Timothy Freke, Peter Gandy, Tom Harpur and others

[Veronica]

I just watched a documentary called "Pagan Christ" based on Tom  Harpur's book of the same name, trying to convince us that there never been an historical Jesus.  It reminds me another documentary I've seen where they were interviewing Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, who were comparing Jesus story to Dionysos and an other pagan god I don't remember the name.

Do you think that the methodology and research of these authors are reliable?  Does it brings a new light to world religions history or does it threathens Christianity?  Does their arguments have some kind value archaeologically speaking  or is it just a big joke?

For myself, I think I've heard enough historical evidences to know that Jesus walked on earth.  But still, they revive my interest to know for myself what part of the Bible is historical and which one is theological.

[archaeologist]

Do you think that the methodology and research of these authors are reliable?

the short answer is 'no'. it isnotbecause theydo not do research ut that they do not apply the strict standards to the other ancient texts that they do the Bible.

the many mss. that most secular researchers rely upon, tend to be written long after the supposed story took place and are usually written in legendary form.  (see Dr. Gregory Boyd's interview in 'A case for Christ' pgs.118-127 & Dr. Edmund Yamauchi's on pgs. 75 - 91)

a lot of these myths have gospel like and their main figures have Christ-like qualities but that is only because they were written AFTER the Christ's life and the gospels' publication

Does it brings a new light to world religions history or does it threathens Christianity?

the former -- No
the latter -- nothing can threaten christianity, the Bible tells us they can do nothing against the truth, and through years of debates and other conversations the opponents of Christ and the Bible can't do anything.  they rely on innuendo, interpretation, and other non-factual alternatives to make their case yet when push comes to shove they cannot provide one scrap of evidence to disprove Christ, The Bible and Christianity.

Does their arguments have some kind value archaeologically speaking  or is it just a big joke?

that would depned upon whom you talk to .  for some, the evidence (not the interpretation) they do discover goes along ways in supporting the Biblical accounts.  Dr. Charles Hapgood, recorded discovered evidence for Noah's flood in his book 'Path of the Poles'.  Though some say he was discredited, the evidence doesn't change.

But still, they revive my interest to know for myself what part of the Bible is historical and which one is theological.

as far as i am concerned, it is all historical and it is all theological.

[rumplesnitz]

In my opinion, works such as these are generally developed from a decision that the originator has made, which is that he/she does not wish to accept the consequences that the existence of a personal and morally authoritative entity exists, Who possesses the wisdom to instruct us in what is right and wrong.  They wish to indulge themselves in sensual pleasures and the concept of eternal life scares them because they know they can't have all they want in this life and still have a comfortable place to rest in the hereafter.  Judaism/Christianity is the only kind of religion that makes any sense at all and so it must be destroyed, in their eyes, for these folks to relax.

So I feel like their methodology and research is most likely clouded with the intent to focus on finding reasons to discount Jesus's existence, not to produce a fair and balanced (apologies to Fox Network) work.

As far as bringing 'new light' to the world - there's a couple of ways to answer that:
1.  The Bible states that there is nothing new under the Sun.  Since the serpent first disputed God's Word to Eve in the Garden of Eden, there have been detractors.  The good thing about this is that it provides an opportunity to sharpen one's faith, by forcing those who care, to study and gain a higher understanding of God.  The bad thing is that some folks are weak or gullible and are easily led astray by nay-sayers and a temptation toward some sort of fleshly indulgence.
2.  The Bible states that Satan was an angel of light, and is the false light of this world.  God was the original light, so a 'new light' would be something other than God.  That false light was already here before the folks you named came along, but they are helping to ensure that the false light gets a chance to kill the soul of a new generation.

'Christianity' is a pretty loose word these days, but the works of these people don't threaten The Word of God.  'Christianity' is loosing its power base to affect political influence on the world scene these days, and yes - each little hammer chips away some shards from the earthly stone.  One day there will not be a Christian left on the face of the Earth.  The Holy Spirit will be called back up into Heaven and mankind will be given its way for a while.  But that time will come at God's command, not because of one more cynical Atheist composition.

Archaeologically speaking I don't think Jesus left a material trace.  He led a simple life, owned no property, held no crown other than briers, and erected no structures for Himself other than the wooden cross He was lifted upon.  No one can prove He didn't exist, and no one can 'prove' He did other than by living by His Word and deciding for themselves if The Truth has brought them to a place of turmoil, or rest.

[wyocowoby]

Veronica have you read the "Jesus Mystery" by Freke and Gandy.  One thing I was very impressed with them was that the least of their references was 200.  The average references they had for each chapter was 300 to 400 references.  Read the books and then read your Bible it will make so much more sense.  Also there is NO historical evidence of a historical Jesus.  You can not use the Bible becuase it has been proven that its not even "correct" history.  Read the book by a former Christian scholar called "Misquoting Jesus".   To have a literal Jesus makes no sense at all but reading the Bible from a mythical point of view makes more sense.

[Sekhmet]

For a better understanding of Christianity might I suggest Pliny the Younger.  I rarely refer to Flavius Josephus but in the case of proving the historical being of Christ and early Christianity, I find him creditable.  Then there is Tactius report on Emperor Claudius demand that the relatives of Jesus be arrested and sent to him.

Belief in Christ is best said by him; blessed are those that believe without seeing.

Have a nice day!