast and has written a bunch of books. He also used to host The Human Bible podcast for CSI. He's a great guy.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
freebill
BANNED
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 9:25 pm
Custom Title: ufo - ra believer

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby freebill » Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:08 pm


Robert Tulip
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 8:50 pm

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Robert Tulip » Thu Jun 16, 2016 9:04 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:You mean people like Robert Tulip?

Finally one of Acharya’s fairly prominent online supporters, Robert Tulip, has “come out” and made it very clear that my suspicions were right all along. Astrotheology — the view they propagate — is a form of religious belief. They believe as strongly as any fundamentalist that they are right and anyone who does not agree with them after they explain it all is perverse or willfully blind. Expressions of disagreement are interpreted as expressions of hostility or even persecution.
http://vridar.org/2014/03/28/astrotheol ... acharya-s/


Hello, this is my first post at this forum, which came to my attention as a result of reading the above disparaging comment quoting Neil Godfrey, formerly of the World Wide Church of God. I appreciate that Neil has strong anti-religious prejudice, as he expresses in this comment and in his other similar comments at Vridar. His argument that Murdock's religious content invalidates her work is fallacious and ignorant.

My review of Did Moses Exist? is at http://www.amazon.com/review/R2PFCVC4RIFMSL [edited to correct link].

Best wishes for the efforts of all here to cultivate a genuine skepticism. Dori Murdock was a great skeptic, despite the inability of many to understand her ideas.
Last edited by Robert Tulip on Fri Jun 17, 2016 10:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19632
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby scrmbldggs » Thu Jun 16, 2016 11:42 pm

Hi, Robert Tulip. Thanks for stopping by and welcome to SSF. :wave:
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8104
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Poodle » Fri Jun 17, 2016 12:12 am

Hi Robert and welcome to our little bijou residence.

A small point ... Your link takes us to a review of 'The Gnostic Paul: Gnostic Exegesis of the Pauline Letters'. I'm sure it's a good one, but it isn't a review of 'Did Moses Exist?'

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29084
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Gord » Fri Jun 17, 2016 1:03 am

Robert Tulip wrote:Dori Murdock was a great skeptic

She certainly does not come across that way in any her writings that I've read, and most of her followers with whom I've interacted have been uncompromising wooists. But she clearly did have a lot of friends. Perhaps she was different in person.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29084
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Gord » Fri Jun 17, 2016 1:06 am

Poodle wrote:Hi Robert and welcome to our little bijou residence.

A small point ... Your link takes us to a review of 'The Gnostic Paul: Gnostic Exegesis of the Pauline Letters'. I'm sure it's a good one, but it isn't a review of 'Did Moses Exist?'

Robert Tulip has a review of Did Moses Exist? at http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/d ... eview.html
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8104
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Poodle » Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:12 am

Thanks Gord. I read it.

That's a couple of minutes of my life I'll never get back.

Robert Tulip
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 8:50 pm

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Robert Tulip » Fri Jun 17, 2016 10:46 am

I have edited my previous post to provide the correct link to my review of Did Moses Exist?

It is http://www.amazon.com/review/R2PFCVC4RIFMSL

Robert Tulip
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 8:50 pm

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Robert Tulip » Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:56 pm

Gord wrote:
Robert Tulip wrote:Dori Murdock was a great skeptic

She certainly does not come across that way in any her writings that I've read, and most of her followers with whom I've interacted have been uncompromising wooists. But she clearly did have a lot of friends. Perhaps she was different in person.


Under her pen name of Acharya S, Dori Murdock was most widely known for her skepticism about traditional religion. She educated a very large number of people to engage critically with claims such as Bible stories asserting that Jesus Christ actually lived.

Similarly her Moses book is an excellent skeptical analysis of the widespread traditional belief in the historical occurrence of the Exodus. It is highly informative and well argued.

Where things become more complicated is in her engagement with existing atheist and religious communities, many of whom have strong psychological blockages about religion. Dori Murdock added to the skeptical demolition of religion some ideas about how religion can potentially work positively, including through recognition that much myth contains highly meaningful symbolic language about cosmology. Some people find this analysis offensive, to the point of responding with moronic bigotry and delinquent insults. And yet Murdock retained her integrity, rejecting both the assumptions of the theology guild about the historical Jesus and the assumptions of atheist culture about the lack of value in myth.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19632
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby scrmbldggs » Fri Jun 17, 2016 11:45 pm

On what is the presumed validity of nontraditional religion based?
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29084
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Gord » Sat Jun 18, 2016 2:42 am

Robert Tulip wrote:
Gord wrote:
Robert Tulip wrote:Dori Murdock was a great skeptic

She certainly does not come across that way in any her writings that I've read, and most of her followers with whom I've interacted have been uncompromising wooists. But she clearly did have a lot of friends. Perhaps she was different in person.

Under her pen name of Acharya S, Dori Murdock was most widely known for her skepticism about traditional religion. She educated a very large number of people to engage critically with claims such as Bible stories asserting that Jesus Christ actually lived.

I disagree. In my opinion, Acharya S/D.M. Murdock exposed a very large number of people to non-skeptical acceptance of poor scholarship. The results have been most evident to me from watching the youtube video Zeitgeist and trying to point out a few of the errors to its (and Murdock's) devoted adherents.

Quick example: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=428&p=428216

Supporting and/or promoting nonsense simply because it attacks Christianity is not what I would call being "a great skeptic".
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19632
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat Jun 18, 2016 3:00 am

Hi, Io the lurker.

Robert Tulip
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 8:50 pm

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Robert Tulip » Sat Jun 18, 2016 3:46 am

Gord wrote: trying to point out a few of the errors to its (and Murdock's) devoted adherents. Quick example: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=428&p=428216 Supporting and/or promoting nonsense simply because it attacks Christianity is not what I would call being "a great skeptic".

Gord, I must say, the quality of argument in that thread you cite is weak. It makes a range of completely baseless slurs, such as invented claims about UFOs and "feminazis". The overall tenor is to say that Acharya's work reminds people of Gnostic mysticism and therefore is anathema.

I personally disagreed with Acharya's claim that evidence suggests Horus had twelve followers, but that is just one small part of a broad and indisputable memetic mythical connection between the myths of Horus and Jesus. As to your rude claims about the Southern Cross in that thread, you are just wrong.

The movie states "the Sun stops moving south, at least perceivably, for 3 days. During this 3 day pause, the Sun resides in the vicinity of the Southern Cross, or Crux, constellation. And after this time on December 25th, the Sun moves 1 degree, this time north, foreshadowing longer days, warmth, and Spring."

"Vicinity" means "fairly close to". It does not mean "in". That claim is perfectly correct.

It is no wonder that this debate is so fractured. I noted your comment "Are you stupid? Zeigeist clearly implied that the Sun actually enters the constellation of the Southern Cross, while carefully wording it that it "nears" the constellation. It's intentional misdirection." You appear to have not listened very carefully given that your argument is so easily refuted by a simple google search. You would have been on stronger astronomical ground by noting that the movement north on Christmas day is less than a degree, but again that would have been a merely pedantic effort to prosecute a deeper philosophical agenda.

When you use entirely false and derogatory language such as your "clearly implied that the sun actually enters the constellation", a retraction and apology would be the appropriate response, not a triumphalist link to your mistake. I suppose the Napoleon principle about retraction is in play here though.

Your attacks on this simple empirical data seem not to appreciate the difference between "in the vicinity of" and "in". In any case, Acharya was not responsible for that movie and was only an adviser on the mythology component. What is happening here is that because people don't like "Gnostic mysticism" they look for any argument they can to discredit perceived advocates of that way of thought.

What would be more useful here would be a civil conversation about the assertion that " the Sun died on the cross" as an allegorical analysis of the observed cosmic pattern of the solstice. Crux was entirely visible from Jerusalem in ancient times, but that is no longer the case due to precession. Poking fun at perfectly reasonable analysis is not a constructive way to promote mutual learning.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19632
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat Jun 18, 2016 3:52 am

Q.E.D.
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8104
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Poodle » Sat Jun 18, 2016 6:26 am

On a solar scale, the North Pole is in the vicinity of the South Pole.

'In the vicinity of ...' is a very loose, almost meaningless, concept at the best of times and its interpretation depends completely upon the reader. In other words, an author wishing to convey information should not use it.

Unless, of course, it is the intention of the author to be vague - in which case it is a well-known fact that Jesus spent most of his life in the vicinity of Glastonbury.

Robert Tulip
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 8:50 pm

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Robert Tulip » Sat Jun 18, 2016 8:08 am

That discussion about the apparent position of sunrise had nothing to do with anything "on a solar scale", a comment that is entirely irrelevant to the point being made, which was just that at the winter solstice the sun rise is at its southernmost point on the horizon over the course of the year. To a reasonable approximation the southernmost point of the sunrise is in the general vicinity of the south pole, just as the northernmost point is in the general vicinity of the north pole.

It looks like the only reason you guys want to make such a thing of it is that you have an emotional hatred towards Gnostic mysticism and are therefore looking for any gotcha chink you can find to hoist Acharya and likeminded people on that petard. I would be happy to be corrected if that impression is wrong, and would be interested in what you so-called skeptics think is supposedly so bad about Gnostic mysticism, without resorting to the usual huffing about straw men and feminazis. This Southern Cross point is a really weak example, and Gord got his facts spectacularly wrong. It helps to illustrate why Acharya found the atheist movement so pathetic.

I don't think highly of Zeitgeist by the way, except for the general theme in the first part that Christianity evolved from Egyptian myth. I am not aware of evidence that the Southern Cross inspired the theory of the crucifixion. However, my argument here was about the appallingly weak logic which Gord used to make a point which was more emotional than rational in dismissing Murdock's scholarship.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8104
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Poodle » Sat Jun 18, 2016 8:43 am

Robert Tulip wrote:That discussion about the apparent position of sunrise had nothing to do with anything "on a solar scale", a comment that is entirely irrelevant to the point being made, which was just that at the winter solstice the sun rise is at its southernmost point on the horizon over the course of the year. To a reasonable approximation the southernmost point of the sunrise is in the general vicinity of the south pole, just as the northernmost point is in the general vicinity of the north pole.

It looks like the only reason you guys want to make such a thing of it is that you have an emotional hatred towards Gnostic mysticism and are therefore looking for any gotcha chink you can find to hoist Acharya and likeminded people on that petard. I would be happy to be corrected if that impression is wrong, and would be interested in what you so-called skeptics think is supposedly so bad about Gnostic mysticism, without resorting to the usual huffing about straw men and feminazis. This Southern Cross point is a really weak example, and Gord got his facts spectacularly wrong. It helps to illustrate why Acharya found the atheist movement so pathetic.

I don't think highly of Zeitgeist by the way, except for the general theme in the first part that Christianity evolved from Egyptian myth. I am not aware of evidence that the Southern Cross inspired the theory of the crucifixion. However, my argument here was about the appallingly weak logic which Gord used to make a point which was more emotional than rational in dismissing Murdock's scholarship.


My comments were meant to be illustrative rather than definitive, Robert, and intended to point out the weakness of approximation.

Far from having "an emotional hatred towards Gnostic mysticism", I find it fascinating, and it has been an area of interest for me over several decades. The uses and abuses of the English language occupies a similar niche amongst my interests. I follow both with equal interest, given that the two are so often found in close proximity, often within a single publication.

Allow me to use one of your own reviews of Murdock's book as an example ...

"DM Murdock’s study of the Biblical stories of Moses and their sources is a compelling and detailed analysis of the available textual and archaeological evidence. She explains in great depth and breadth the facts surrounding this major religious character, rigorously and systematically drawing on sound scholarship to demonstrate a new, provocative and coherent interpretation that refutes conventional assumptions. In highlighting the best and most scientific research, Murdock brings forth lost information with the high goal of enabling greater understanding and social harmony."

In hindsight, would you not admit that this may be a little on the overenthusiastic side? Explaining the facts surrounding Moses would be a very short work of scholarship indeed. Then "to demonstrate a new, provocative and coherent interpretation" is also a little over the top. Replace 'demonstrate' with 'advocate' and we're nearer the truth. And then there's "brings forth lost information with the high goal of enabling greater understanding and social harmony". Wow! Hyperbole at its best whilst at the same time being mere advertising blurb. Your review may, of course, represent your true view on your subject but, to be frank, it's the kind of thing which makes me raise an eyebrow. I understand enthusiasm, but academic distance may have been the better stance.

Murdock's book is aimed at the popular market, I'm afraid - a couple of steps up from Erich von Daniken's masterpieces. This doesn't mean I won't read it (I may already have read it) or that I will poke fun at it. Nor does it mean that what Murdock says at any point is rubbish. But let's not pretend it's a work of high scholarship.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29084
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Gord » Sat Jun 18, 2016 9:49 am

Robert Tulip wrote:
Gord wrote: trying to point out a few of the errors to its (and Murdock's) devoted adherents. Quick example: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=428&p=428216 Supporting and/or promoting nonsense simply because it attacks Christianity is not what I would call being "a great skeptic".

Gord, I must say, the quality of argument in that thread you cite is weak.

I know. That Zeuss guy just couldn't shake the stupidity out of his head.

As to your rude claims about the Southern Cross in that thread, you are just wrong.

The movie states "the Sun stops moving south, at least perceivably, for 3 days. During this 3 day pause, the Sun resides in the vicinity of the Southern Cross, or Crux, constellation. And after this time on December 25th, the Sun moves 1 degree, this time north, foreshadowing longer days, warmth, and Spring."

"Vicinity" means "fairly close to". It does not mean "in". That claim is perfectly correct.

I'm sorry, have you not seen Zeitgeist? It clearly implies the Sun rests within the stars of the Southern Cross by showing it doing exactly that on the screen.

Furthermore, no one should ever claim the Sun ever comes within the vicinity of the Southern Cross, because it doesn't.

It is no wonder that this debate is so fractured. I noted your comment "Are you stupid? Zeigeist clearly implied that the Sun actually enters the constellation of the Southern Cross, while carefully wording it that it "nears" the constellation. It's intentional misdirection." You appear to have not listened very carefully given that your argument is so easily refuted by a simple google search. You would have been on stronger astronomical ground by noting that the movement north on Christmas day is less than a degree, but again that would have been a merely pedantic effort to prosecute a deeper philosophical agenda.

No, you're doing exactly what other fanatics of Zeitgeist have done -- you're ignoring what Zeitgeist itself shows, and trying to claim it says something else because, somewhere else on the internet, someone else says something else.

You cannot refute my argument with a simple google search, because my argument refers to exactly what Zeitgeist said and did.

When you use entirely false and derogatory language such as your "clearly implied that the sun actually enters the constellation"

Wow, but you're full of {!#%@}. Zeitgeist did exactly that -- it clearly implied BY SHOWING IT HAPPENING that the Sun actually enters the constellation.

a retraction and apology would be the appropriate response

I do not accept your apology.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Robert Tulip
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 8:50 pm

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Robert Tulip » Sat Jun 18, 2016 1:57 pm

If the vision in the movie shows something different from the text then I stand corrected. I was just relying on the written material about the winter sun rise being in the south. Thank you for the clarification. However, a picture of the sun in the Southern Cross can be considered a parable for the obvious connection between the three day death of the sun at the solstice and the three days of Easter. If you don't get that then it may be a case of you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

I personally agree with Acharya that the Zeitgeist movie provided some good information on the Egyptian roots of Christianity but overall is highly flawed. I am not aware that she has ever defended this literal "Sun in the Southern Cross" line as you imply. Peter Joseph was responsible for Zeitgeist, so if you want to assess Murdock's views you are better off reading her detailed book Christ in Egypt.

There is a syndrome in this material that people who are hostile to astrotheology take something that someone else has said or shown - in this case Peter Joseph the producer of Zeitgeist - and distort it with malicious intent to malign Acharya S. I have seen that happen numerous times from people with evangelical commitments, both religious and scientific.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19632
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat Jun 18, 2016 3:04 pm

Robert Tulip wrote:If the vision in the movie shows something different from the text then I stand corrected. I was just relying on the written material...

[...]

There is a syndrome in this material that people who are hostile to astrotheology take something that someone else has said or shown - in this case Peter Joseph the producer of Zeitgeist - and distort it with malicious intent to malign Acharya S. I have seen that happen numerous times from people with evangelical commitments, both religious and scientific.
(my emphasis)

Isn't that a quite ridiculous accusation if you never bothered looking at the material you so vehemently defended?
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8104
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Poodle » Sat Jun 18, 2016 3:33 pm

Robert Tulip wrote:...However, a picture of the sun in the Southern Cross can be considered a parable for the obvious connection between the three day death of the sun at the solstice and the three days of Easter ...


Equally, it could be considered a deliberately misleading lie.

I'm a little disappointed, Robert, I expected better of you.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19632
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:10 pm

Poodle wrote:
Robert Tulip wrote:...However, a picture of the sun in the Southern Cross can be considered a parable for the obvious connection between the three day death of the sun at the solstice and the three days of Easter ...


Equally, it could be considered a deliberately misleading lie.

I'm a little disappointed, Robert, I expected better of you.


So did I. But what we got was*:

excellent, highly informative and well argued, integrity, perfectly correct...

vs

disparaging
prejudice
fallacious and ignorant
moronic bigotry and delinquent insults
assumptions
completely baseless slurs
invented claims
rude claims
fractured
pedantic
entirely false and derogatory
triumphalist
Napoleon principle
attacks
entirely irrelevant
emotional hatred
so-called skeptics
the usual huffing
spectacularly wrong
pathetic
appallingly weak logic
don't get that
syndrome
hostile
distort with malicious intent
malign


Projecting much?


(And yep, I'm 'Poking fun at' - among other things - "In any case, Acharya was not responsible for that movie and was only an adviser on the mythology component.")


* In no way exhaustive but only a quick sample.
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29084
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Gord » Sat Jun 18, 2016 9:30 pm

Robert Tulip wrote:If the vision in the movie shows something different from the text then I stand corrected. I was just relying on the written material about the winter sun rise being in the south. Thank you for the clarification. However, a picture of the sun in the Southern Cross can be considered a parable for the obvious connection between the three day death of the sun at the solstice and the three days of Easter. If you don't get that then it may be a case of you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

If you don't get that showing the Sun in the constellation of the Southern Cross while saying something like "the Sun dies on the cross" ISN'T implying that the Sun actually enters the constellation, then I guess you really can't make it drink.

There is a syndrome in this material that people who are hostile to astrotheology take something that someone else has said or shown - in this case Peter Joseph the producer of Zeitgeist - and distort it with malicious intent to malign Acharya S. I have seen that happen numerous times from people with evangelical commitments, both religious and scientific.

There is another well-known syndrome called "defending the indefensible". I am not hostile to astrotheology, but I am hostile toward people who insist on spreading falsehoods and then trying to defend their actions with more falsehoods.

Here, read something: http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/06/02/def ... -to-guide/

Defending the indefensible: a how-to guide
BY STEPHEN M. WALT
JUNE 2, 2010


...Here are my 21 handy talking-points when you need to apply the whitewash:

1. We didn’t do it! (Denials usually don’t work, but it’s worth a try).

2. We know you think we did it but we aren’t admitting anything.

3. Actually, maybe we did do something but not what we are accused of doing.

4. Ok, we did it but it wasn’t that bad ("waterboarding isn’t really torture, you know").

5. Well, maybe it was pretty bad but it was justified or necessary. (We only torture terrorists, or suspected terrorists, or people who might know a terrorist…")

6. What we did was really quite restrained, when you consider how powerful we really are. I mean, we could have done something even worse.

7. Besides, what we did was technically legal under some interpretations of international law (or at least as our lawyers interpret the law as it applies to us.)

8. Don’t forget: the other side is much worse. In fact, they’re evil. Really.

9. Plus, they started it.

10. And remember: We are the good guys. We are not morally equivalent to the bad guys no matter what we did. Only morally obtuse, misguided critics could fail to see this fundamental distinction between Them and Us.

11. The results may have been imperfect, but our intentions were noble. (Invading Iraq may have resulted in tens of thousands of dead and wounded and millions of refugees, but we meant well.)

12. We have to do things like this to maintain our credibility. You don’t want to encourage those bad guys, do you?

13. Especially because the only language the other side understands is force.

14. In fact, it was imperative to teach them a lesson. For the Nth time.

15. If we hadn’t done this to them they would undoubtedly have done something even worse to us. Well, maybe not. But who could take that chance?

16. In fact, no responsible government could have acted otherwise in the face of such provocation.

17. Plus, we had no choice. What we did may have been awful, but all other policy options had failed and/or nothing else would have worked.

18. It’s a tough world out there and Serious People understand that sometimes you have to do these things. Only ignorant idealists, terrorist sympathizers, craven appeasers and/or treasonous liberals would question our actions.

19. In fact, whatever we did will be worth it eventually, and someday the rest of the world will thank us.

20. We are the victims of a double-standard. Other states do the same things (or worse) and nobody complains about them. What we did was therefore permissible.

21. And if you keep criticizing us, we’ll get really upset and then we might do something really crazy. You don’t want that, do you?

Repeat as necessary.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Robert Tulip
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 8:50 pm

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Robert Tulip » Sun Jun 19, 2016 5:11 am

scrmbldggs wrote:you never bothered looking at the material you so vehemently defended?

Far from it. My comments stand entirely. I am intrigued by the massive failures of logic you people are making here.
I referred to what the movie actually said, while Gord exhibits a basic failure to see the difference between symbolic and literal language, treating a symbolic illustration - which in any case Acharya never made or defended to my knowledge - as though she has advanced it as a scientific claim.

Here is some of Gord’s false commentary on Acharya from the thread that he linked. My critique of it is perfectly reasonable and measured, especially considering the utterly wild and false emotional attacks about such complete red herrings as "feminazis" and belief in UFOs. The defense you and others here make of Gord's comments is irrational. Inability to engage with symbolic language is behind much skeptical pathology about religion.
Gord wrote:
"And during this three day pause, the sun resides in the vicinity of the Southern Cross, or Crux, constellation."

No. The Sun is never in the "vicinity" of the Southern Cross (or Crux). It gets as close to the Southern Cross as it gets to the Big Dipper. It is absolutely ridiculous to suggest, as the movie did, that the Sun actually enters the constellation of the Southern Cross.
No. In December the sun appears close to the Southern Cross, and in June it appears close to the Big Dipper Sunrise at the winter solstice is at its southernmost point, which is the real scientific basis behind the allegorical language about the Southern Cross.
Gord wrote: Look at the map of the constellations for yourself, and it should be absolutely obvious: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... r_plot.svg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Yes of course it is absolutely obvious, which should lead any reasonable person to examine whether the intent is symbolic or literal. In this case a person would have to somewhat unversed to think the intent was literal, since as I recall, the movie also makes the obvious well known point that the sun only ever appears within the zodiac, which illustrates that your alleged 'gotcha' error is just your own misunderstanding.
Gord wrote:Furthermore, there wasn't even a constellation called "the Southern Cross" until the 16th century AD, when European sailors started exploring further south. Before that it was just part of another constellation, Centaurus.
The actual language of the movie, as far as I can tell, is about the entirely simple and true fact that the date when the sunrise is closest to the south pole is the December solstice. The rest is just your fertile embroidery. The fact that the movie uses a symbolic picture to illustrate an imagined connection between the cross and the solstice is just a parable, not a literal claim. Wrongly seeing that as an imagined literal claim reflects a serious failure of comprehension.
Gord wrote:The same anachronistic error is made when the movie claims the three stars of Orion's belt were known as the Three Kings. The did not receive this name until probably the 18th century.
No. You do not know that is the case. You are just making it up. There was massive destruction of ancient myth. The purpose here is imaginative reconstruction of how stories most probably emerged. In fact the connection between the three kings and orion’s belt as a real mythical origin for part of the Jesus birth narrative is highly plausible as part of the widespread ancient practice of seeing stories in the stars. No anachronism whatsoever. To prove an anachronism you would have to show that ancient use is unlikely, when in fact there is an excellent correlation between the stars of Orion, Canis and Argo and the Biblical birth narrative.
Gord wrote:What I am is someone with enough knowledge of astronomy to see the BS being passed on to, and eaten up by, the gullible people who desperately want to somehow "disprove" Christianity. The right way to do something like that is with facts, not the made up nonsense being espoused by people like Acharya S.
The agenda in Murdock’s book Christ in Egypt is to explore how the systemic parallels between Egyptian myth and the New Testament could have arisen. Unfortunately, hostile ignorant attacks on this whole area of scholarship are rife. You fail here to engage with very simple symbolic language and you attribute to Murdock claims that she does not make. Such elementary errors illustrate the big difficulties and cultural pathologies surrounding such work.

It is very sad that you self-professed skeptics exhibit such a weak grasp of a core issue in this topic, how a skeptical approach to mythology can avoid the mistake of failing to recognize symbolic language.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19632
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby scrmbldggs » Sun Jun 19, 2016 5:24 am

Robert Tulip wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote:you never bothered looking at the material you so vehemently defended?

Far from it. My comments stand entirely. I am intrigued by the massive failures of logic you people are making here.
I referred to what the movie actually said...


Robert Tulip wrote:If the vision in the movie shows something different from the text then I stand corrected. I was just relying on the written material...

:blink:
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8104
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Poodle » Sun Jun 19, 2016 5:47 am

Robert Tulip wrote:
Precis

... Lots of stuff in here about when an author says something which isn't true, it's obviously symbolic or parable ....

End Precis


I said I was disappointed, Robert. Now you're just being silly. But I see a good commercial future for this, so here are a few ideas for stuff...

Adolf Hitler was the Saviour of Liberalism in Germany. Think of the stories you can spin on that one then, when the inevitable challenges come in, claim it as a symbolic story demonstrating that he COULD have been liberal if only pigs really had flown.

There are alien stations on the Moon - obviously an oblique reference to the colonisation of America ( so obvious, that one :roll: ).

The sun appears to enter the constellation of the Southern Cross - oh, sorry. That one's been done.

These are not parables or symbols, Robert - they're simply things which aren't true.

Robert Tulip
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 8:50 pm

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Robert Tulip » Sun Jun 19, 2016 9:23 am

No one ever said the sun appears to enter the constellation of the Southern Cross. Gord made that up as an offensive effort to bully and demean the scholarship of Acharya S. If you guys are too thick to understand that then I am wasting my time here. Bye.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8104
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver

Postby Poodle » Sun Jun 19, 2016 10:26 am

Hmmmmm.

I think we upset him.


Return to “Book Reviews/Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests