I'm not giving this website up but I will have to give it a rest for a little while. I want many different flavors under an inclusive and creative atmosphere. This website has become pretty myopic. I'll be back at a later date... sooner than later, I promise. For now I'm going to broaden my horizons a little. BBL.

Damn, what'd I miss? LOL

Anyway, I understand that hashing over the religious stuff can get redundant at times here at booktalk and was probably not the original intended focus of Chris when he started it. But I think it has been made clear beyond all doubt in the past week or so that such a focus was almost entirely due to Stahrwe, because ever since he was banned, the religious threads have not gotten anywhere near as many bumps as they used to. They used to dominate the "Recent Posts" box, and now I hardly see them anymore. And I think that's a good thing for the time being. Lets take a break and see some fresh topics get the spotlight for a change.

However, the unique appeal of voting for Murdock's book this month as opposed to the other nominations so far, is that this time we have the opportunity to actually discuss it in depth with THE AUTHOR HERSELF.

No matter how redundant a topic may be at the moment, you can't pass up an opportunity to probe an author's mind directly like this. It'll be good for Booktalk.

this all touches quite an emotional nerve. I think Tat has over-reacted and that Camacho has a reasonable point. :ouch. I like it that Camacho speaks his mind quite bluntly.*

Looking at the recent discussions of non fiction, ones that have gone well include The Moral Landscape by Sam Harris and The Evolution of God by Robert Wright. Partly this is because they open interesting perspectives on atheism and raise ideas that are highly debatable within popular culture. Books that are less controversial seem to struggle to find people talking about them.

Tat makes a good point that Booktalk has never previously selected a book that advocates the argument that Jesus Christ did not exist. Over the time I have been here there has been discussion of such books, such as The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty and The Jesus Mysteries by Freke and Gandy, as well as some of DM Murdock's work, but never as a selected book.

The passion that mention of Christ In Egypt arouses here indicates to me that there would be active participation, and that people could learn a lot from it. Murdock is a brilliant writer, but she is actually quite isolated as far as mainstream response is concerned, probably because of the vitriol of her opponents. Talking about why her ideas are controversial, and how they have been received, would be interesting.

* (must admit though that I was sad to see bleachededen leave after some robust commentary)

Robert, of course Camacho had a reasonable point all along and I have no problem admitting that. It's reasonable to want to see more variety than just religious topics over and over again, especially from the perspective of someone who doesn't like the topic and has somewhere between little to no understanding of the topic. But did he have to try and draw me into a conflict over it?

You and I have debated things many times and disagreed time and again on certain points. But you're not a complete douche bag or an idiot in my view, Camacho is. Almost as big a douche as Stahrwe, but slightly lesser. And now he wears it as a badge in his signature line by his own doing. I must have struck an emotional nerve with that one. But you don't go starting fights you can't finish...

But, Robert, I will go ahead and apologize for calling Camacho a troll and comparing him to Stahrwe. I wouldn't want that to reflect badly on astrotheological studies or the subject matter involved in the suggested book. I know that Camacho has devised some strange ideas about what astrotheology is and about mythicism being some type of religious cult. But that's just due to not knowing or understanding what is actually going on. And reading this book would certainly clarify that. People taking the MP range from atheist to some open minded theists, which is the sort of crowd we have on the FTN. So much so that there's always little spats between theist and atheist perspectives of the MP. It's about as all inclusive as it gets in that respect. But you wouldn't know that by turning a blind eye to the whole thing and never looking into it...

Camacho brings up a good point in his usual direct and, admittedly, confrontational way. (Honestly, I'm not sure that calling him a "douche" is going to help matters muc--LOL).

Just to throw my two cents in, I've become rather disillusioned with the religious discussions here as well. Even before Stahrwe arrived on the scene, religion was usually the issue that generated the most discussion, and I don't see that as changing now that he's left. Personally, I'm interested in discussing religion purely from a scholarly or materialistic perspective. Whenever someone who is ideologically motivated gets involved, such purely analytical or scholarly dialogue is no longer possible. The Evolution of God by Robert Wright was a fascinating book and it started out as a great discussion until Stahrwe came in with his YEC-motivated derailments. I have argued here many times before that it is ultimately futile to have any kind of religious discussion with someone like Stahrwe who seems only motivated in rationalizing his existent religious beliefs. What has been most frustrating for me is that so many BT members have continued to debate Stahrwe to the point where we frequently had several threads going on at the same time with basically the same rational assertions hitting the same ideological brick wall over and over again ad nauseum. How many years would this have gone on if Stahrwe had not been booted? And, yet, as I explained to Chris in several PMs, this is obviously what many BT members want. They must get something out of it too. And, really, who am I to suggest a different direction for BT? I appear to be in the minority. So, in that sense, I totally commiserate with Camacho.

As for the D.M. Murdoch book, I'm tempted to join in simply to try to understand why the mythicist position is so appealing to a few people here. Unfortunately only a few people have expressed interest in discussing this book and, in my experience, these kinds of discussions--with only three or four people participating--tend to fall flat.

Thanks Geo. It's really nothing more than a scientific investigation approach towards the parallels between the Egyptian Religion and Christianity. Claims that were made in ZG part 1 are closely analyzed against the primary source material and scholarship both old and new. For whatever reason it may interest you, it would ultimatey be worthwhile to join in, scrutinize, ask questions, or whatever. And I'd make sure to have the author participating on top of that. This is one that I think needs to be discussed because of what it establishes and even the theory of Christian origins related near the end.

Tat, I bought one of Murdoch's books once--I think it was Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ. (I'm on vacation and so I can't check my library right now.) Anyway, I know I shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but the design was just painfully amateurish and I never got around to reading it. To be honest, this book looks like one of those countless hokey "spiritual" self-help (and self-published) Christian propaganda books that are out there and left me a bit sour on Murdoch. Indeed, the whole Murdoch thing seems rather cultish to me for its reliance on conspiracy theories. I don't know if I will ever get past the notion that this is a fringe belief that ultimately will not be adequately supported by the facts, although obviously I will need to read one of her books and assess for myself.

I just checked Amazon and the cover may have been redesigned at some point.

WWJ is actually a good read. I'm sure you'd like it if find and read it. But as for CiE:

I don't know if I will ever get past the notion that this is a fringe belief that ultimately will not be adequately supported by the facts, although obviously I will need to read one of her books and assess for myself.

First off, what "belief" are we talking about? Is there any call to "belief" in the first place? Certainly not in WWJ or CiE. Evidence of mythological parallels are discussed, theories of origins are discussed, sources are discussed, apologetic arguments are addressed, but nothing in the way of "belief" in any religious sense. These books are about scholarship which is why I and the others enjoy them. If this goes through and you join a discussion on CiE you'll be able to see for yourself (aside from what you've heard Robert or anyone else saying) what direction the books take.

tat tvam asi wrote: First off, what "belief" are we talking about?

It's my sense that the theory that's being cultivated in Murdoch's books are that Jesus never existed. I will refrain from further comment until I get a chance to read one of her books. Thanks, Tat.