• In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 709 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 1:09 am

Gerald Massey

Engage in conversations about worldwide religions, cults, philosophy, atheism, freethought, critical thinking, and skepticism in this forum.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
User avatar
Robert Tulip

2B - MOD & SILVER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6497
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
18
Location: Canberra
Has thanked: 2717 times
Been thanked: 2659 times
Contact:
Australia

Gerald Massey

Unread post

Flann 5 wrote:provide the primary sources Massey allegedly cites
The thirty one page summary document in question is http://www.theosophical.ca/otherdocumen ... Massey.pdf

In considering a controversial author such as Massey, it is best not to rely on slanted distortions from church based heresy hunters. They have an agenda to claim that long debunked literal stories such as the miracles of Jesus actually happened, in defiance of the laws of physics. Anyone with such contempt for evidence can be expected to play fast and loose with material from those they wish to slander, and is not to be trusted without checking their facts.

And unsurprisingly, the mistakes by the Christians are bad. The above linked short document, which Flann5 cites as evidence that Massey did not use primary sources, says at the top of the first page "See "Natural Genesis." from the same author for original references".

Since Massey's work is more than a century old it is in the public domain. Natural Genesis (Part One) is available freely at http://www.metaphysicspirit.com/books/T ... l.%20I.pdf

The Table of Contents indicates the original ran to more than 500 pages. I have not read it, but skimming the link is instructive as most pages have footnotes to sources, often several.

So once again, the fundamentalist Christian claim that mythicism lacks sound method is exposed as hypocrisy, projecting their own lack of rigour onto real scholars.

This responds to appalling lies about Massey presented at a booktalk thread.
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Gerald Massey

Unread post

Robert Tulip wrote:

Flann 5 wrote:
provide the primary sources Massey allegedly cites



The thirty one page summary document in question is http://www.theosophical.ca/otherdocumen ... Massey.pdf
Hi Robert. The request was to provide the citations from the primary sources Massey allegedly cites. Simply linking Massey's writings does not do this. You say there are sources cited in footnotes. Be specific in response to Holding's critique and give the citation from the primary source Massey is supposedly citing in each of the cases Holding raises.

Holding is quite correct that even atheist and fellow mythicist Richard Carrier criticises the claim that the Luxor images are what they are said by mythicists to represent i.e a pagan parallell from which Christianity allegedly borrowed.
http://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/580
Robert Tulip wrote:In considering a controversial author such as Massey, it is best not to rely on slanted distortions from church based heresy hunters. They have an agenda to claim that long debunked literal stories such as the miracles of Jesus actually happened, in defiance of the laws of physics. Anyone with such contempt for evidence can be expected to play fast and loose with material from those they wish to slander, and is not to be trusted without checking their facts.
Here you assert your apriori belief in philosophical naturalism as being fact. Presumably you are eternally existent and omniscient and can verify that nothing supernatural has ever happened in all that time anywhere. And God is subject to laws he created apparently?
And all this when even the enemies of Christ are on record as acknowledging that he worked miracles albeit it was claimed to be by the power of the devil according to them.
Everyone is free to believe what they choose however outlandish,but when claims are put in public forums you can expect criticism of them.

As far as I'm concerned people can judge for themselves whether or not Holding makes valid criticisms of Massey's writings and whether he suppports these in the various articles he also links. http://www.tektonics.org/lp/massjc.php
I think he does. We've been through all this before and hardcore mythicists will not be persuaded. Nonetheless I provide these articles to alert those unfamiliar with these things to their preposterous and unhistorical nature. I won't be wasting any more of my time on this subject of mythicist theories and claims which I've addressed a great deal here in the past.
Last edited by Flann 5 on Mon Mar 27, 2017 11:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Robert Tulip

2B - MOD & SILVER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6497
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
18
Location: Canberra
Has thanked: 2717 times
Been thanked: 2659 times
Contact:
Australia

Re: Gerald Massey

Unread post

I am not getting into a debate about JP Holding since I regard him as a moron.

I showed that his assertion of a lack of references is the easiest thing to refute.

The fact that flann and stahrwe failed to do such a simple search shows they are here to troll against evidence-based methods, not for mutual learning.
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Gerald Massey

Unread post

Flann 5 wrote:You say there are sources cited in footnotes. Be specific in response to Holding's critique and give the citation from the primary source Massey is supposedly citing in each of the cases Holding raises.
Robert Tulip wrote:I showed that his assertion of a lack of references is the easiest thing to refute.

The fact that flann and stahrwe failed to do such a simple search shows they are here to troll against evidence-based methods, not for mutual learning.
What a cop out Robert. You have failed to specify a single primary source in support of Massey's claims which were challenged by Holding. Instead you resort to namecalling and a vague allusion to sources being included in the footnotes. Answer the questions with specific primary source citations or stop bluffing.

Let's remember that we are dealing with a theory that asserts that Jesus Christ did not exist historically,a claim that is regarded by the overwhelming majority of biblical scholars and historians as risible.

No wonder though when some sceptics feed themselves on a diet of Richard Carrier, Daniel Dennett, Dan Barker and Dawkins that eventually they believe that which they clearly desire to be true, however ridiculous. They call this farce critical thinking no less!

http://www.evidenceunseen.com/christ/wa ... gan-myths/
After this I leave you to your superior wisdom by which you will live or die ultimately should heaven forbid, Christianity be true.
User avatar
Robert Tulip

2B - MOD & SILVER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6497
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
18
Location: Canberra
Has thanked: 2717 times
Been thanked: 2659 times
Contact:
Australia

Re: Gerald Massey

Unread post

Flann 5 wrote:vague allusion to sources being included in the footnotes.
Mr Holding spectacularly failed to notice what Massey says about sources. In the short book that Holding says has no references, at the top of the first page Massey indicated where his references can be found. You can read it in the opening post here.

Such level of error is good grounds for suspicion of Holding's bona fides.

My link to sources in footnotes was not a "vague allusion" but rather a direct link. If you want to check any of Massey's claims read the links in the opening post of this thread. Comparative Religion is a massive field, not one that is simply refuted by calls to read the Bible.

Maybe Massey does get some things wrong. But don't rely on fundamentalist Christians for any critical analysis of such topics, since they are looking out to defend their completely wrong theories of history and protect their flock against facts.
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Gerald Massey

Unread post

Robert Tulip wrote: Mr Holding spectacularly failed to notice what Massey says about sources. In the short book that Holding says has no references, at the top of the first page Massey indicated where his references can be found. You can read it in the opening post here.
As far as I can see J.P.Holding did not say that Massey did not reference sources sometimes. The problem is that often these sources are invalid such as the Toledeth Jeshu for example as Holding demonstrates. Secondly he often does not provide sources for his claims and in particular primary sources which is what is required.

For example as Holding points out Massey claims various titles for Horus such as Good Shepherd,Lamb of God etc which you will find in Holding's critique. He says that the only sources he could find for these were esoteric sources. He then challenges Massey supporters to produce these alleged titles in the original contexts, that is the primary Egyptian sources.

Enough of the evasion Robert. Have a look at these titles Massey claims for Horus which Holding quotes him on and provide the primary sources for them in the ancient Egyptian texts.
You simply refuse to answer the challenge and think merely by saying that Massey provides some references and sources,(though he doesn't provide primary sources in the areas Holding challenges) you can evade specific questions and simply refuse to answer them.
You can fool yourself all you like but if you are not prepared to be specific and answer specific challenges and questions with references to primary sources, this conversation is over as far as I'm concerned.
User avatar
Robert Tulip

2B - MOD & SILVER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6497
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
18
Location: Canberra
Has thanked: 2717 times
Been thanked: 2659 times
Contact:
Australia

Re: Gerald Massey

Unread post

We had a good booktalk discussion of Christ in Egypt by DM Murdock, which is a good source to assess the simplified Horus claims made in the zeitgeist movie. See also Murdock's Zeitgeist Sourcebook

http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/z ... cebook.pdf

If you read Christ in Egypt, then I will discuss sources with you. You are approaching this from a very thin evidence base and weak method. Your critique of philosophical naturalism shows that you put tradition before logic.
User avatar
FTL99
Float like a butterfly, post like a bee!
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:32 pm
12
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: Gerald Massey

Unread post

The fact is that Gerald Massey was very heavily peer-reviewed by the top Egyptologists and other scholars of his day. Most of Massey's work has been substantiated by modern Egyptologists independently.

Who Is Gerald Massey?
User avatar
tat tvam asi
Reading Addict
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:57 pm
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 571 times
Been thanked: 549 times

Re: Gerald Massey

Unread post

FTL99 wrote:The fact is that Gerald Massey was very heavily peer-reviewed by the top Egyptologists and other scholars of his day. Most of Massey's work has been substantiated by modern Egyptologists independently.

Who Is Gerald Massey?
Cricket's.......
Post Reply

Return to “Religion & Philosophy”