Customer Reviews
Highly outdated and heavily biased thesis - By: Ms. J. Kirby, 21 Jul 2008 
The basic idea behind the Jesus Mysteries is that tired old story that Jesus never existed & was a product of various pagan myths. With a backgroundin New Age mysticism & spiritualism neither Gandy nor Freke have ever before demonstrated much grasp of critical history or biblical interpretation. During a short exchange I had with Peter Gandy on an Internet Discussion Board I asked him if any academics at respectable universities supported his thesis. Of course, he did not give me an answer as it would have to bein the negative. Instead, wah-wah book authors like to claim that real scholars secretly agree with them but dare not speak out & face the scorn of their colleagues. This, if true, would be most unfortunate for academic research but thankfully it is just another myth from the conspiracy theorists. I mean, to challenge the hegemony of evolution is professional death for any scientist but there seem to be quite a few willing to speak out. Perhaps, its just that Christians are more willing to take risks for their beliefs than our opponents.
The truth, of course, is that the academy is no longer the friend of Christianity. The Jesus Seminar are quite happy to challenge our most central claim about the Resurrection & there is no doubt that if their misguided researches were to tell them that Jesus was a pagan myth, they would be shouting it from the roof tops (or at least, the cover of Newsweek). Yet even they, willing to discard all notions of objectivity to recreate a Jesus who is to their liking, have no time for the Jesus myth. And if even the enemies of orthodox Christianity do not take it seriously, why on earth should we?
One thing that can be said for the Jesus Mysteries is that it has a long bibliography & lots of notes. This is an essential part of any scholarly work but sadlyin this case it does not live up to its billing. For a start, very many of the books referred toin the notes are extremely old & very hard to get hold of for any one without a first class library at hand. I took my copy of the Jesus Mysteries with me when I went to a summer school at the University of Wales thinking that there at least I would be able to find the books the authors refer to. Not a bit of it. Unperturbed, I tried the unfeasibly large University of London Library where I met with a shade more success but still found few of the older authorities on Mithras.
This is serious because many of the claims made about parallels between Jesus & pagan figures are only justified by reference to books that are nearly a hundred years out of date and, as J. P. Holding has demonstrated, modern Mithras studies have moved on a good deal. In the few cases where I could check their sources something rather surprising came up. Freke & Gandy are so selective & vague with their references that I could find a statement that totally contradicts their central thesis on the very page that they pointed to.
A couple of examples will surface to show we are not dealing with a pair of objective scholars but people who are willing to pull the wool over the eyes of their readers. They refer many times to The Mysteries of Mithra by Francis Cumont & publishedin 1903. Yet we find thatin his comparison of Mithraism & Christianity, Cumont (certainly no friend of Christianity himself) specifically states that unlike Mithras, Jesus was a real person.
When dealing with ancient sources they are even more blatant. On the basis of a third century picture of the crucifixion, which we now know is probably fake, the authors claim Bacchuus was crucified & Christians copied the idea. This is their piece de resistance & they even put a pictures of the likely fake on the cover of their book without breathing a word about the doubts about its veracity. And suppose there existed an earlier source who stated categorically that no pagan godman was crucified. That would destroy their case & reading the Jesus Mysteries you would assume that neither Freke or Gandy knew of such a source even if it existed. You would be wrong.
They quote from Justin Martyr many times about his concerns that pagans & Christians had some similar rituals (they did, & modern scholarship is totally unsurprised by this). He is a second century writer who therefore predates all the pictures of pagan godmen being crucified & he writes:
"Butin no instance, not evenin any of those called sons of Jupiter, did they imitate the being crucified; for it was not understood by them, all the things said of it having been put symbolically. Justin Martyr s First Apology LV.
No honest scholar would simply fail to quote this vitally important contradiction to their thesis. Gandy did attempt to explain away this passage when it was presented to him but failed utterly & certainly could not say why he ever felt he could simply miss it out of his book.
A few other points should be madein case anyone is still tempted to take this book seriously. The most quoted New Testament scholars are Ian Wilson & our old friend G. A. Wells (a professor of German!). They claim to make reference to Wilson because his books are widely available but far superior scholarship is to be foundin any library. It is ironic they are concerned that their readers should be able to find this book easily but use much older & more obscure books for the meat & drink of their argument, many of which are around 100 years old.
Also, they claim that the ancients knew the earth went around the sun. This is untrue. Although some Greek thinkers (well, one I know of) suggested this, the model of the Earth being the motionless centre was nearly universally accepted by the Greeks (including Aristotle & Ptolemy among others). To hint that the heliocentric model was knowledge lost because of Christianity is simply daft.
They say that no serious scholar believes Josephus wrote any of the Testamonium Flavium. I take it this is a joke or else they are claiming J. D. Crossan, R. T. France, Raymond Brown, John P. Meier, Michael Grant, Robin Lane Fox etc etc are not serious scholars. We might not agree with all of these guys (I mean, the last two are atheists) but we certainly consider them serious scholars.
Freke & Gandy claim early Christians destroyed ancient pagan texts wholesale. In fact the Oxford Companion to Classical Literature makes it clear that there was no policy of destruction & the church was activein preserving ancient texts. Glenn Miller has fully investigated this widespread & baseless accusation. The oft repeated accusation that Christians destroyed the Great Library of Alexandria is simply an eighteenth century myth. In fact, the quotationsin The Jesus Mysteries are from Ray MacMullens Enemies of the Roman Order which is a book that demonstrates that Christian policy was basically identical to pagan policy with regard to the suppression of subversive literature.
In their survey of the New Testament, the authors say that only seven of Pauls letters are genuine & that the Acts of the Apostles is a second century fiction. They explain that the Paul revealedin the genuine letters was a Gnostic & that the spurious letters & Acts were written to cover it up. The allegation that the letters are fakes is dealt with elsewhere but just suppose it is true. In that case, we would not expect to find Freke & Gandy quoting from Acts & the spurious letters to make their ridiculous point that Paul was really a Gnostic. But that is exactly what they do using both Colossians & Ephesians.
Lastly, I should point out a relatively minor error that would however expose any undergraduate who made it to the scorn & derision of their tutor. Pretty much throughout the book the authors refer to the Roman Catholic Church as if it were the same entity that it is today. The fact is that during the period they discuss there was no distinct Roman Catholic Church because all orthodox Christians were still united. I expect, however, that the policy was deliberate on the part of the authors as no wah-wah book is complete without an evil conspiracy emanating from the Vatican.
Still, if anachronism is the greatest crime a historian it is probably the least of the sins of Messrs Freke & Gandy. BEDES LIBRARY.
Popularisation of historical scholarship on the origins of Christianity - By: Jezza, 09 Jun 2008 
...and slightly annoyingin that way that popularisations sometimes are. Much of what'sin here is indisputable to proper scholars; some of it is Freke's own hypothesis about the relationship between Christianity & mystery cults, which I think is interesting much more subject to discussion. Unfortunately it's not always clear which is which. The book also gives the impression of being organised from back to front; that is, it ends up with a chapter demolishing the 'literalist' account of Christianity's origins, when surely this belongs at the beginning. I'd prefer a book which separates the agreed data about the 'historical Jesus', & details the wayin which the largely fictional account of the beginnings of Christianity has been constructed & subsequently revealed -- & then a separate section on the various hypotheses about why, of which Freke's is only one. Anyone have any recommendations?
Not a scholarly work, this poor evidence wouldn't stand in court. - By: internetmaster, 31 Mar 2008 Whilst I found this book interesting & of some value, I can't get over the fundamental mistakes that the authors makein this book. In many places you will find statements which are clearly not based upon the orginal document discussed but are either pilfered from someone elses book or based on assumptions. One such example is from Page 174 - "according to the gospels, Jesus died on Friday". This is, of course, a gross error. The gospels DO NOT state that Jesus died on Friday. Scholars acknowledge that Jesus may well have died as early as Tuesday & that Good Friday was a Church invention. Another example is on Page 40 where it states "The baby Jesus is visited by "Three Wise Men"". Here again, the book uses school Nativity plays as reference whereas the New Testament DOES NOT specify THREE Wise Men. You don't need to be a lawyer to find faultin the poor evidence givenin this book. Another edition is needed to fix the mistakes.
I'm converted......... - By: Agent Ajax, 16 Jul 2007 
The authors Timothy Freke & Peter Gandy have got it just right & they have researched their subject brilliantly. Although early onin the book they appear to confuse the Dionysian & Eleusinian Mysteries, I haven't one criticism against them. One thing the book doesn't cover very well is how the New Testament was significantly reshaped from the 4th century A.D. onwards & throughout the medieval era. However I am fully satisfied that The Jesus Mysteries Thesis presentedin this book is correct & fully explains the actual origins of Christianity.
An evolving polemic - By: Sarakani, 25 Sep 2006 Since this book came out, Christian scholars - true believers like US Professor Elaine Pagels have produced works that represent partial vindications of this book.
The one think about Freke & Gandy I disagree with is that Jesus did not exist. Most scholars agree he did & there are gospels, some present, some missing which support his existence. Professor Vermes has unearthed something of the Jewish Jesus. Jesus was very much a Jewish teacher who apparently was not interesetedin teaching gentiles (see any scholarly work on Jesus as a historical personage) - "cast not thy pearls before swine".
But it is true that there is very little substantially that we can say on Jesus (given most of the gospels did get facts wrong or distorted facts to suite "prophecies") - certainly at an archaeological level & it is true that Christianity "is the most Syncretistic" of world religions based on a Christian writerin "A handbook of living religions". In other words, Christianity does combine elements from several traditions including Judaism & Greek traditions with possible contributions from Egypt.
It is also true that modern Chritianity, "Literarism"in the book was almost single handedly put together by St Paul - a man who despised some of Jesus' original diciples like St Peter.
Freke & Gandy have setin train a clearer understanding of what Christianity should be. Not John's Gospel & the great commission but a richer, gnostic vein, as highlightedin the gospel of St Thomas.
Freke & Gandy's work is an expose of the dark side of Christianity. A side that has been inflicted not just on ancient pagans, but the entirety of S. America & most of Africa & parts of Asia where the bulk of true believers now live - at the expense of indigenous religions of which "Paganism", Greek civilisation & "Gnosticism" including Jewish Christianity as it was originally practised were victims.
Ruthless, at times scholarly, compelling & very gripping - I would recommend this book to those who wish to study Christianity with clarity. Today, Elaine Pagels & other scholars are trying to restore a spirit of the original Christianity - its harmonies with other traditions rather than its absolutism. I wish them luck given the fierce opposition they are likely to face from certain elements of a more established Christianity.
