contra Hasis (the anti-mushroom “psychedelic witch”):
if pagans accused early Christians of all bad things, how come pagans didnt accuse Christians of using mushrooms?
The fact that pagans didnt accuse xns of msh isnt evidence that xns didnt use msh; it is in fact evidence that pagans venerated msh, which increases the likelihood xns used msh.
His pagans/early Christianity argument backfires. And gives credulity to pagans’ accusations. And contradicts his medieval era argument.
In fact, everyone used and venerated mushrooms, including pagans and Christians.
Psilocybin was the engine of the mystery religion banqueting tradition.
Thomas Hatsis asserts that in the early Christian era there was mushroom Prohibition, therefore we know Christians didn’t use mushrooms.
Thomas Hatsis asserts that in the medieval Christian era there was not mushroom Prohibition, therefore we know Christians didn’t use mushrooms.
(as if pagans’ accusations had any credibility) – 3 problems here w Hatsis’ argumentation.
he needs to reconcile his contradiction.
But not to take him seriously in detail of corrective epicycles he’s forced to invent to desperately try in vain to save his failed model (ie, his incoherent heap of assertions);
rather, we need to state the truth of the matter, the simple coherent truth: the Normalcy entheogen theory of mushrooms in Christianity, per Professor Jerry Brown.
we need to pursue like cyberdisciple’s webpages “against the assumption of suppression of psychedelics in pre-modernity” and his webpage about allegro assuming Suppression and taboo, and his webpage about Ruck pushing outdated 1880 anthropology fertility cult theory.
and we need to gather Cyberdisciple’s classification of outdated theories of myth, gathering all citations: what has Carl Ruck asserted about suppression of mushrooms in the 4 periods?
what have these writers written to assert Suppression of Mushrooms in 4 periods, 4 historical eras
4 eras:
1) Ancient Greek religion
2) Hellenistic Religion
3) early Christian
4) medieval Christian
in a limited sense which I have yet to identify, there is a single paradigm, which is the Allegro/Ruck/Hatsis paradigm of suppression assumption, which causes them all to be completely mistaken, in contrast with the Maximal Entheogen Theory or the Normalcy entheogen theory, against their shared same beliefs
Thomas Hatsis has the same beliefs on key points on key assumptions about mushroom Prohibition Suppression, Thomas Hatsis agrees with John Allegro.
Thomas Hatsis agrees with John allegro, who agrees with Carl Ruck’s uncritical unexamined presupposition: the assumption of the suppression of mushrooms in these historical eras.
But that is a complex partial truth; that needs quotation citations from each of these authors – and Robert Graves too.
what does Jerry Brown assert because
Jerry Brown is Maximal per the Normalcy entheogen theory, and he simply says “the way that Christians had religious experience was through Sacred Plants”.
THE CARL RUCK SCHOOL = THE MINIMAL ENTHEOGEN THEORY OF RELIGION
Egodeath Mystery Show episode 134b ~~50:00 – Clear articulation of why I created the the Maximal entheogen theory of religion in 2002.
Reading aloud (from bottom to top) my 6-page October 2002 posting at the Egodeath Yahoo Group proposing the Maximal/Normalcy entheogen theory of religion, against the Ruck school’s Moderate[~= actually, Minimal]/Suppression assumption.
2002 is before Valentine 2004, therefore post here both urls of the announcement: the egodeath.com copy & the Egodeath Yahoo Group wordpress archive.
every time I search early archives of Yahoo group prior to valentines day 2004, I’m reading the archived upstream copy of egodeath.com website.
I identified at that time what Carl rock failed to do : he failed to describe the extent of the normalcy and predominant influence of visionary plants at the origin and later in Greek and Christian religion
my view brings my core theory, analogical psychedelic eternalism , to perceive the evidence much more clearly than Carl Ruck school is able to do in their negative and underestimating limited ability for their theory to make the evidence visible and recognize mythology as describing the experiencing, and not just the physical form of the plants
See my amazon book review of Carl rocks book about “consciousness”, which articulates this limitation of the Ruck school.
It would be much better during 2002-2022 to contrast the maximal entheogen theory of religion vs the moderate/minimal entheogen theory of religion . The weird thing is that the Moderate entheogen Theory if I can convey I need to do this in a voice recording the Moderate entheogen Theory is Minimal when we say moderate you see it is the opposite of what it pretends to be if they say Moderate it Carl Ruck says he asserts a moderate theory he’s actually asserting a minimal Theory Moderate Theory pretends that it is different than a Minimal Theory but really it’s essentially not different than Minimal TheoryThe weird thing is that the Moderate entheogen Theory if I can convey I need to do this in a voice recording the Moderate entheogen Theory is Minimal when we say moderate you see it is the opposite of what it pretends to be if they say Moderate it Carl Ruck says he asserts a moderate theory he’s actually asserting a minimal Theory Moderate Theory pretends that it is different than a Minimal Theory but really it’s essentially not different than Minimal Theory
It is a myth that there is any difference between the Minimal Theory versus the Moderate Theory there’s no real difference between McCanna saying that the ancient period Had no mushrooms but only the archaic period Had mushrooms, vs Ruck’s view. t
he Ruck school says the presence of msh in greek & Christian religion is minimal. though present.
less confusing is Normalcy vs Suppression labels for these opposed positions.
The Egodeath theory 