Customer Reviews

The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviours Christianity Before Christ

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

What most Christians don't realize is that a great many of the elements of the story of Jesus Christ as related in the New Testament gospels are not unique in the recorded history of man. In fact, there have been at least fifteen demigods, saviors, or avatars that preceded Jesus in various times, places, and cultures -- including some that predate the Christian era by millennia! In 1875, Kersey Graves wrote a ground breaking treatise that told of these other miraculous and immaculately conceived personages, that stars pointed out the time and birthplace of the various saviors; the 25th of December is a common birthday attributed to these men; the 346 striking analogies between Jesus and Krishna; the stories of Appollonius, Osiris, and Magus; previous virgin mothers and virgin-born gods; prophecies by the figure of a serpent; the Holy Ghost of an oriental origin; Christ as a spiritual medium; the rival claims of saviors; and messianic prophecies. This photomechanical reprint of a true and seminal classic is now made available for a whole new generation of readers. The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors is very highly recommended reading for students of Christianity in general, and the anthropological/sociological role of the redeemer figure in the cultural and religious histories of the world.

There is a reason this book keeps being reprinted: It is very important. Graves's seminal work has been widely assailed over the past century, yet it holds enough germane information concerning the world that is remains a classic, despite its perceived and real flaws.

I view "The World's 16 Crucified Saviors" to be so salient that I wrote the foreword to this edition, defending it against unwarranted criticism, of which there has been much, and much of which, it is shown, has been illusionary. The criticism Graves does warrant is that he failed to cite his sources often and carefully enough. Despite the fact that Graves was not a meticulous record-keeper, or, at least, what we have of his is hasty in its citation, we nevertheless possess significant, worldwide religious correspondences that go well beyond this one tome.

In spite of this difficulty, it turns out that many of the claims made popular by this clearly classic work are accurate to varying degrees, thus absolving Graves from the untoward characterization of his labor. The book is not fallacious--perhaps overly ambitious in its declarations, although it is not hard to get caught up in the moment when one discovers the real significance of comparative mythology. In that regard, this one small freethought book, written by an ex-minister, may have done more than practically any other in the past century to explore the odd correspondences among the world's religions and religious figures. These correspondences reveal a unity of thought that is extremely important today.

Acharya S, author of "The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold" and "Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Unveiled"

For its time, this text was revolutionary. Many, though not all, of its assertions have been supported by recent scholarship and proven by a multitude of evidence. This text should be respected for the many contributions it made to our understanding of the subject of comparative religion.

Kersey Graves's Sixteen Crucified Saviors does not deserve the vitriol that it has suffered. Ironically, this author has been 'crucified' by critics since its publication, most of whom have revealed Christian biases. For an example, we need look no further than one particularly fallacious review of this very edition, right here on Amazon:

'Jeri Nevermind' claims, "Christianity not only did not borrow doctrines from pagan sources, but paganism borrowed from Christianity."

It would certainly be convenient for Christian fundamentalists and literalists were it true that Christianity never borrowed doctrines from pagan sources. However, this simply is not the case.

"Paganism" traditionally refers to religions and spiritual practices of pre-Christian Europe. So, strictly speaking, it would be impossible for pagan religions to borrow from Christianity, since Christianity did not exist yet. Obviously, this reviewer is using the term "paganism" to refer to polytheistic traditions or folk religion worldwide, as seen from a Western or Christian viewpoint. This usage of the term reveals the reviewer's Christian bias.

Later in his review, Jeri asserts that the 'history of religion' field of academia is "outdated."

That simply isn't true. Today, in the U.S. and abroad, many universities and some high schools offer courses on the history of religion as well as on the subject of "comparative religion," which specifically address the issue of cross-cultural influences on various religions, including pagan influence on Christianity.

I can't imagine Jeri would have any quarrel with fields such as "history of art" or "history of language." Such fields endlessly reveal the common sense fact that cultural traditions evolve over time due to influences from neighboring cultures. Are we to accept the biased notion that the Christian religion is the only aspect of culture that is above such influence and variation? Of course not. Every culture has its myths. There are Egyptian myths, Greek myths, and - yes - even Jewish myths.

Admittedly, critics are justified in arguing that Kersey Graves's text is dated and imperfect (as should be expected - it was published in the nineteenth century), but to go so far as to claim that Christianity is somehow absolutely free of influence from any other religion is absurd.

Jeri further claims, "There is now not a single credible scholar anywhere in the world that will argue in favor of this theory," referring to Graves's thesis - that there was pagan influence on Christianity. Actually, the reverse is true. Any scholar who claims that Christianity has somehow remained impervious to influence from all other religions is doing so in direct contradiction to the universal and fundamental precept of the study of culture itself - that culture is relative, evolves, etc. That religious traditions borrow from each other is simply a fact. It is implied in the entire concept of 'culture,' of which religion is an integral part.

In conclusion, Kersey Graves's The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors is not the most up to date nor the most well cited text on this subject. It is, however, one of the first and one of the most important, historically. If you're new to this subject, the works of Robert M. Price or Acharya S. might better suit you. One particularly good starting point, in my opinion, is D.M. Murdock's Christ in Egypt: The Horus Jesus Connection, which meticulously cites primary sources and credible scholars.

I feel that most of you are more or less illitterate in trying to kill this book by giving it one star reviews. That's totally unfair on behalf of it's author and those among us who love to read books that mythicize Christ and expose the Jesus myth for what it really is - just a myth! If you guys can't cope with that then that is your bussiness. OK here's some few questions for ya that you're all pretty much familiar with already - one , WHERE IN THE WORLD IS ANY PHYSICAL EVIDENCE THAT THIS JESUS GUY EVEN EXISTED? Why keep being obsessed with some Jesus character who says people should eat each other and threat each other mercilessly and who says he comes with a sword instead of peace and who says people should hate their families? I can't understand this insane obsession to try to prove something about Jesus. Someone once said that wherever Jesus walks , money talks. It inspired me to paint two Christ paintings in oil colour using Old Holland oil colours and one of them has recently been exhibited in our Hallgrimskirkja church. Kersey Graves shall be one of the most illuminating names of researchers into human history of all times and one star reviews are not going to stop that. Also , note that Kersey isn't saying anywhere that he's sure that Jesus is a myth. What he is suggesting in the book for fundamentalist Christians and others who may think that a godman walked the Earth in some form is to question the authoriative sources who have asserted so - and to go where the evidence will take them.

This book is a joke. And I am an atheist who does not believe the jesus of the gospels was an actual historical person. I am a fan of the masterful work of Earl Doherty, Robert Price, Randel Helms, etc. -- these men are geniuses. Their work is scholarly. This book was a MAJOR disappointment. It makes all kinds of claims, but has no support, evidence, or basic footnotes for back-up. For example, it says all these things about Krishna -- but gives no references. What story is the author erefring to? What text? When was it written? Every claims in this book is like that -- totally unstubstaniated. Don't waste your money. It is a very enticing book from its title, but it is a real dud.

Yes there is information available as to other avatars, but this is not the book to get this from. Even those who give this book a positive review state that the information is flawed. The only reason that this book continues to sell is due to its title and the fact that there are not many other books specific to this topic and that are of quality.

"Kersey Graves 1813-1883....Graves was a sceptic, atheist, and spiritualist. All sources Graves used were Freethought texts (i.e. no original sources), which in turn had synthesised random, miss-understood and half-digested pieces of mis-information...modern scholarship has cast serious doubt on the veracity of such claims, and demonstrated that Graves' scholarship is deficient. Graves massaged his data to fit his thesis, and where he had no data he falsified it...He often failed to cite proper sources for verification; although, many of the most important facts collated in this work were derived from Sir Godfrey Higgins' Anacalypsis" (wikipedia). "Other sources include Tom Paine's The Age of Reason, Robert Taylor's The Diegesis, Constantin-Fran?ois Volney's The Ruins; or a Survey of the Revolutions of Empires, Louis Jacolliot's The Bible in India, and Ernest Renan's "romance," The Life of Jesus." [...](John Benedict Buescher)

After reading Gerald Massey's 'Ancient Egypt - light of the world' and being very impressed, I was hoping for great things from Kersey Graves book. I was somewhat perturbed by Graves' obvious emotional hatred of Christianity, but I was more interested in authentic, verified information and persisted. What came next told me that this book was bogus:

Pg 133 Footnote "The author desires it to be understood with respect to the cases of crucifixion here briefly narrated, that they are not vouched for as actual occurrences, of which there is much ground to doubt. It has neither been his aim or desire to prove them to be real historical events, nor to establish any certain number of cases. Indeed he deems it unimportant to know, if it could be determined, whether they are fact or fiction, or wether one God was crucified, or many".

Pg299 Footnote "The author deems it proper to state here, with respect to the comparison between Christ and Chrishna, that some of the doctrines which he has selected as constituting a part of the religion of the Hindu saviour are not found in the reported teachings of that deified moralist." What follows is Kersey saying that since, in his opinion, Christians have taken liberty, so can he.

To what more then can we believe from this book? To what encouragement do we have to continue on reading this book when such claims are made?

"Nevertheless, even Theosophist founder Helena Blavatsky-herself a writer of syncretistic, comparative religious histories, and also inspired by Godfrey Higgins' Anacalypsis-thought little of Graves' work. In Isis Unveiled, her own effort to out-Higgins Higgins, she noted the absurdity of Graves' claim that anyone had ever believed that Gautama Buddha or Apollonius-two of his sixteen saviours-were actually "saviours," except in the loosest sense of the term, or had been, in any sense, crucified. She also faulted Graves for relying on Orientalist visionary Sir William Jones (1746-1794) in some of his "hazardous speculations." [...](John Benedict Buescher)

On a number of occasions the present author states that he leaves critical information out due to lack of space. Hogwash, most of the book, especially the last 124 pages contain simplistic, unverified ramblings that are a continuation of the axe Kersey has to grind with Christianity. The following is an example of this:

"The Scientific Errors of Christ (Heading)
That Jesus Christ was neither a natural or moral philosopher is evident from the following facts:-
1. He never made any use of the word "philosophy".
2. Never gave any use of the word "science".
3. Never spoke of a natural law..." pg 402

Yep, I think we should crucify Jesus Christ on these SINS alone, even worse for not mentioning 'quantum physics'. If you like this sort of stuff, there's a whole lot more i.e. ""That he omitted to teach the most important lesson that can engage the attention of man, viz: that the great purpose of life is self development" pg 403. Is this not the biggest understatement of all time?

How about bible misquotes? "21. And Christ's declaration, that those who marry are not worthy of being saved (see Luke 20:34), shows that he was very ignorant of the nature of sexual functions of the human system" pg 405. I just happen to have a bible and like to check these things. This scripture describes the post resurrection where people do not marry, as they are as the angels. It in no way says that those who are married in this life cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.

Actually I'm glad I read this book for the following reason. This book states that there are no historic records of Jesus Christ from the era in which Christ physically walked this earth. Such hearsay finally got me to look into this and I discovered information to the contrary. I discovered that the Jewish Historian Josephus did mention Jesus Christ i.e. Antiquities XVIII, iii, 3. Most scholars have "no doubts" about the authenticity of the majority of the passage. There are 2 versions as per manuscripts. It does however appear that the shorter version finds greater favour with scholars i.e.:

"About this time appeared Jesus, a wise man and He drew to Himself many Jews. And when Pilate, at the denunciation of those that are foremost among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those who had first loved Him did not abandon Him. The tribe of Christians named after Him did not cease to this day."

IF ONE FAILS TO ACCEPT THIS, I discovered that there is a reference to John the Baptist in the work of Josephus Antiquities of the Jews XVIII Chapter 5. In reference to this passage of which is too lengthy to produce here, I present the following quote:

"The passage on John the Baptist is well-nigh universally accepted as affording no grounds for reasonable scepticism, and as therefore providing a most valuable external proof that John was a historical character." [...]. (Sacred-texts - 'The slavonic Josephus' account of the Baptist and Jesus') I.e. If John the Baptist existed, I'm personally feeling pretty good about the fact that Jesus did also. As to kersey graves view that there is no record as to massacre of the innocents by Herod, I would point to Macrobius Saturnalia (ii, 4) in opposition to this.

I am also glad for having read Kersey Graves book, as I am now aware of the 'Anacalypsis' and have purchased this book. I am also keen to read 'Isis Unveiled' and the Bhagavad-Gita for further study. I do not dismiss Kersey's premise that there were other Avatars that had a similar Christic drama to Jesus Christ; a superior source is needed however.

This book would have been better served with the presentation of the facts alone, inclusive of specific source material; facts that I do believe exist, but alas have been bludgeoned and blended in with Kersey Graves Christianity hating, 'axe grinding' illogic emotionalism. The world will always hate the Christ and seek justifications in its inquietude. To align oneself to this is to do an injustice to one's true self. To also think that the Christ force is particular to Christianity is also a grave mistake.

If you have no interest in facts, this might be the book for you! Published in 1875 this book is a curiosity but little more. Even in the Victorian era when this was written, this book was considered silly by scholars.

There was a period in biblical scholarship when many scholars investigated whether or not Christianity had borrowed doctrines from paganism, especially the mystery religions. If you are curious, look up the 'History of Religions' theory, in any book about biblical scholarship. It lasted from the middle of the Victorian era to about 1920. Which is why this book, with its stilted language, dates from 1875.

But all this was long, long ago. There is now not a single credible scholar anywhere in the world that will argue in favor of this theory. Not one. Massive numbers of books were published on the theory, and whole libraries still groan from their weight.

The result of all this investigation? That Christianity not only did not borrow doctrines from pagan sources, but paganism borrowed from Christianity. The earliest Gnostic writing was a hundred years after the death of Christ, for example, yet the Gnostics stole names of apostles to give their works added credibility.

As for the subject of so-called 'dying and rising gods' here is a quote from Dr Jonathan Z Smith: "the category of dying and rising gods, once a major topic of scholarly investigation, must now be understood to be largely a misnomer based on imaginative reconstructions and exceedingly late or highly imaginative texts".

Want to investigate further? To read a summary of the entire "History of Religions" theory, as it was called, please buy "The Jesus Legend" by Paul Eddy and Gregory Boyd. You can order this from Amazon today. Or for a book written on the popular level, try "The Gospel and the Greeks" by Nash. For a top flight scholar on the subject: Martin Hengel and "The Son of God". Other scholars who have written books on this subject: Edwin Yamauchi, Gunter Wagner, and C H Dodd.

Mix a little truth with a lot of myth and speculation and you get the Da Vinci Code warmed over. It makes interesting reading but be aware where the facts end and the speculation and myth begins. Impartial authors are difficult to find so the best avenue is to read authors on both sides of the topic.