Joseph Atwill will present his controversial theory Oct. 19 in London that the New Testament was written by first-century Roman aristocrats as part of a sophisticated government project to help pacify Jews in occupied territories.
Atwill, author of “Caesar’s Messiah,” claims he’s found ancient confessions by the scriptures’ authors that they invented Jesus Christ and his story as basically a form of propaganda.
“Jewish sects in Palestine at the time, who were waiting for a prophesied warrior Messiah, were a constant source of violent insurrection during the first century,” Atwill said. “When the Romans had exhausted conventional means of quashing rebellion, they switched to psychological warfare. They surmised that the way to stop the spread of zealous Jewish missionary activity was to create a competing belief system. That’s when the ‘peaceful’ Messiah story was invented. Instead of inspiring warfare, this Messiah urged turn-the-other-cheek pacifism and encouraged Jews to ‘give onto Caesar’ and pay their taxes to Rome.”
He says that Jesus was not based on an actual historical figure, but Atwill argues that the events of his life were overlaid on top of actual events from the First Jewish-Roman War, waged by Emperor Titus Flavius in Palestinian territories.
“The biography of Jesus is actually constructed, tip to stern, on prior stories, but especially on the biography of a Roman Caesar,” he says.
Atwill said he understands that his theory is bound to upset Christians, and he’s hoping skeptics will come to challenge him after his lecture as part of a symposium, “Covert Messiah,” along with Kenneth Humphreys, author of “Jesus Never Existed.”
“Although Christianity can be a comfort to some, it can also be very damaging and repressive, an insidious form of mind control that has led to blind acceptance of serfdom, poverty, and war throughout history,” Atwill says. “To this day, especially in the United States, it is used to create support for war in the Middle East.”
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started. They could still get him out of office. But instead, they want mass death. Don’t forget that.
I think that's "Prof. Jay Fikes" who said that, and is leading the conversation. Anyone able to confirm? Nope. That's Atwill doing much of the talking, the guy on the left. (their right )
Certainly put my ears up, but I think he has a fair point about that, though use of the word holocaust may be a bad choice, but then, not all holocausts are necessarily genocidal in nature. War in the 20th century was a massively deadly activity, at a scale that seems unprecedented.
he seems to be bringing in some LC-related tidbits.
on edit: oh boy - I don't know about these guys. Poison and sugar?
Last edited by justdrew on Thu Oct 10, 2013 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
Papa Monzano, he's so very bad But without bad Papa I would be so sad; Because without Papa's badness, Tell me, if you would, How could wicked old Bokonon Ever, ever look good?
Quite synchronous [the topic of this OP] as I was just chatting with a few pals last night about this topic while referencing the below little gem, which relates in some ways to the article above:
I thought I’d begin this rant by sharing some of my thoughts on the historical figure known as Jesus of Nazareth. I think we can all agree that, unlike some of the other subjects I have weighed in on in the past, this is one on which people do not tend to have strongly held points-of-view, so there is little chance that I will offend and alienate readers right off the bat.
So let’s jump right into it then with observation #1: When the likely outcome of an unwed pregnancy is death by stoning, people can be really creative liars.
Nothing in the least bit controversial about that … right? Let’s move on then to observation #2: It is fully understandable why the lie was told, and even why many people in that era might have believed it; what is more difficult to understand is why tens of millions of people around the world still believe it 2,000 years later.
I doubt that I’ve lost anyone yet, so let’s quickly move on to observation #3: Jesus was initially described as coming from a line of men who worked with their hands, which was later interpreted to mean that he was a carpenter. Given though that the primary building materials in the land of his birth were sand and rock, it is far more likely that Joseph and his sons were stone masons. Just saying …
Observation #4: Jesus of Nazareth’s real father was undoubtedly a Roman citizen. Some have speculated that he was the product of rape by one of the notoriously ruthless Roman storm-troopers, but his later actions suggest to this completely impartial observer that it was more likely a consensual coupling and that the father was someone of considerably more importance than a mere soldier.
Observation #5: Jesus was very likely a controlled Roman asset. Just as, nearly two thousand years later, the obviously controlled asset known as Jesse Jackson replaced the slain Martin Luther King, and the equally controlled asset known as Louis Farrakhan replaced the eliminated Malcolm X, so it was that Jesus was maneuvered into position to replace the executed John the Baptist, who had, I’m guessing, become a bit of a problem for the Roman overseers.
The message that the emergent messiah delivered to those living under the brutal hand of those Roman occupiers was, by any rational analysis, exactly the wrong one. It was a message brimming with advice about loving neighbors and turning cheeks … a message that constantly reinforced the notion that it was better to be poor and oppressed than wealthy and powerful, for the poor, you see, were going to spend all eternity in the glorious ‘Kingdom of Heaven,’ while the rich were going to burn in the fires of Hell (unless they were somehow able to steer their camels through the eye of a needle, or something like that).
It was, in other words, a belief system seemingly designed specifically to suppress any thoughts of rebellion amongst the unwashed masses. And the beauty of it was that no one would find out if the fabled Kingdom of Heaven actually existed until it was too late for them to get a refund.
I know what you’re thinking here: “But Dave, didn’t the Romans execute Jesus, and do so in a horrifically brutal and sadistic manner – you know, like in that Mel Gibson torture-porn flick?”
Maybe they did and maybe they didn’t. Even if they did, that would not necessarily prove that Jesus was not a covert Roman operative. Most all assets are expendable if they become more valuable dead than alive. And it’s pretty clear that for the last couple thousand years, Jesus has proven his value as a dead martyr. But was he crucified? I tend to doubt that he was.
Consider that Mr. Nazareth was alone by choice when apprehended. He had supposedly wandered into a garden to gather his thoughts, or some such thing, allowing Roman authorities to conveniently apprehend him quietly and without incident. It was almost as if he had turned himself in, knowing that he was in safe hands. The most likely scenario is that he was replaced with a look-alike at the private palace of Pontius Pilate, where he was taken to supposedly be tried and convicted (so to speak).
Bear in mind that whoever had the misfortune of resembling Jesus needn’t have been all that close of a double. By the time he was beaten, whipped and outfitted with a custom crown of thorns, the battered, bruised and bloody body would undoubtedly have been all but unrecognizable. And following the crucifixion, as we all know, the body, uhmm, disappeared. Because it was, you know, resurrected from the dead. Or because it had to be disposed of before anyone caught on that it wasn’t really Jesus. Personally, I’m going with option #2, primarily because I am not familiar with any documented cases of bodies being resurrected from the dead and I’m not really into taking huge leaps of faith. But maybe that’s just me.
I kept reading the OP title as "Carter's Messiah" but this was definitely an improvement on that premise.
Interesting to see Jan Irvin still heating up the ol' esoteric podcast circuit. That whole culture baffles me, I don't get how mogs can talk for so long at a stretch...and bear in mind, I'm a rapper saying that.
One of our clients is a very scholarly Christian publisher, I will definitely ask the owners for "The Scoop" on Atwill and come back with anything juicy, or you know, "relevant."
Interesting. I started to watch the documentary and I'm curious who's behind this production.....who funded it? It's professionally done, so there are forces at play behind the scenes who want this message amplified and legitimated. Of course, I've surmised for the past twenty or more years that there was never a live Jesus....that this was a concocted work-in-progress that transpired over several centuries until it was codified at Nicaea and ultimately adopted by Constantine as the official religion of Rome. So, yeah, who's behind it and what are their true motivations, but also, does it even matter at this point? For many Christians, it's practically irrelevant that Jesus actually walked the earth. That's the power of myth....it no longer needs to be real for it to have a resounding impact. Not to mention, I don't think you'll find many Christians who will believe this, and you can be sure the Christian Establishment will attack this with fury.
And another thing. If we're to believe this to be true, that Rome engaged in sophisticated psychological operations such as this two thousand years ago, imagine how sophisticated it is today. What's real and what isn't? If this theory is true, many people took the existence of Jesus for granted....it was a perfectly normal thing to do....why question it? Apply that mentality to our world today and think of all the things we take for granted....and imagine being told eighty percent of what you believe to be your reality is in fact not what you thought. I think many would scoff at that notion.
the Caesar's Messiah video is good, and I _think_ it's solid scholarship. Some of his other views I'm not so sure of, but I haven't been quite horrified by anything he's said. Though I think at heart he's a rightist-anarchist.
well the thesis in the 2nd video I posted above, certainly puts a new spin on "the cops are causing all the action" ...
... it's an extension of the tacit thesis behind the LC material.
I'm not quite buying it, but mostly my complaint is that they're not sufficiently circumscribing the extent of 'controlled media' and also overstate the magnitude of it's effect - which was also my complaint with Hugh. It sure seems likely LSD (and other drugs) were used to turn a political, free speech, anti-imperialism movement into a cokedupfuckfest. But it wouldn't have taken some genius hari seldon type to come up with that plan. It's obvious and brutal.
I don't know, it all sniffs like an endless mental vortex. In the end, All of Life is humans influencing humans, this fear of "external control" could be seriously debilitating, just Live, Learn and Love - what will be will be.
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
Atwill, author of “Caesar’s Messiah,” claims he’s found ancient confessions by the scriptures’ authors that they invented Jesus Christ and his story as basically a form of propaganda.
“Jewish sects in Palestine at the time, who were waiting for a prophesied warrior Messiah, were a constant source of violent insurrection during the first century,” Atwill said. “When the Romans had exhausted conventional means of quashing rebellion, they switched to psychological warfare. They surmised that the way to stop the spread of zealous Jewish missionary activity was to create a competing belief system. That’s when the ‘peaceful’ Messiah story was invented. Instead of inspiring warfare, this Messiah urged turn-the-other-cheek pacifism and encouraged Jews to ‘give onto Caesar’ and pay their taxes to Rome.”
I'm not sure how those two points work?
Atwill found confession by the scripture's authors that it was invented, and that the scripture served the purpose of stopping the spread of zealous Jewish activity in order for easier roman rulership. But Jerusalem was sacked in 70 AD and the war was practically over except for the holdouts that led to the siege of zealots of Masada, so when was the Jesus propaganda written and propagated in order to have it intended mitigating effect?
According to u.arizona.edu...
The Synoptic Gospels were not written in the order in which they are now collected. Matthew was long felt to be the most authoritative—perhaps because the group that produced it was more numerous or influential than competing groups. Scholars now generally agree that Mark was the earliest written, about a generation (35 years) after Jesus’s death, sometime around the year 70 CE. What happened in 70 CE? Matthew was written about a decade later, around 80 CE. Luke-Acts slightly afterward during the decade between 80 and 90 CE.
The non-synoptic gospel of John was written around 100 AD or later according to most sources.
So if the gospels were written after the First Jewish-Roman War and set in time and place before the war, how does that work?
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.
the writing team depended on the fact the the temple had already been sacked in 70. They took necessary source material back to Rome, having destroyed all other info storage in the region. (except for hidden texts such as the DSS)
This would make sense, as it's not 100% clear they were writing the exact gospels or just acting as sources of a historical narrative that then was incorporated into texts that became the gospels.
I think this bit lays out the timeline fairly concisely...
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
The first revolt ended in 70 AD, so there was no time for the Mark material to make its mark in the context of Roman psychological warfare, and then it was mostly all over until 132 AD when the second revolt began.
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.
well even after the main insurrection, there was still a population to deal with. There were already many sects, it seems totally within Roman modus operandi to attempt to build a pliable loyal sect.
In the grand scheme of things, I don't think it was exactly successful, and then it got a bit out of hand, and eventually the myth ate the myth makers. So the post-Constantine councils were an effort to get back in the driver seat of this thing they may or may not even remember they built.
I don't know, the similarities he points out in the above video are striking, but heck, we may never know for sure
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
While it may have started as a Roman psy-op, there are unintended consequences. If you don't care about the rewards of the material world, you no longer become controllable via the rewards of the material world. True Christians cannot be bought off with gold, or sex, or a life of comfort. Fanatical Christians will then try to "save" or "convert" non-Christians. Thus, crusades against wealthy people. And then you're right back where you started!
)
