|John Lamb's Not in His Image: A Critique|
This is one of those books I put down after only 75 pages because it was making such incredible claims that it became unbearable to read.
We're told that historians have regarded the death as Hypatia as the end of classical civilization in Europe. Lash has read historians? Then why is he still using the term "Dark Ages"  which historians have long rejected for the less prejudicial "Early Middle Ages"?
We're told that Hypatia "invented a prototype of the astrolabe."  Really? That's not what the data tells us; there are sources that credit the invention of this at least a century earlier, and Hypatia's father, Theon the mathematcian, wrote a treatise on astrolabes. Hypatia was impressive but let's not go so far as to change history here.
Lamb's sources include non-credible authors like Barbara Walker, G. R. S. Mead, Helen Ellerbee, Martin Bernal, John Allegro, and Baigent and Leigh.
He refers to a "sea change in the collective consciousness of humanity"  as a mystical event which created an excess of narcisssism "in the general population."
He claims that Constantine made Christianity the state religion in 325 AD.  Wrong; state paganism remained the official religion until Theodosius I.
He claims that the scholars who examined the Dead Sea Scrolls were "controlled by the Vatican" .
All of this, mind, in the service of a Gnostic soteriology which Lamb believes will save the world from the "redeemer complex" inherent in the monotheistic religions like Christianity. Most of the book that I read up to page 75 was a conglomeration of Gnostic commentary, doing little more than assuming the system true rather than proving that it was, save perhaps, Lamb may have supposed, by default.
It became too painful to read after this, as the errors simply became overhwhelming.