Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-10-2013, 12:30 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
I'd like to see his evidence before making a determination. Atwill's assertions should stand or fall on their own merits. In the mean time, I'm suspicious of anyone claiming a new revelation of historical events. I can't believe in something like these claims just because I want it to be true. That would be the same wishful thinking I see in christian belief.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chopdoc's post
09-10-2013, 12:44 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(09-10-2013 12:30 PM)Chopdoc Wrote:  I'd like to see his evidence before making a determination. Atwill's assertions should stand or fall on their own merits. In the mean time, I'm suspicious of anyone claiming a new revelation of historical events. I can't believe in something like these claims just because I want it to be true. That would be the same wishful thinking I see in christian belief.

Especially when they "just happen" to neatly / perfectly support his books, and prior work.
But we shall see.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 01:26 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
I think I'll just watch the professional historians' reactions to him. But yeah, this business of making youtube videos etc before presenting talks... it's a bit too lunatic fringe for me.

And ja, *especially* this idea of suddenly radically reinterpreting old documents with 'secret knowledge' of 'inside jokes' or 'poetic allusions'... I mean, the Christees do it all the time with the Bible, so it's kinda *poetic* justice that this joker's employing the same line of reasoning... Dodgy

Oh well Rolleyes At least it's entertainment.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 01:34 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(08-10-2013 08:40 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-10-2013 08:27 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  New discovery: ancient confessions recently uncovered now prove that the New Testament was written by first-century Roman aristocrats
and that they fabricated the entire story of Jesus Christ.

http://uk.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11201273.htm

I think we all knew this anyway and it appears, now we have a little evidence.

I also posted this on my fb and I have to admit to some glee as I mentally pop a few balloons that some religious people in my family have.

(Dr.) Mark Fulton (our TTA guru on this subject) discovered Atwill some time ago. (He talks about him in his soon-to-be-published book.) It will be interesting to see what his "discovery" is.

Where is Mark? Totally miss him.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 01:48 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(09-10-2013 01:34 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(08-10-2013 08:40 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  (Dr.) Mark Fulton (our TTA guru on this subject) discovered Atwill some time ago. (He talks about him in his soon-to-be-published book.) It will be interesting to see what his "discovery" is.

Where is Mark? Totally miss him.

He' around. He got married this past year. Can't wait to see a new little Marky Mark, (not that I know anything).

This "secret knowlegde" stuff really is nothing new, IMO. Carrier talks about mythic syncretism/literary patterns in many of his works. Even the gospel of Mark itself, has as it's basic premise is that only the initiates to the cult get/understand the "messianic secret" revealed to them. It's really a pretty common theme. Dumb. But common.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
09-10-2013, 02:37 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
From Wikipedia:

**
Traditionally Luke has been regarded as written by Luke the Evangelist some time between the "we" passages in Acts 16 onwards and the imprisonment of Paul in Rome in Acts 28, leading as with some modern scholars to argue for a date c. 60–65. However many critical scholars consider the "we" passages spurious or inserted and place the date c 80–90.

**
The works of Jewish historian, Josephus (37-100 ca), are major sources of our understanding of Jewish life and history during the first century.

The works of Josephus translated by Thomas Lodge (1602). (c. 75) War of the Jews, or The Jewish War, or Jewish Wars, or History of the Jewish War (commonly abbreviated JW, BJ or War)
(date unknown) Josephus's Discourse to the Greeks concerning Hades (spurious; adaptation of "Against Plato, on the Cause of the Universe" by Hippolytus of Rome)
(c. 94) Antiquities of the Jews, or Jewish Antiquities, or Antiquities of the Jews/Jewish Archeology (frequently abbreviated AJ, AotJ or Ant. or Antiq.)
(c. 97) Flavius Josephus Against Apion, or Against Apion, or Contra Apionem, or Against the Greeks, on the antiquity of the Jewish people (usually abbreviated CA)
(c. 99) The Life of Flavius Josephus, or Autobiography of Flavius Josephus (abbreviated Life or Vita)

**
Whether conservative or liberal, many scholars have Luke written before Josephus writes. So the theory that Luke copies Josephus must be off, more so when you agree with mainline scholars that Luke is copying Mark, who wrote even earlier...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 03:03 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(09-10-2013 02:37 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  From Wikipedia:

**
Traditionally Luke has been regarded as written by Luke the Evangelist some time between the "we" passages in Acts 16 onwards and the imprisonment of Paul in Rome in Acts 28, leading as with some modern scholars to argue for a date c. 60–65. However many critical scholars consider the "we" passages spurious or inserted and place the date c 80–90.

**
The works of Jewish historian, Josephus (37-100 ca), are major sources of our understanding of Jewish life and history during the first century.

The works of Josephus translated by Thomas Lodge (1602). (c. 75) War of the Jews, or The Jewish War, or Jewish Wars, or History of the Jewish War (commonly abbreviated JW, BJ or War)
(date unknown) Josephus's Discourse to the Greeks concerning Hades (spurious; adaptation of "Against Plato, on the Cause of the Universe" by Hippolytus of Rome)
(c. 94) Antiquities of the Jews, or Jewish Antiquities, or Antiquities of the Jews/Jewish Archeology (frequently abbreviated AJ, AotJ or Ant. or Antiq.)
(c. 97) Flavius Josephus Against Apion, or Against Apion, or Contra Apionem, or Against the Greeks, on the antiquity of the Jewish people (usually abbreviated CA)
(c. 99) The Life of Flavius Josephus, or Autobiography of Flavius Josephus (abbreviated Life or Vita)

**
Whether conservative or liberal, many scholars have Luke written before Josephus writes. So the theory that Luke copies Josephus must be off, more so when you agree with mainline scholars that Luke is copying Mark, who wrote even earlier...

Of course, Wikipedia... the most accurate source of information in the galaxy.

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Sam's post
09-10-2013, 03:27 PM (This post was last modified: 09-10-2013 03:54 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
I'm still here! I'm glad I'm missed! No babies on the way LOL

I'm really intrigued by Atwill's theory. I do believe that Christianity was invented by the Roman government to undermine militant Jews. Just whether Atwill has got all his details right I'm not totally sure. I don't think he's a crackpot.

Here's what I have written about his theory in my book. It's been subtly improved upon since I last posted it. It is a bit long but I assure you it's very interesting if you can get through it...

Atwill’s Theory
There’s a fascinating, intriguing theory about the gospels that neatly fits with my strong suspicion that Christianity originated as government propaganda. The contemporary writer Joseph Atwill, who spent ten years studying the gospels, the Dead Sea scrolls and Josephus’ works, thinks writers working for the Roman government during the Flavian dynasty (69-96 CE) wrote the original gospels. He writes in his 2005 book “Caesar’s Messiah” (http://www.amazon.com/Caes+ars-Messiah-R...ks&ie=UTF) that he thinks intellectuals under Titus’ direction created the gospels, incorporating a skillful satire of Jewish messianic dreams that becomes apparent on reading Josephus’ “Wars of the Jews” and his “The Life of Flavius Josephus.”

Titus had decimated militant Judaism in 70 CE, but he couldn’t get the Jewish prisoners to worship him as Lord. The revolt may have been crushed, but the religion that inspired it wasn’t, and was still a threat to the Pax Romana. It became obvious that Jews were still dreaming about their messiah, so Titus transformed himself into the embodiment of their dreams. He had a derivative of Judaism created that worshipped him (as Jesus) without its followers knowing it. The agenda was to tame Judaism by transforming it into a cooperative, government friendly religion. Mr Atwill thinks that Titus had the gospels invented for two reasons; firstly to act as a theological barrier against the spread of messianic Judaism, and secondly because if he could get Jews to worship “Jesus,” it would mean they accepted Roman authority.

Titus helped his father in the running of government affairs until his father’s death in 79 CE, when he became emperor himself. He was deified shortly after his own untimely death from natural causes in 81 CE. The historian Seutonius says of him
“I have likewise been informed by many persons, that he was remarkably quick in writing short-hand, would in merriment and jest engage with his secretaries in the imitation of any hand-writing he saw, and often say, ‘that he was admirably qualified for forgery.’" (The Lives of the Twelve Caesars, section 466.)

Josephus was an adopted member of the Imperial family. He lived in the imperial palace, and was their official historian. He would have considered Vespasian and Titus divine, or been pleased to help propagate the myth. Titus supported and financed the publication of his “Wars of the Jews.”

There were plenty of people in the Flavian household who, like Josephus, were familiar enough with Judaism to help create Christianity. Titus’ mistress Bernice was a Jew of Maccabean descent. Tiberias Alexander, a Jew, was chief of staff to Titus during the siege of Jerusalem. He was also the nephew of Philo, a well-known Jewish philosopher. John of Gischala, one of the main leaders of the Jewish revolt, had been transported as a prisoner back to Rome, but not executed. Atwill believes his inside knowledge of the struggle against Rome was used by the Flavians to help fabricate gospel fictions.

Titus had his writers backdate Jesus’ ministry to c.30 CE, thereby enabling “Jesus” to foresee events in the future war. There are remarkable similarities between Titus and Jesus. Titus, at the time of his military campaign in Palestine, was in his late 20’s, just like Jesus. Vespasian had already been deified by the Roman Senate. Jesus and Titus were both were sent on a mission from God, their father. Both began their three-year campaigns in Galilee and finished them in Jerusalem. Atwill believes the site of today’s Nazareth was chosen in the fourth century because it was the location of Titus’ first battle in Galilee.

There are events from the ministry of Jesus that closely parallel Titus’ military campaign in the first Jewish war. Titus is the “son of man” who “laid low” many Galilean towns, surrounded Jerusalem and destroys the buildings therein, all as predicted by Jesus, nearly forty years after “Jesus” spoke them.
“For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.” (Luke 19:43-44 KJV.) Many Jews had been trapped inside Jerusalem’s walls because they didn’t know the Romans, who encircled the city, were coming.

Mark’s gospel says:
“And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea: for they were fishers. And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.” (Mark 4:18-19 KJV.) That sounds like a nice story, but takes on a more macabre meaning if read in conjunction with Josephus’ Wars of the Jews in which there is a story of a battle between Jews and Titus’ troops on the same sea of Galilee:
“Sometimes the Romans leapt into their ships, with swords in their hands, and slew them; but when some of them met the vessels, the Romans caught them by the middle, and destroyed at once their ships and themselves who were taken in them. And for such as were drowning in the sea, if they lifted their heads up above the water, they were either killed by darts, or caught by the vessels; but if, in the desperate case they were in, they attempted to swim to their enemies, the Romans cut off their heads or their hands…” Josephus goes on to relate how the next day the troops fished hundred of Jewish bodies out of the water. Hence Titus’ troops became “fishers of men” on the Sea of Galilee.

We read in Luke chapter eight
“And they arrived at the country of the Gadarenes, which is over against Galilee. And when he went forth to land, there met him out of the city a certain man, which had devils long time, and ware no clothes, neither abode in any house, but in the tombs. When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not. For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For oftentimes it had caught him: and he was kept bound with chains and in fetters; and he brake the bands, and was driven of the devil into the wilderness. And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, Legion: because many devils were entered into him. And they besought him that he would not command them to go out into the deep. And there was there an herd of many swine feeding on the mountain: and they besought him that he would suffer them to enter into them. And he suffered them. Then went the devils out of the man, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the lake, and were choked. When they that fed them saw what was done, they fled, and went and told it in the city and in the country. Then they went out to see what was done; and came to Jesus, and found the man, out of whom the devils were departed, sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid. They also which saw it told them by what means he that was possessed of the devils was healed. Then the whole multitude of the country of the Gadarenes round about besought him to depart from them; for they were taken with great fear: and he went up into the ship, and returned back again.” (Luke 8;26-38 KJV.)

This is an odd tale. There’s no theological or moral principle that can be gleaned about demons entering a herd of swine that then drowned. Why would the demons wish to enter swine, and why do these swine rush into the lake? The answer is that the story makes sense as a satire of Josephus’ description of the battle of Gadara. Gadara was located east of the Jordan River on a mountain about 10 kilometers south-east of the Sea of Galilee. The people of Gadara were known as “Gadarenes.” (http://www.keyway.ca/htm2001/20010621.htm).

Atwill thinks the “demon possessed man” is a satire of John of Gischala. This is how Josephus describes John
“Yet did John demonstrate by his actions that these Sicarii were more moderate than he was himself, for he not only slew all such as gave him good counsel to do what was right, but treated them worst of all…he filled his entire country with ten thousand instances of wickedness” (Josephus, Wars of the Jews.)

Josephus describes the battle of Gadara:
“These things were told Vespasian by deserters…Accordingly, he marched against Gadara…but Placidus…slew all that he overtook, as far as Jordan; and when he had driven the whole multitude to the riverside…he put his soldiers in array over against them…At which flight, hand to hand, fifteen thousand of them were slain, while the number of those that were unwillingly forced to leap into Jordan was prodigious.” (Josephus, Wars of the Jews.)

John was the rebel leader who commanded “legions” of the Sicarii, so he “infected” many people, who were denigrated as swine. These people were slain or drowned in the river Jordan.

Here is part of Matthew’s version of the story:
“And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way. And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? (Matthew 8;28-29 KJV.) What’s “the time” the “devils” are referring to? It could have been the capture of John and Simon at the end of the campaign.

Jesus repeatedly says
“…repent for the kingdom of God is at hand…” (Matthew 3:2; Matthew 4:17; Mark 1:15.) Titus wanted the Jews to “repent” for their rebellion against Rome. The “kingdom of God” that was “at hand” was the conquest of Jerusalem by Roman troops.
Jesus predicted the annihilation of a “wicked generation” (of Jews,) which is precisely what Titus achieved in real life. They were wicked because they’d rebelled against Rome.

The understanding that a “generation” lasted about forty years comes from the Torah.
“And the Lord's anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until all the generation, that had done evil in the sight of the Lord, was consumed. (Numbers 32;13 KJV.)

Titus destroyed the Temple in 70 AD, as “foretold” by Jesus.
"As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” (Luke 21:6 KJV, see also Matt. 24:1 and Mark 13:1.)

The theory explains why “Jesus” would say
“And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.’ (Matthew 5:41 KJB.) Roman soldiers conscripted people to carry their packs for a mile. And,
“But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19;27 KJV,) which is precisely what Titus did.

It explains why Jesus said
“Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.” (Matthew 21;43 KJV.) “He” was saying that the nation of Israel had been rejected as the people of God, and gentiles had replaced them.

It also explanations why “Jesus” was able to predict the future, as noticed by the credulous (or dishonest) Eusebius:
“If anyone compares the words of our savior with the other accounts of the historian (Josephus) concerning the whole war, how can one fail to wonder, and to admit that the foreknowledge and the prophecy of our Saviour were truly divine and marvelously strange.” (Church History, Book III, Chapter VII.) Eusebius failed to realize, or admit, that the gospels’ authors had used Josephus to create Jesus. Even some modern Christian apologists still think Jesus predicted the future. (http://www.ukapologetics.net/09/AD70.htm).

Josephus even claimed the “government of Vespasian” was, in effect, the messiah predicted in scripture.
“What did the most to induce the Jews to start this war, was an ambiguous oracle that was also found in their sacred writings, how, about that time, one from their country should become governor of the habitable earth. The Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular, and many of the wise men were thereby deceived in their determination. Now this oracle certainly denoted the government of Vespasian, who was appointed emperor in Judea.” (Flavius Josephus, Jewish War 6.312-313.)

Vespasian’s reign (69 – 79 CE) was notable for the fact that he, with his son Titus by his side, is well known to have been a great propagandist; someone very proficient at controlling popular perception. They were particularly good at promoting the public’s respect for imperial authority. Vespasian was said to have restored a blind man’s site using spittle and to have healed a cripple (do these sound familiar?) He sold the idea that he’d bought peace to the empire. He was a strong patron of the arts and letters, and commissioned many authors to write “Flavian versions” of history. ( http://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/the_...roved.html , http://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/the_...a-day.html ).

Using religion for the good of the state was a well-established practice in ancient Rome; it had a long tradition of absorbing the religions of its opponents. It was easier and more cost effective than allowing those gods to remain enemies, thereby risking more wrangles with the rank and file rallying under them. In this case it was done to subdue stubborn Jews and to stroke Titus’ ego by surreptitiously getting them to worship Jesus (ie Titus) as if he’d been the messiah they’d been waiting for. “Jesus” was designed to deprive the Jews of their ambition to start another war, and to dilute the purity of Judaism with gentiles, who were more likely to obey the government. That’s ironic, because the real Yeshua, if he ever existed, had tried to start an insurrection against the government.

This neatly explains how Christianity, a pro-Roman religion reliant on the gospels and said to promote pacifism and obedience, didn’t in fact emerge from a Judean cult in a nation that had over a one hundred year history of a militant struggle against Rome, but in reality emerged from Rome itself. It explains why Rome created Jesus, a pacifist preacher. It’s why “Jesus” referred to Jews (his own companions!) who rebelled against Rome as a “wicked generation.” It’s why the “second coming” of Jesus never happened; it was Titus who came instead. It’s why the true identities of all the four gospel authors are unknown. It explains why they were first written in Greek, and why they’re so often anti Semitic, yet in places tried to also appeal to fundamentalist Jews.
It’s why members of the Roman imperial family such as Flavius Clemens, later said to be the fourth pope, Bernice, Titus’ mistress, and Flavia Domitilla, Vespasian’s granddaughter, were said to be promoting Christianity. If these people were “Christians,” they were so in name only, as they couldn’t have believed in their own spoof.

Propaganda was a powerful tool in Roman times, just as it is today. Public opinion was easily manipulated, because people didn’t have the means to check out the facts. Atwill thinks the Flavians didn’t intend sophisticated, educated people to read their invention as serious literature or history. The gospels were written for militant Jews and the hoi polloi, people Josephus referred to as “slaves” and “scum.” They fancied Christianity might flourish before the Gospels’ satirical level became widely known. The gospels were designed to become apparent as satire only to the more educated classes who could recognize the parallels in Josephus’ works.

If this is true, the gospels were a very black comedy, and Christianity was a clever, and in one sense humorous, product of the broader struggle that had been going on since Alexander the great in 333 BCE; the one between Hellenism with its polytheism, cleverness and rationalism, and Judaism’s monotheism, subservience and faith. Jesus’ injunctions to love your enemies, turn the other cheek, aspire to poverty, dream about heaven, think like children and pay your taxes take on a cynical meaning, because they were invented to pacify peasants and slaves. Titus' invented religion, the one said to be the basis of western morality, took hold partly because common people didn't have the intellectual armor to guard against it, and it eventually grew beyond the wildest dreams of the Flavians. Christians have been unwittingly worshipping Titus Flavius for nearly 2000 years. Titus, lying in his grave, has had an embarrassed grin on his face for the last two millennia. His invention grew into a much larger monster than he could ever have imagined.

This theory ties in with the hypothesis that Paul’s Christianity originated as part of a government plot. Paul probably wrote well before the Flavians, yet there’s a good reason why similar propaganda could have started in Paul’s day; Rome was trying to prevent a war with the Jews. Atwill will be writing another book that helps explain Paul’s role in the scheme.

There is, however, in my opinion, what seems to be a few minor problems with the theory. Atwill has proposed the four gospels were originally written under Titus’ direction, yet it’s a fact that no first century source ever specifically mentions the existence of any of the four Gospels (see http://www.harrington-sites.com/f5.htm). There are some explanations that render Atwill’s theory still plausible; the original Jesus story, first written in the 70’s, might never have been popular until much later. Or, mentions of first century gospels were later destroyed. Or, the basic framework of the Jesus biography (ies) were all that was written at first, and it (or they) were untitled.

Atwill doesn’t comment about the fact there are now four gospels. It’s fairly well established that Mark was written first. I find it hard to imagine why the government would invent four different accounts, although it’s possible. It seems more likely they wrote one, the original version of Mark, and the others evolved from this as the second century progressed.

The theory to some degree undermines all the painstaking work and alternative theories of numerous historians, including linguists familiar with Greek and Aramaic. I think it needs to be remembered that that the gospels were edited and interpolated for at least a couple of hundred years after they were first written, so all such endeavors are bound to come to different conclusions.

If Josephus had a hand in the gospels’ stories, why didn’t he mention Jesus in his own writings? I think Josephus’ works were more serious attempts to document history, written for the educated upper classes, people who could read and afford to buy books. The gospels were a different kettle of fish. They were written as propaganda, to be read out to the hoi polloi. Josephus would have been aware of, and maybe even had a hand in, the gospels’ composition, but wouldn’t have wanted his genuine histories confused with the tongue in cheek satire of the gospels.

Atwill doesn’t explain the proliferation of dozens of now apocryphal gospels in the second century, or the success of Marcion and the gnostics, but the reality is that any commentary about this, from anyone, is guesswork.

I haven’t done justice to all of Atwill’s ideas, so I encourage those interested to read his book and watch him talk on youtube. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g40Eck6gW7U , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zlj5-iwKueQ ).

Where does this leave my theory that there existed an historical Yeshua who tried to start a war with Rome? I admit it makes a “non existent” Jesus more probable, yet I don’t think the ideas are mutually exclusive. It’s not hard to imagine Jewish and Roman intellectuals deciding to use the memory of a political activist crucified under Pontius Pilate roughly forty years earlier as the foundation for a very tall tale. It’s a clever ploy to mix a little truth into an account to make it appear more legitimate. The Nazarenes of the late first century still thought highly of their hero Yeshua, and the gospels probably deliberately undermined their story about him. It’s possible that the gospels’ original authors used details about Yeshua sourced from the gospel of the Nazarenes (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/go...ans.html), or details from it were added in at a later date, in an effort to make them appear more credible.

If the government created the gospels, they would have also employed presbyters to promote the new religion. This would explain how Christianity appeared in many different parts of the empire toward the end of the first century. I admit I have no specific evidence to support this idea, but the reality is that no one knows how or why Christianity spread in the first century. It’s very difficult to picture a watered down version of Judaism based on a crucified Galilean gaining a momentum of its own without some structural support. Those Christian apologists who claim it was only because Christian teachings were so pure and attractive have overactive imaginations.

As time went by, and the Flavian government was no more, I suspect Christian churches became self-funding and self-promoting, at least until the fourth century when the government once again patronized them. The fact that the faith started as propaganda was never, obviously, public knowledge, and by the time the mid second century came around there were multiple versions of Christianity all with their own idiosyncratic ideas. The Jews were decisively defeated for a second time, and no one remembered, and no documentation was kept, about why the whole show was created in the first place.

The truth about the origin of Christianity makes a fascinating discussion. All historians have their own opinions, and to some degree we all make educated guesses about Yeshua, because reliable specifics are so lacking. We’ll probably never definitively know the whole story, unless startling facts are one day discovered in the bowels of the Vatican or somewhere else.

I think while we may be unsure of the exact details about the authorship of the gospels, or of Paul’s motivations, the origin of the whole Christian saga reeks of political propaganda.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 11 users Like Mark Fulton's post
09-10-2013, 07:03 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
Ok, I'm feeling lazy, so I'm flat out saying I didn't read this entire thread, but this Atwill story has been floating all over Facebook on atheist sites. I find it disturbing that atheists are so willing to believe this guy who frankly sounds about as credible as Bill O'Reilly is about the historicity of Jesus. I wrote a blog about it today if any of you want my full analysis: "Defending Truth Can Mean Defending Jesus".

We sound like theists willing to believe anything that supports the way we wish history was, not the way it actually was. Let be a bit more skeptical.

Cheers,
PersephoneK

"If you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things." ~Rene Descartes.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like PersephoneK's post
09-10-2013, 07:38 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
So Roman aristocrats just happened to be really good at writing in sophisticated Greek?

Wouldn't it be more logical if they wrote in Latin?

Manifest Insanity @ Amazon
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Diogenes of Mayberry's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: