-101 votes

The Roman Empire and the Catholic Church are about to Fall: The Roman Conspiracy to Create Jesus Christ Unveiled:

Get a load of this: http://caesarsmessiahdoc....

It's going to be released in Beverly Hills, CA. September 28, 2012

The Second Coming of Christ Has Already Happened.

There is absolutely no denial after you grasp this. It may take you a few hours to finally get the gist of it, but once it hits you, it's a WHAM you'll never forget, and you'll never look at the Scriptures the same again.

The "Holy Trinity" .... "Vespasian - Titus - Domitian" .... All three became Emperors of Rome, and after Titus' death, Domitian constructed the "Arch of Titus":

Arch of Titus in Rome was constructed in 82 AD by the Roman Emperor Domitian shortly after the death of his older brother Titus to commemorate Titus’ victory in the Sack of Jerusalem in 70 AD. The Arch of Titus has provided the general model for many of the triumphal arches erected since the 16th century including the Arc de Triomphe.

The "Second Coming of Christ" was Titus' take down of Jerusalem, and the Son of God was memorialized with this mighty Arch. The second attempt was successful, and that was the Second Coming.

As seen here: http://www.touropia.com/a...

The concept of a divine trinity consisting of a father, son and “Holy Ghost” – the Greek words actually mean “awful spirit” – comes from Josephus. Josephus applies the Jews’ messianic prophecies, not just to Vespasian, but to his dynasty. In other words the real trinity is Vespasian, his son Titus, and his son Domitian – the awful spirit.

Domitian was the "Holy Ghost" - The "Awful Spirit" who wanted to be recognized as a God himself.

In Greek evangelion, a technical term meaning “good news of military victory.” In English, it is translated as “gospel.

The "Gospels" is nothing more than a military victory account of the Romans win of the Jewish. The New Testament was written by the Flavian Dynasty with the help of Josephus Flavius

For anyone who doubts that the Flavian's of the Roman Dynasty and Josephus were the ones that actually wrote the New Testament and created "Jesus", just take a moment out of your day and ask yourself why is the Bible so Antisemitic and so "Pro-Roman"? .... "Turn the other cheek" .... "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's", etc.

Now ask yourself if you've ever even noticed the book of "Romans" and the book of "Titus" in the NT? Now are you ready for the FACE PALM moment?

Why would a Jewish loving "God" dedicate in his written words, a book to "Romans" and another to "Titus"?

Go read Titus, and realize that it is actually Vespasian (God) giving the Son of God (Titus) instructions on how to teach the newly acquired slaves (Jewish after the Romans conquered them in the War) how to be obedient to their new masters (Vespasian and Titus).

The Original Jewish people had their own God, and he was David; a real Titan; a warrior; a man of war that even brought down Goliath and was soon to take the head off of Caesar (Dead Sea Scrolls), and there were many Jews amongst and within the Roman Empire who were gathering in groups discussing how their God "David" was coming soon to take the head off of Caesar. Nero didn't like this and called upon Vespasian who he had earlier exiled to return to the Empire and deal with this disobedient Jews, and he did along with his great warrior son Titus.

Vespasian and his son Titus went to Jerusalem and tried to bring down the city, but failed. That was the first coming of Jesus Christ (Titus). Vespasian was wounded and told his son Titus he MUST reenter Jerusalem and finally take her down and make all those unruly Jews submit to the Roman Empire, and Titus went back to Jerusalem and did just that.

Here's Part 1: and there are 5 parts total:


And that was the "Second Coming of Christ" aka "Titus".

The following account of Vespasian's triumph in Rome is provided to us by the Jewish historian, Josephus who was present at the festivities. His description not only provides insight into this victory celebration but also of the nature of other triumphs staged after a Roman victory. We join his story in the early morning hours of the day of the festivities:


The Jews who submitted to their Master (God) and came to him through his Son (Titus) were allowed to enter the "Kingdom of God" aka "Heaven". Those that disobeyed were killed or not allowed inside the gates of Heaven (the new Jerusalem).

Now hopefully you understand why many Jewish people today do not believe in Jesus Christ; nor do they follow or praise him. Their God is "David" the great warrior and not the pacifistic "Jesus" that turned the other cheek and gave unto Caesar.

Use your head for a moment and realize the Jews and Romans were arch enemies. Do you really think their "God" would be a pacifistic tax slave? Or would he have been a Warrior?

The Romans created this "Jesus" character to hopefully teach the Jews to turn the other cheek; submit to authority; give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.

Why would a real living God who's loving and caring order his followers to kill sinners and their children? Seriously think about this a moment: Would a loving God order the death of a child of a sinner? What did the child have to do with a mother infidelity? The child should not be held accountable for a parents sins, right?

Or did he (Vespasian aka God) order the killing of children so that one day they would not come back to revenge the death of their parents?

Why would a God demand sinners to bring their best Oxen and Cattle as a tribute to God as an offering for their sins? Could it be because there was nothing of more value that the Jews could afford? Why would it be easier for a Camel to fit through the eye of a needle than a rich man get into Heaven? Could it be, because Vespasian did not want anyone of wealth in that Kingdom but himself?

The Scriptures were back dated 40 years to the day that Titus took down Jerusalem. Remember that Jesus spoke of this real Messiah that would burn down the cities; surround Jerusalem and raze the Temple within that 40 year span. The Romans created "Jesus" and made him a passive and forgiving Messiah; one that would turn the other cheek and give unto Caesar that which was Caesars.

The supposed Crucifixion of Jesus Christ was a mockery to the Jews; the end of Christianity; the end of their messiah Jesus, and the acknowledgment of the REAL "Jesus Christ" that fulfilled all those prophesies that the Jews Jesus spoke of, and that REAL "Jesus Christ" was Titus, the Son of God (Vespasian).

They (the Romans-Flavian Caesars) wanted to be known as God (Vespasian) and the Son of God-Jesus Christ (Titus). The only way they could get the Jews to accept them as Gods was to get them to pray through this made up Jesus character they invented. The Jews would NEVER bow to a living man (Vespasian), but by bowing to "Jesus Christ", they were actually bowing to the Caesars of the Roman Empire. They wore a mask; created a strawman (Jesus). They did not care about the name; they knew that they created "Jesus", and when the Jews were bowing and praying to Him, that they were actually bowing to Vespasian and Titus.

I know this is a hard pill to swallow for Christians (myself included), but if you actually step away from the Bible and stop looking at it as some magical book, and read it in it's literal typological form, the truth is in plain sight for all to see.

The campaign of "Jesus" ministry and the campaign of Titus' war on the Jews are in perfect sequence with each other if you read Josephus' court of record of the Jewish-Roman War. Remember that Josephus was a Jewish General who was captured by Titus' Army; they spared him; he was a great mind and they had a use for him in the Empire. One record of events is totally dependent on the other; as in the ministry campaign of Jesus was actually created from Titus' campaign in his war on Jerusalem.

All "Religions" are total BS; they are meant to divide and conquer; to control the masses; to teach obedience to a master, and that master is Government.

Now you know why all the authors of the Bible never contradict each other; because it was written by a few men at the time; all in the same court.

"Jesus" spoke of his prophecy in 40 years (within his lifetime), not of 2000 years afterwards and beyond. The Flavian's back dated the Scriptures 40 years on purpose, so that when Titus actually brought down Jerusalem it would look as if HE was the real Christ.

The many "Anti-Christs" that will (already did) come, are actually nothing more than those who opposed Vespasian and Titus; they were non believers; must be possessed with demonic spirits since they did not believe in Jesus Christ (Titus). These disobedient slaves with demonic spirits were against "Anti" Jesus Christ aka Anti-Christs.

No one shall enter the Kingdom of God (Vespasian) without coming through his Son "Jesus Christ" which was actually Titus.

John 3:16

For God (Vespasian) so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son (Titus), that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

Go read "Titus" at the end of the New Testament; then read Romans and Philemon where "Paul is a prisoner of Christ Jesus".

At the end of Revelation written by Josephus from the words of God (Vespasian), he warns anyone who alters the text will suffer the plagues described within.

Would a loving God actually do all those things to man just because he changes some text? Or is that the "Threat" of God (Vespasian) to anyone who would alter his words?

Now read Revelation 19:11 "The Rider on the White Horse"

I saw Heaven standing open (the walls of Jerusalem had holes in them from the battle and the gates were finally opened) and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. His eyes are blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe "dipped in blood" ...

Would a robe dipped in blood actually mean that the robe is Red or Scarlet?

A Roman Victory Parade was at hand; Titus was wearing his Victory Robe and the Victory Crown upon his head as he entered the gates of Heaven (The New Jerusalem).

Here's the famous painting on Joseph Atwill's facebook page:


The triumph was a gala affair. Presided over by Vespasian and Titus, it featured piles of booty, including gold relics taken from the destroyed Jewish Temple, paraded through the streets. Now you understand what the text means by "Streets of Gold".

Titus was the the Rider on the White Horse followed by the armies that followed him were on white horses and dressed in fine linen .... It was a VICTORY PARADE; the "Second Coming of Christ" had taken place; they were all celebrating and dressed for the occasion. It was now time for God (Vespasian) to take his Throne, and the Son of God (Titus) to be seated at his right hand.

"You are worthy to take the scroll and to open it's seals because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God..."

Titus was wounded in the war.

Once you tie the Scriptures to the Roman-Jewish War, it is plain as day.

Here's Josephus' account of the victory celebration first hand:


The most precious of objects taken from Jerusalem were items from the Temple: the golden table on which the bread of the presence had been placed, the golden lampstand, or Menorah, the golden trumpets used in calling people to worship, and a copy of the Jewish Torah. Behind the wagons that carried these objects rode Vespasian, then Titus, with Domitian beside him. The triumphal procession ended at the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus where Simon, son of Gioras, who had been the Jewish general, was put to death before all of the citizens of Rome. All of this happened in 70 A.D. when Titus destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple of God.

If you will read the book in it's literary and typological sense, you will come to realize it was an account of what had happened THEN, not what would happen 2,000 years from THEN.

Listen to Joseph Atwill explain the truth about the "Jesus" character and how and why he was brought to life:


Here's another very good interview:


Look up his other interviews on YouTube as well.

Ask yourself one question: Why would a Book inspired by God himself who loved the Jewish people more than anything in the world or universe combined, dedicate a Chapter of His Book to the "Romans" and another to "Titus"?

Answer: Because the Flavian's created Christianity and with the help of Josephus Flavius, they created the character known as "Jesus Christ", and Titus himself fulfilled all the prophesies of THEIR creation, and his Father who is now known as God and accepted as God along with Titus who would now be accepted as "Jesus Christ" had fulfilled the prophecy of the "End Times", which was nothing more than the end of Jerusalem and the Messianic Christian Movement with the "Second Coming of Christ" aka "Titus".

As a tribute to their conquering victory of the Jews and to make sure everyone living at that time knew that Vespasian was to now be recognized as God and Titus as the Son of God aka Jesus Christ, they put it in plain sight for all to see in the book of Romans and the book of Titus.

In the book of Titus, Vespasian (God) is talking to his Son Titus (Jesus Christ) and instructing him on how to teach the new slaves (Jews) to be subservient and obedient to their new God.

Just read it; it's right there in the "Holy Bible" for all to see who the REAL God and the REAL Jesus Christ really is.


This is a good overview on Joe's Blog:


Once we break the chains of religion, the political structure of the world WILL change.

The Second Coming of Jesus Christ has already taken place; and the "End Times" are nothing more than the end of the militaristic-messianic movement of the Jews in about 70 CE (Common Era).

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

there are no gods

just fools that fight over them and others that get rich selling the dogma to other fools.

What is of and from God belongs to God.

What is of and from government has nothing to do with God and belongs with the government. That is what Jesus was saying. The amazement was because Jesus outwitted his very powerful enemies with that statement and there was no rebuttal to it. They thought they had him cornered and they lost that round.

How is it even possible to correctly interpret that in any other way?

“It is the food which you furnish to your mind that determines the whole character of your life.”
―Emmet Fox

I guess this is the next step after the

bastardization of the language, "new speak" or what has become "politally correct speech". Now we bastardize the ancient writings of real semitic people. Repeat a lie often enough and sooner or later the lie replaces the truth.

This thread is being used to replace truth with "new lies soon to become truth". You can't fool all of the people all of the time. The poster doesn't care if we buy into the lies, as long as we help perpetuate them.

“It is the food which you furnish to your mind that determines the whole character of your life.”
―Emmet Fox

Joη's picture

let's hear some critiques of Atwill's theories:


Not mentioned in those is what jumped out to me immediately: the incorrect conclusion that the "render unto Caesar" line is pro-roman (or pro-taxation in general) sentiment, when it is not at all.

"You underestimate the character of man." | "So be off now, and set about it." | Up for a game?

How about you post a comment rebutting my comment below this


Lets put theories and opinions aside and use some "common sense".


Joη's picture

when a hull is leaking, seek to stop it, don't taunt the leak

You really think these are valid comparisons?

"Jesus chose apostles from fishermen, said to be fishers of men" :: "During the sea battle of Gennesareth, Titus's soliders were harpooning men underwater".[pg 38]

"Jesus knocking on the gates of Jerusalem" :: "Titus also knocks on the same gates, but with catapults." [pg 203; links broke]

According to Atwill, the gospels were written in 71-79AD, and his reference text War of the Jews was written in 79AD [pg 347]. Other sources agree the War of the Jews was written in the mid 70sAD.

If the character of Jesus did not exist until the gospels were concocted according to Atwill, why is Jesus referenced in Paul's letters to the Corinthians, written between 53-57AD? Or Thessalonians, or Galatians, etc predating these gospels by decades?

"You underestimate the character of man." | "So be off now, and set about it." | Up for a game?

I "Love" the way you CONTINUE to skip over the Million $

Question: Unbelievable that you think people are stupid enough to see that you are deliberately attempting to "dodge" the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room, and redirect the argument into a game of opinions and arguments ... lol

Okay Jon, since apparently your computer screen is giving you problems and you can't see the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room, let me present you with it once again:

I've left this comment in a few locations in this thread, and everyone seems to be avoiding it like the plague:



Further down the passage in Hebrews 12:9 God (Vespasian) says:

"Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us, and we respect them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of our spirits and live! Our fathers disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, that we may share in his holiness"

Here Vespasian is stating "we have all had human fathers who disciplined us", but now that I am the true living God of Heaven (the new Jerusalem), I will discipline you for your good, so that you may share in my holiness

Question: Did or does a REAL God have a human father?

Now Jon, can you answer the MILLION dollar question or not?

This is the beauty of this statement: I didn't say that; you didn't say that; Joe Atwill didn't say that; no other internet guru or biblical scholar said that; Fred Flintstone or Robert Price didn't say that.

Forget any other arguments from anyone else, and rebut the words of God Himself as written in Hebrews 12:9 above.

I'll be waiting Jon.

NOTE: Once again in case you get confused. I don't want any misunderstandings Jon (or anyone else on the board for that matter); do not attempt to divert or sidestep the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room Jon; do not plaster a comment full of others opinions with links of rebuttal's etc. Jon.

Answer the Million Dollar question Jon, and give me your rebuttal to the word of God himself as listed above.

"insert game show music here"

If you divert the question Jon, I'll keep posting this above and below any comment you make Jon, until you have no more wiggle room.

Answer the question and rebut the words of "God" himself.

Once we've addressed the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room, all arguments are null and void.


You clearly do not understand the doctrine of Inspiration

The Christian doctrine of Inspiration is that holy men of God are moved by the Holy Spirit to write. The words are the words of the human author, but the authors were writing exactly what God wanted them to write, word for word. So the human author of Hebrews was writing to Hebrew Christians as directed by the Holy Spirit to impart God's truth to them.
2 Peter 1:21 For prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction in righteousness.

Your argument is a straw man, a logical fallacy that holds no weight. No "gotcha" moment there.

Is that really the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room?

If so then it turns out to be the size of an ant compared to the truth.

The answer to your question is yes, Jesus had a human father, his name was Joseph. He wasn't Jesus' biological father, but he was the father who raised him and disciplined him after Jesus was born and grew into adulthood.

I guess with that question addressed your theory falls apart.

I take it you are confused about Jesus being truly God and truly human. Don't worry though, even a lot of Christians are confused about it. You should read up on the hypostatic union of Jesus. Hopefully that helps you.

It took me a while, but I

It took me a while, but I think I understand why you are saying what you are saying.

Judging from your bolded words and your OPINION of what Hebrews 12-9 is saying, it appears you think that Hebrews 12-9 is the direct recorded words of God. The text you have written has a clue showing that you are wrong in that understanding.

The words "but God disciplines" indicates that a third party is talking about God and that the words are not that of the first person. Reading Hebrews from the beginning will tell you that it is apostle Paul that is telling us of the love of God in his discipline.

Paul did not write the "Hebrews"

Domitian of the Flavian Dynasty did. "Paul" is Domitian's "Jesus", just as the Gospels foreseen the military campaign of Titus.

Mathew/Mark/Luke were written during the reign of Vespasian and Titus.

Hebrews was Domitian's brain child; his character was "Paul".

Read Joseph Atwill's book "The Single Strand".

I can see why others didn't

I can see why others didn't respond to your 'hard' question. It may be because that you don't follow the same rules as you ask others to do. You asked a responder to use the scriptures only and note to use comments of others.

I did exactly that and then you respond with comments taken from Atwill.

Regardless of who wrote the Hebrews text, my point still stands and stands unanswered. The Hebrew text you posted is written in the third person and not the first person and so why would anyone want to attribute the words directly to God? And therefore, your question about a father of God is pointless or unappropriate. Or maybe it should just be said it has no place.

To the Haters and the Bashers, I present you the following:

Hebrews 12:2 ... God Disciplines His Son(s)

"Let us fix our eyes on Jesus (Titus), the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning it's shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God."

Here God (Vespasian) is talking to both of his sons (Titus and Domitian) and stating that He (Titus) avoided the cross; scorned it's shame, because "He" Titus didn't hang on a cross like the character they had created, but instead, is sitting at the right hand of God(Vespasian).

"Consider him who endured such opposition from sinful men, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart."

God (Vespasian) is telling Domitian that his brother (Titus) endured such opposition from the forces he fought in the desert (sinful men who did not believe that Vespasian was God and Titus was the Son of God), and he should be respected for that

"In your struggle against sin, you have not resisted to the point of shedding your blood. And you have forgotten that word of encouragement that addresses you as sons."

Domitian, in your struggle against the Jewish Rebels, you did not resist to the point that you were wounded, but your brother Titus did

"My son, do not make light of the Lord's discipline, and do not lose heart when he rebukes you, because the Lord disciplines those he loves, and he punishes everyone he accepts as a son."

He said "My son", referring to Domitian. Do not take lightly your brothers new position in the Kingdom, and do not lose heart, he is the chosen one, and he now has the authority to punish you.

Further down the passage in Hebrews 12:9 God (Vespasian) says:

"Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us, and we respect them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of our spirits and live! Our fathers disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, that we may share in his holiness"

Here Vespasian is stating "we have all had human fathers who disciplined us", but now that I am the true living God of Heaven (the new Jerusalem), I will discipline you for your good, so that you may share in my holiness

Question: Did or does a REAL God have a human father?

Sorry folks, it is what it is. I have been a Christian all my life; studied the book back and front; went to Church; after ever prayer I always say "In Jesus Name I Pray" so that my prayers are to be heard by God. But now I truly see at least part of the light, and that light is:

There may very well be a God and I wish to believe in him. But it is very difficult to dispute these accusations of a made up Jesus character to alter religious beliefs in favor of the Roman Empire.

Each his/her own.


I feel sorry for you

When stuff like this comes up--and there has been so many attacking the veracity of the scriptures and Christianity---is taking it at face value without examining validity of the source.

Who had access to the original records by Vespasian & Titus making these statements? Who translated them? What kind of review was made by other scholars on this theory of Roman conspiracy to create these scriptures?

You mean to tell me that for hundreds of years some of the finest and brilliant biblical scholars from various times, nations and backgrounds never saw this Roman conspiracy? That it totally escaped them, or that they colluded to repress it?

I'm sorry, if this was such a expose, it would have been made a big deal by various critics of Christianity log ago, if not by historical scholars with similar access to such ancient records.

Here's a critical response of Mr. Atwill's thesis that reveals its faulty logic and conclusions.


Conscience does not exist if not exercised

"No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up!
---Lily Tomlin

Ready to eat your crow?

You said:

"You mean to tell me that for hundreds of years some of the finest and brilliant biblical scholars from various times, nations and backgrounds never saw this Roman conspiracy? That it totally escaped them, or that they colluded to repress it?"

My response: Yes, they were too stupid to ever see the Roman conspiracy. In fact they were so stupid, that they couldn't see the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room, and apparently neither have you

Have fun reading this Mr. SemperFi


Not impressed with your rebuttal

read my "another point" posted higher up.

Atwill is merely regurgitating others work on the same topic, adding rhetoric, not new evidence.

The idea of Romans co-opting Hebrew written works to carve out a pseudo-Christian one with sufficient consistency is beyond the mental pale. How do you explain the amount of Hebrew scholarship required of Roman writers to cut a convincing cloth out of Jewish history for a plausible fulfilling of OT Messianic prophecies? The polytheistic Roman writers could never have successfully imitated the deep and complex Hebrew culture to pull it off.

Second, you mean to tell me with all the political intrigue, wars and Empire building that any one Caesar could get a bunch of Roman scholars using quills and parchment to produce enough manuscripts to successfully propagate Christianity in a short of enough time frame to make it worth the while?

And what about the Dead Sea Scrolls? Are they just more red herrings produced a by a conspiring Empire in a lame attempt of pysops to mind control citizens!

There is simply too much historical and scripture records that even the Roman Empire could possibly fabricate or propagate to pull it off.

Conscience does not exist if not exercised

"No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up!
---Lily Tomlin

Again, you are "DODGING" the Million Dollar Question:

Stop with the "Rain Dance" around the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room and address it.

Here we go again:

Excerpt from the passage "God Disciplines His Son(s)"

Further down the passage in Hebrews 12:9 God (Vespasian) says:

"Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us, and we respect them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of our spirits and live! Our fathers disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, that we may share in his holiness"

Here Vespasian is stating "we have all had human fathers who disciplined us", but now that I am the true living God of Heaven (the new Jerusalem), I will discipline you for your good, so that you may share in my holiness.

Then in Hebrews 3:12 prior to that he even states:

"See to it brothers that none of you has a sinful unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God"

Do you see the Vanity?

Question: Did or does a REAL God have a human father?

Stop spamming the thread with useless BS and address the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room.

Nothing else matter once this is recognized. Once that light goes off in your head; the rest is useless BS.

If "God" is admitting in his own words that even he had a human father, does that not make a BELL go off in your head?

Forget about Atwill, and address "MY STATEMENT". I'm the one who's bringing this fact to the forefront; I've never even heard Atwill or any other "Biblical Scholar" ask this question, have you?

Maybe someone has, but this is the first time I've ever heard it brought up. I was just dissecting my Bible yesterday and BINGO! it hit me.

It's in his words; the written word of "GOD HIMSELF".

Here is the core; the root of understanding the entire conspiracy that all Biblical Scholars and Guru's to date have yet to see.

Read my other comments above and below; I've covered a lot of this many times.

Once again, please address the question and the question ONLY:

Question: Did or does a REAL God have a human father?

I am not dodging anything

Your entire argument is based on these parallels of Vespasian writings and Hebrews? ----the KJV of Hebrews to boot---as a proof?

You do know you are quoting the English translation of the Bible made about 1500 hundred years after the events occurred--long after the Roman Empire kicked the bucket. So how does KJV Hebrews happen to match so perfectly with the translation of Vespasian comments? Now that a seems like a leap of faith to me!

It sounds like someone after the fact have "re-translated" Vespasian words to match up with KJV of Hebrews in order to support their thesis.

So unless you can direct me to an unbiased translation of Vespasian's commentary prior to the KJV of Hebrews, that I may compare for myself, I say your current source is compromised.

Conscience does not exist if not exercised

"No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up!
---Lily Tomlin

How about a version from 1600 ago? Will that do?

Codex Sinaiticus, a manuscript of the Christian Bible written in the middle of the fourth century, contains the earliest complete copy of the Christian New Testament. The hand-written text is in Greek. The New Testament appears in the original vernacular language (koine) and the Old Testament in the version, known as the Septuagint, that was adopted by early Greek-speaking Christians. In the Codex, the text of both the Septuagint and the New Testament has been heavily annotated by a series of early correctors.

The significance of Codex Sinaiticus for the reconstruction of the Christian Bible's original text, the history of the Bible and the history of Western book-making is immense.

Home Page: http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. Its heavily corrected text is of outstanding importance for the history of the Bible and the manuscript – the oldest substantial book to survive Antiquity – is of supreme importance for the history of the book.

Now, would you like to see the text in it's most ancient; earliest version available to man?

Hebrews 12:


Now, once again: Can You Answer The Million Dollar Question?

"Did-Does-or-Can A Real God Have a Human Father?"

"insert game show timer/music here"


God himself

has no beginning nor end.

But Vespasian does. Good enough?

You have yet to produce an original document of Vespasian written statements that I requested. Hebrews veracity is not on trial here, Vespasian's is. So show me where you reference his exact words from.

Its funny, because while you claim this information makes Christianity a hoax, you yourself may be a victim yourself! Perpetuated by some who are trying to pass off mere speculation on the most circumstantial and coincidental evidence.

Now if you come across some hard evidence of ANY Roman writers of the same period actually spilling the beans or otherwise confessing they made up Christianity as part of a grand conspiracy, well, then let me know.

Conscience does not exist if not exercised

"No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up!
---Lily Tomlin

You must like the taste of Crow; here, have some more :)

You said:

"Now if you come across some hard evidence of ANY Roman writers of the same period actually spilling the beans or otherwise confessing they made up Christianity as part of a grand conspiracy, well, then let me know."


This might go down better with some Ketchup :)

South, kindly copy and paste the sentence....

...in the article to which you linked that qualifies as a confession that someone "made up Christianity as part of a grand conspiracy".

I read the article and found nothing even remotely close to such a confession.


The Constitution is a living document

As far as I know, "The Bible" is not.

Mods Please Remove This Post

This makes all of us look bad.

image, image, image--

LOL! Are *you* one of those who wanted Dr. Paul to get a new suit?

*trying to lighten things up*

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

I knew this was going to have

I knew this was going to have a massive number of down votes before i clicked on it.

Keep on track folks

Blessed are the peacemakers

I don't doubt that it is easy for most records to be . . .


but . . .

the fact that the "Jewish" world had come under heavy condemnation was established well before the New Testament. Warnings were given throughout the Old Testament that a "hired razor" would 'shave' the people--

and Rome was a rather sharp razor.

The fact that many "Romans" joined the early Christian church is not hard to accept, either, based upon the fact that many of them were slaves and/or conquered people--

This is an amusing attempt at having a parallel 'history'--but it's not very convincing.

If a person's faith in God depends upon a few isolated scriptures and not upon the whole, then . . . that person may accept this eagerly enough--

having said that I have no doubt that Greek and Roman philosophy/philosophers had an impact on the form the New Testament would eventually take--

That's nothing very profound in that.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Subtle Deception

I have been telling you that Christianity today is mostly made up of pagan beliefs introduced by the "holy roman" church starting with Constantine. And because of these false teachings it gives rise to all kinds of ridiculous attacks on the truth because the Catholic/protestant perpetuation of these falsehoods has left Christianity without a solid foundation.

Until Christianity turns again to what Yahshua and the early apostles taught and lived then it will just continue to make it easy for these kinds of ignorant attacks.

your last line is signficant--


it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

This is so lame on so many levels.......

Never mind the Old Testament is chock-full of Messianic prophecy. Yeah, some Roman conspiracy band of scholars got together and laboriously went through ALL the Jewish scrolls--mind you, they were not all assembled into one book like that Old Testament we have today----and then compiled a pseudo testament of the Savior where he quotes and/or is referred to by those same scriptures. A room full of monkeys with typewriters would have better odds recreating a plausible fraud.

You want some objective scrutiny of Christianity? Read the story "The Case for Christ" of Chicago Tribune journalist Lee Strobel. An declared atheist, Mr. Strobel sought to discredit Christ, and instead, after years of research, became converted.

A final proof of divinity cannot be found in scriptures alone. One either accepts man as a mere higher form of animal, to be born, live and die, to eventually become food for the worms. That eternal oblivion awaits us all, making love and friendship a false illusion that will not survive death. That art and music is nothing more than "sound and fury, signifying nothing" but a means stimulate a chemical reaction to temporary excite our physical sense and help pass what little time we have in mortality.


One can embrace that man is a combination of a immortal spirit and a physical body, referred to as a soul. A spirit that can mediate and commune with a higher power. That good art and music are products of that spiritually, and not just gross manipulation of cheap sentimentality. That such spiritually leads to being motivated to do good for others, instead of seeking for one's self-interest. (I'm referring to personal charity here, folks, not free market economics, ok?). I refuse to believe that the maternal instinct and associated emotions such as love and kindness are solely evolutionary hard-wired for the sake of merely perpetuation the species.

Conscience does not exist if not exercised

"No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up!
---Lily Tomlin