| Language Arts & Disciplines |
|
|  |
| Customer Reviews: | | Average Customer Review: ( 2 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
2 of 2 found the following review helpful:
 Do not be deceived! Feb 03, 2010
By Homer Mason
To me, this book exemplifies an allegorical approach to scripture quite nicely. For Paula, Luke/Acts, Matthew, Revelation and numerous other books in the Bible are to be interpreted by means of allegory. She believes that these Biblical books were written by those whose philosophy is only to be understood by the initiated inner circle. She views the Bible as a kind of Trojan horse, in which the secret, esoteric messages of Luke/Acts and other books are hidden. According to her, the Bible was corrupted by the orthodox Christianity that actually opposed the true teachings of Jesus the Nazarene. But she is thankful that the true message was yet preserved in the hidden interpretation found in these various books. She says that those with "ears to hear" may understand the message conveyed, while the un-initiated literalists will have the message that keeps them enslaved to the false doctrines of fundamentalism. One of which is the concept of a wrathful, vengeful, God; the "angry Jehovah" of the Old Testament with all His blood sacrifices and cruel wrath. Accordingly, this God of the Old Testament was the creation of the enemy, and lacks compassion and kindness. To balance out "the masculine energy" of the God, there must be "the feminine energy" of the Goddess. From a supposed allegorical interpretation of various Old Testament passages, Paula traces the sister/bride, goddess/queen thread through the time of Christ.
Paula claims to be following Philo's rules for allegory in her alleged understanding of Luke/Acts. And as the title implies, it is the message unlocked by Josephus' account. She claims that these authors were neo-platonic philosophers following after the teachings of Pythagoras, and encrypted, as he did, their doctrines in enigmas. Some evidence she uses to support this understanding of Luke/Acts can be found in several of the chapters of Luke. In these chapters she multiplies the numbers together to get some of the Pythagorean sacred numbers.
She makes the case that Plutarch was the actual author of Luke/Acts, and believes it highly likely that Julius Tiberius Alexander was the author of Josephus. She claims that these initiated ones were of the sect of the Nasarenes, of whom Paul was the enemy. According to her, the role players in the story of Jesus and his bride (God and Goddess) were the true disciples of the Pythagorean and Platonic philosophy.
The Jesus from "Josephus' Jesus" is not the divine Jesus, God incarnate, of the New Testament. According to this book, the "historical Jesus" was a creation of Caesar Augustus, who along with Mary Magdalene was to fulfill for the Jews the prophesied Messiah, "dying and resurrected God," and for the Egyptians the God and Goddess, Osiris and Isis. The purpose of which was to unite the Jewish and Egyptian religions to bring about peace to the Roman world. Her chronologies deal with the bloodline of Jesus and Mary, who, as she works to prove, were married and had 3 children. Jesus being the son of Alexander III, and the grandson of Mariamme, wife of Herod the Great, who was murdered through the accusation of Salome. As well, she ties the Saulus of Josephus to the Paul of the New Testament, who she says was the grandson of Salome, Herod the Great's sister. The Bloodline of Salome versus the bloodline of Mariamme. One of the fundamental messages she "uncovers" is the conspiracy of Saul of Tarsus who subversively changes his name to Paul and infiltrates the the true teachings of Jesus the Nazarene and persecutes and kills His followers. Accordingly, Jesus' teachings were replaced by "Paul's Christianity" and made orthodox by Constantine in 325 B.C. at the council of Nicea.
Question: If this truly is the case, why would Constantine build his "Church of the Holy Apostles" on the site of a temple to Aphrodite? And why on his "Arch of Constantine" did he have decorative images of Victoria, and sacrifices to gods like Apollo, Diana, or Hercules? Why is he pictured wearing the Apollonian sun-rayed diadem in the dedication of the capital of Byzantine Christianity? Actually, his life looks more in line with the teachings of Paganism than of Christianity.
I was recommended this book by my friend who posted the previous review. He and I have slight disagreements about the sincerity of Paul. This book has been a source of good discussion, and I hope it will continue to be. I do enjoy being challenged, and this book is definitely a challenge to my way of thinking, as I tend to take the literal interpretation where there is no obvious symbolism.
As a serious student of Scripture and history, I like to rely on facts. It seems to me that most of this book relies on more conjecture than fact, with a few not so apparent factual errors in the mix. As she often appeals to what is not said in history, and therefore uncertain, it is sometimes impossible to prove the contrary. But to the conclusion of the sum of all her collected facts, opinions, and hyperbole, I find more opposing evidence than I need, to believe the contrary.
Paula seems to give weight to the pagan philosophy of the mystery schools in her doctrines. She would have us take away what made the original christianity unique (namely , the divine Way and Word of God), and thereby reduce it to be on par with all other religions. This allegorical Jesus comes close to the Jesus of the Gnostics. She wouldn't disagree that Gnosticism was the worst enemy of the early church, but would disagree as to which were the "good guys", and the "bad guys".
If the notion of Jesus being divine makes you uncomfortable, and you would like an alternative, here you have it. I am truly amazed at how smoothly the threads are woven throughout this story. I don't mind admitting that, if I did not believe this doctrine so dangerous, I would give it a 5 star review, but as I now see it such a review would cause my conscience much irritation.
This is why I believe it is dangerous: The most reliable manuscripts of the account of Jesus Christ's life and teachings tell us that He said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: NO man cometh onto the Father but by me." John 14:6 And his followers taught, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12 If this is TRUE in content, then any teaching that does away with this Way, Truth, and Life does away with the salvation that accompanies it, and leaves many without escape! This is precisely what Gnosticism does. That is why I believe it is dangerous. Make sense? If anyone doesn't believe these statements to be true, then I can clearly see how they would not think it dangerous to do away with this, Way, Truth and Life.
Who speaks truth?
2 of 3 found the following review helpful:
 Stay away, I'm told. Jan 30, 2010
By Carl M. Felland
This author's search has resulted in a work that gives light to Luke/Acts and complementary literature holding the keys to an allegorical interpretation of the Scripture. She makes the case that the reason Plutarch did not write about Jesus in the books attributed to him is that he is actually the author of Luke/Acts. Her integration of the message of Philo, Josephus, and other contemporary authors helps give an alternative to a literal reading of the Bible. This allegorical alternative is seen as very dangerous to many in the church.
I got to know the author through our common distrust of "Apostle Paul." I came to distrust Paul by looking through a conservative lens, she through a liberal lens. However, we came to similar conclusions. Paula paints a clear picture of how the book of Acts could speak so well of Paul, yet be a treatise showing him as the enemy (as even other conservative scholars have pointed out). She has the author writing in such a way that his book would not be destroyed by the censors.
When she applied Philo's Rules of Allegory to Luke/Acts, Saul/Paul was identified as the enemy. As an example, under "noteworthy omission," Saul is announced as the enemy by comparing Luke 1:71 "That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us," with Psalm 18 (and 2 Samuel 22:1) "... the LORD delivered him from the hand of all his enemies, and from the hand of Saul..."
Josephus' Jesus gives historically verifiable genealogies for both Saul/Paul (hint: Josephus' Saulus and Luke's Saulus are actually the same person) and for the Messiah and the Messiah's literal Bride. The author illustrates a feud between competing families leading to the competing Gospel messages some have pointed out within the New Testament.
Previously I gave Del Tondo's Jesus Words Only a very favorable review. I still appreciate Del Tondo's work, but now see the difficulty he had in citing Ebionite (Nazarene/Essene) sources to discredit Paul's claims, without being able to consider the Messiah taught by these same people.
Paula Gott's writings are clear and concise, although sometimes it seems she expects that the reader has read her previous works (and she's so liberal). She cites literature that would be well known in the days of the formation of Christianity, yet literature that has not been taught in the church with the same vigor as the Scripture has been taught. She takes current scholarship's questions, for example MacDonald's essay Abstract for The Shipwrecks of Odysseus and Paul (Journal of Higher Criticism, Fall 1994), and seems to provide answers that make more sense.
I'm told to stay away so I don't get distracted...
|
| | |
|
|
