Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-06-2014, 12:10 AM
Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
This is compulsory viewing in my opinion.

Please watch it before it's taken off youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlDa7ObXNdw
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2014, 12:38 AM
RE: Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
Thanks. Watching it now.

The narrator sooo sounds like Susan Sarandon.

My sceptical hackles have been immediately raised by the non-Susan voice saying "very parallel" (yuch!) and marketing Atwill as a guy who is one of "some... mavericks, working outside the restrictions of mainstream religious institutions" Dodgy next visual cuts to cage wire and the Vatican.

I feel immediately like I'm being played.

Dodgy

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
01-06-2014, 12:41 AM
RE: Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
(01-06-2014 12:38 AM)DLJ Wrote:  I feel immediately like I'm being played.

Dodgy

Did you get a kiss first? Consider

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
01-06-2014, 01:10 AM
RE: Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
[Image: bullshit-meter-2.jpg]

This smells awfully fishy.

Reserving judgement.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2014, 02:05 AM
RE: Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
(01-06-2014 12:38 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Thanks. Watching it now.

The narrator sooo sounds like Susan Sarandon.

My sceptical hackles have been immediately raised by the non-Susan voice saying "very parallel" (yuch!) and marketing Atwill as a guy who is one of "some... mavericks, working outside the restrictions of mainstream religious institutions" Dodgy next visual cuts to cage wire and the Vatican.

I feel immediately like I'm being played.

Dodgy

I hear you. I guess it's fair to say that he may not be the world's best maker of documentaries, and he occasionally says dubious things, so he's not perfect.

I think the take-home message from the documentary and his book is that the gospels were a product of the Roman government propaganda machine. The details of exactly how they did it are very much open to debate, but in my opinion the essential premise is quite sound. For me it just rings true. In fact I've come to this conclusion quite independently before I'd ever read Atwill.

I'm glad that he's got a few other people backing him up. Ken Humphreys has a good website and seems very knowledgeable. I've never heard of the Australian dude that he sounds knowledgeable too.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2014, 02:31 AM
RE: Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
DLJ's rule of sceptical thumb:

I'm open to anything that can been seen a political evolution i.e. small changes in reaction to other small changes.

I'm open to dramatic moments caused by power vacuums but I'll go with decisions made in reaction to cock-ups, over planned conspiracies, every time there's a choice between the two.

I'll only allow conspiracies if there is a culture of conspiracies i.e. there were many possible alternative conspiracies and the one that made it passed the finish line was the fittest (in the Darwinian sense).

Also, a convincing conspiracy explanation needs to include more than one unplanned twist and probably a result that was some way off the original intent... 'cause that's life, right?

As an example, and I haven't watched it all yet, creating a prophet who was supposed to be heralding Titus as the Son of God, which then backfires so that the prophet (Jesus) is recognised as the Son of God instead, is much more plausible than creating a Jesus persona to be the Son of God.

Yes

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2014, 02:31 AM
RE: Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
I am most of the way through the "documentary". It is makes a lot of bold claims and doesn't really back that up with any kind of direct evidence or reasoning. It stands to reason that the romans could have benefited from a pacifist jewish sect, but the kind of subtly so very not roman. If they wanted people to worship them, they would have created a religion for it that said so. I find it hard to believe they created a messianic figure so that people could worship the Flavian caesars as a god and not even know it.

I did a bit of fact checking, and for the most part everything seems to be ok. They made a claim that Flavius Clement I was the first pope of Rome, which a little wikipedia shows to be absolutely false.

This is the fourth supposed pope the church, if you count saint peter. He was not related to the Flavians in any way

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Clement_I

And here is the guy they think was the same person. Same name, but lived a different time, indeed a Flavian, never a pope:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria

This is the one false hood I caught. I suspect there is probably more.

They also made some very strenuous comparisons to jesus christ and the prophets Elisha and Elijah. Claiming that the prophets did "food related miracles", which is true I guess, Elijah multiplied the oil a poor person had so she could sell it and pay a debt. They mention brings people back from the dead, which I don't remember, and Elisha allegedly ascended into heaven, which did happen but not quite the same way it did for jesus.

They did bring up some good points. Jesus has no physical description. The name Jesus Christ means "savior" and "messiah" in hebrew (although I think they say it was greek. meh)". In Mathew jesus predicts the fall of the temple, which either means jesus is magic, or that gospel was written after 73CE.

fall of the temple:
https://www.christiancourier.com/article...the-temple

fun reading:
http://christianity.about.com/od/faqhelp...yeshua.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ

The bible was written in greek, not aramaic or hebrew. I did a little research, apparently Greek was just the prefered language for literate peoples at the time. Even portions of the old testament where either written or quoted in Greek.

http://www.letusreason.org/Biblexp177.htm

So there is a strong case that jesus never existed, but not a strong case that it was a roman fabrication.

They also make comparisons to Horus and Krishna, which I have researched a bit and they don't seem to hold up very well. They dabble a bit in talking about the birth of jesus with winter solstice and the resurrection in spring, almost like they flirted with Zeitgeist a bit. They were trying to make the case that the jesus story is related to pagan myths. Its seemed to me to be a very weak case.

I have about thirty minutes of it left, but those are my observations so far. If you want to learn more about the history of Rome and Isreal at the time of jesus and in during the formation of the early church it can be enlightening, although told at a slant. I don't think it is making a very strong case for a Roman conceived christianity however, and there are at least a few blatant, out right false hoods, that I have caught at least.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Michael_Tadlock's post
01-06-2014, 02:55 AM
RE: Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
(01-06-2014 02:31 AM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  ...
They were trying to make the case that the jesus story is related to pagan myths. Its seemed to me to be a very weak case.
...

By my rules of thumb, I'm OK with this bit. Kinda like a merging of religion-genes ... but slow evolution rather than planned exercise always seems more likely.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2014, 06:14 AM (This post was last modified: 01-06-2014 08:44 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
Peter was never a "pope". That was clearly invented later. Neither was he ever a "bishop" in Rome. That role did not even exist in his lifetime. There is no reason to accept the RCC "papal listing" as real, without external evidence. A listing in Wiki is not evidence. The assumption of primacy of (a) central Roman seat of Christianity is one of the disturbing things here. We know it existed in many communities, some very important ones, in various other forms, not just the Roman version.
A couple other things are interesting, to me. We know for a fact that Josephus' *history* was an attempt to portray/validate Vespasian as the messiah. The messiah was to be "the anointed one" ... ie a real historical KING in the Davidic line, (anointed as KING of the Jews), who would lead them out of real political historical bondage from their occupiers. That was the role of a "messiah". Not all Jews were apocalyptics however. (See : How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee of Dr. Bart Ehrman). Josephus was not some sort of "objective Jewish observer" which many Christians seem to want to hold to. The "literary" typology of the gospels is correct, (and Carrier would agree with that), in it's archetypical form (as "mythology"), which Carrier has demonstrated. The thing that makes me uneasy here, is this video never mentions the HUNDREDS of other gospels we know were circulating. Did Rome invent them all ? I like that it mentions Philo, as his Jesus is disturbingly similar, (a "divine figure ... which does not mean *equivalent* divine status as Yahweh), dies for sins, (out in space somewhere), rose form the dead etc, and most of all, I like that it mentions the "war zone" which is totally forgotten today when people think about the era. Jerusalem was OCCUPIED, and the Jews HATED that. In general the factions of the Jews in the 4 canonical gospels do portray the waring factions of Jewish authorities as inept fools, and the Jesus group as somehow "other", (even though we know they were really and only a sub-sect in Judaism, at least in Palestine, for many years.)

BTW, I still want to know why the arch of Titus fails to show the Arc of the Covenant, (which would have been removed from the temple in Jerusalem). If there really was one of those in the Temple in Jerusalem, surely they would have used it. It is not displayed on the Arch. (There is a box, and we know what that is, but it's not the Arc). If there was an arc, they would have displayed it. I know no one was actually allowed into the Holy of Holies, except the High Priest, once a year. Something stinks there.

The philosophical underpinnings of Christianity seem to be more in line with Zoroastrian Mithraism than anything else, (to me), and this video seems to ignore the writings of Saul of Tarsus, which in many ways support what they are saying, and could be used, but don't. Tarsus was an important seat of Mithraism. But I haven't watched the whole thing yet. It seems to have some elements of truth in it. Some nuances I disagree with. I'll try to go through it again and make a list.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
01-06-2014, 06:38 AM
RE: Atwill Documentary...excellent stuff
the video, if it leads you to the conclusion that Jesus never existed, is not something I would be sharing with others. it just makes you look like a gullible atheist who wants to have his demonstrably incorrect beliefs confirmed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: