-15 votes

New Scholar Suggests Jesus Was Only a Means of Political Control

This has been discussed before, but this guy is making headlines all over the place. He claims that Josephus' writings actually prove that Jesus' life story was fabricated. This is interesting because most Christian historians use Josephus' writings as credible historic evidence that Jesus did live as we all think he did. If Josephus is debunked there isn't a whole lot more the Christian apologists can use.

http://www.covertmessiah.com

Its well known that the story of Jesus was told many years before his supposed existence all over the world. There are many similarities to astro-theology and many religion's theology. Is this stuff finally going mainstream?




Comment viewing options

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

Scholar?

Can someone please research this guy, who happens to sell books for a living, and let everyone know just what kind of "scholar" he is? Every article you see describes him as a "Biblical Scholar". I believe, in fact, that he is a "self proclaimed scholar" which is much different. Did I mention that he sells books for a living? I challenge you to bring forth true evidence of his being any sort of "scholar". This is simply another ANTI theist book written for other anti theist to buy and pat each other on the back. Never mind the messenger, if the message jives with your anti theist beliefs, then you are likely to ignore the idiot making money from your purchase. Kind of like the average American idiots who swear on their lives that they watch the "true" news, unlike those other stations. As if any of them aren't entertainment networks filled with opinion wrapped up like news. Rant over, now go investigate and check out this guy who claims to be a scholar.

Another new scholar

having his 15 minutes of fame.

This

relatively-new anti-Christian push is not working! People can post all the BS anti-existence-of-Jesus quotes they want because no one will EVER convince me that Jesus does not exist. I've shared this before, but here it is again:

The first words out of my 4-year-old daughter's mouth after heart surgery were: "...Mommy, Jesus came and held my hand..."

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond
BAN ELECTRONIC VOTING!!

many of us have had experiences like this--

many of them--

sometimes we don't talk about them, because--

well . . .

Matthew 7:6

But I appreciate your courage in bringing this up--

countless experiences--

are out there for those who know Jesus--

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

Notwithstanding Josephus....

...you have the Manichean writings about Jesus, the Muslim record, the Coptic record, the Antiochan record, the Alexandrean record. Need some more?

and ya

And you know only 300 years of writings following his death with over 6,000 pages.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Ante-Nicene-Fathers-Volume-Set/dp/...

Now for the third time

And since the same topic has been posted 3 times now I will quickly explain why the hypothesis is wrong.

1. The hypothesis states that Josephus in collaboration with Rome after the Roman war 66-73 AD. created the Gospels and Jesus as a way to subdue and make everyone follow Rome.

2. The existence of Jesus, his Church, or anyone talking about the Church and Gospels before the conspiracy dates 66-73 would nullify the hypothesis.

3. St Paul, his New Testament writings, and the Church already existed 20 years before the Fall of The Jewish Temple and the Roman war.

4. Therefor we conclude the hypothesis that Rome and Josephus created Jesus and the Gospels is Null and void.

Thank you.

I'm glad to see that there is someone on here who actually has researched this topic (as opposed to just shooting his mouth off about being the "logical" one). We need more like you on here.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

O ye of little faith. Dost

O ye of little faith. Dost thee doubt the benevolence of the Emperor God Constantine? The turncoat (Flavius) Josephus but speaketh the truth.

Great, this old lie again.

Some recommended reading and viewing material for anyone who hasn't joined the Christ Myth cult yet but who might be feeling unsure about what to think on this topic.

http://graceinthetriad.blogspot.com/2011/06/debunking-christ...
http://graceinthetriad.blogspot.com/2011/06/debunking-christ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLrbQnfGucA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkXIIHk5BVM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDmxf0YK7P8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpCB6BNKxmo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVLCvcuRDUA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGV08Pxwi_k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1949zqy0Vp8

P.S. - Anyone who has not either viewed all 6 parts of Holding's series on Josephus and Jesus or the "Did Jesus Exist?" lecture but has anything to say on the topic to the contrary will be ignored. Either learn your opponent's view on the matter or stick to the echo-chamber, I get bored far too quickly with people who rehash the same tired nonsense.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

I think its hard to deny that

I think its hard to deny that a person named Jesus existed. I think there is enough evidence to support that and perhaps some of the things he did in his life, but after that the story gets pretty blurry. Best case scenario the Catholic church distorted a lot of things and we are in the dark about some important facts. Why is Jesus' life and death so astrological and repeated throughout history? I never get a good answer to that.

It's not.

To be fully clear, the Roman Catholic Church didn't really distort much apart from a few renegade bishops in Rome whose errors were then contradicted by their successors. It wasn't really until at some point in the 7th century that Papal hegemony became outwardly pronounced (after Gregory I at the earliest anyway), and doctrinal issues contrary to the Gospel message did not become fully pronounced until the Fourth Council of the Lateran, and then the subsequent Council of Trent (the fruits of a massive overreaction to legitimate complaints made by Augustinian theologians like Huldrych Zwingli and Martin Luther).

As far as why Jesus' life and death is astrological, you need to look at the link below, it does a thorough job of debunking Peter Joseph's errors regarding Jesus' life in comparison to various pre-Christian deities.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFI6m6Icav4

Furthermore, Jesus was the subject of prophecy throughout the Old Testament, going back as far as Genesis 3:15 with regards to the virgin birth. It makes perfect sense that Jesus' coming would be foretold throughout different cultures, particularly since it is stipulated that the 3 Magi that brought him gifts at his birth in Bethlehem were from outside of Judea. Technically speaking, saying that Jesus' existence is suspect because it fits in too nicely with the workings of the world is liking saying water is suspect because it is wet.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

God created the universe

so it makes sense that it would be a reflection of Him.

This is a fascinating documentary/website that theorizes that the constellations are actually a message to man from God about the Redemption. This is taken from an astronomical point of view with the "star of Bethlehem" as the decoder.

http://www.bethlehemstar.net/about/

Already done

Re post

And since the same topic has been posted 3 times now I will quickly explain why the hypothesis is wrong.

1. The hypothesis states that Josephus in collaboration with Rome after the Roman war 66-73 AD. created the Gospels and Jesus as a way to subdue and make everyone follow Rome.

2. The existence of Jesus, his Church, or anyone talking about the Church and Gospels before the conspiracy dates 66-73 would nullify the hypothesis.

3. St Paul, his New Testament writings, and the Church already existed 20 years before the Fall of The Jewish Temple and the Roman war.

4. Therefor we conclude the hypothesis that Rome and Josephus created Jesus and the Gospels is Null and void.

Sadly, Another Day, Another Doubter

3 "Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is long suffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."
2 Peter 3:3-9

See, this is why you come off as ridiculous

Credible, reasonable logic, and you just quote scripture and consider it your argument. You're being completely unreasonable.

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

Hmm.

So it's unreasonable to quote scripture, yet completely reasonable to latch on to a small handful of hack scholars in a bizarre fit of confirmation bias while ignoring the hundreds of years of scholarship devoted to this subject which reveals this latest batch of "atheistkult" idiots to be the fools that they are.

I can only imagine what it's like to live in the paranoid world that you think is reality.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

I agree with TelFIRE.

Let me pose a hypothetical to you. Let's say I create a revolutional philosophy (religion). And, let's say I've created a book (like the bible) which provides guidelines to my "new philosophy" and information about it. Now, some guy comes along and starts telling me all my theories and writings are wrong. Do you think he's going to accept that I'm right because I quote back my own work to him?

Point is, if you want to prove something about the Bible or Christianity to someone who doesn't believe in it, you need to use an outside source.

Oh please, if this were any

Oh please, if this were any other topic besides religion everyone would agree how absurd this is. I'm not latching onto any group of "hack scholars", I watched a video that someone posted, saw reasonable and potentially plausible arguments and a limited set of evidence. The response was to write down quotes that have no relation to the discussion, much less refute any of the claims made.

There is no "hundreds of years of scholarship" from where I stand, there is a topic, with some logic, and then a bunch of massively biased zealots shouting insults and offering literally zero logic or counter-evidence.

I'm not even picking a side, yet you've made assumptions about me and insulted me without offering a single damn shred of evidence in your support. If you can't see the problem here, no wonder there are less and less of you.

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

somewhat true

"There is no "hundreds of years of scholarship" from where I stand"

True, there is actually thousands of years of scholarship on the topic going back to Saint Paul who was going to the apostles to ask questions about certain things so he could know more about the facts of what he experienced.

You may also want to read the arguments and logical discussions by heretics and non heretics within the ante Nicene church fathers within the first 300 years of Christianity. You know its only several thousand pages of discussion, but hey there is no scholarship on the issue right?

If there's thousands of years

If there's thousands of years of proof, why don't you SHOW some of it instead of INSISTING that it exists despite a complete and utter lack of any hint of it on this thread?!

I think you continue to miss my point! No one will ever take you seriously! You could be completely right, but you are being a bunch of tools and refusing to consider what it's like for someone who doesn't just automatically believe what the Bible says and regard it as absolute truth that cannot be argued.

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

Blah blah blah.

You know, there's this nifty little thing called a "search engine", and an intellectually studious person would probably check for counterpoints to whatever material he has come across by happenstance before forming a presupposition regarding thousands of years of history. But in typical modern American fashion, you need to be spoon-fed everything or else it doesn't exist, which I suppose is a fitting indicator of the decline in education in this country on several fronts.

You are literally so lazy that you can't even be bothered to scroll up a little bit in the comment section to where I myself and a few others have posted at least a dozen links dealing with the errors that you seem all too willing to accept without even the slightest hint of skepticism. In light of this, why should I or anybody else bother re-posting these links? You don't give any indication that you have the mental capacity to comprehend all the information that you'd be handed.

Nevertheless, since I'm in a charitable mood, I've got a few links down below for you to take a look at dealing with this topic. If you can't be bothered to look at a single one of them before spouting out about how I need to kiss your backside in order to have a legitimate point, I will consider the conversation over and proceed enjoying the rest of my life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFI6m6Icav4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkXIIHk5BVM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDmxf0YK7P8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpCB6BNKxmo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVLCvcuRDUA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGV08Pxwi_k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1949zqy0Vp8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-h2ZtBiUvk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ_ois81VKg

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

So am I to understand that it

So am I to understand that it is my job to argue your points for you to myself? Ok if that's how you prefer things to be done I'll go ahead and research your counter points for you.

Alright, I'm back. I googled for videos proving christianity and found a bunch of people quoting more scripture and claiming vague predictions came true (never mind that they've 'come true' dozens of times since then).

I mean how completely absurd, that you think it is MY responsibility to Google for YOUR counter points! And then if I don't come back with the exact same position as you, I'm "lazy" and didn't do enough research. I'm literally laughing out loud at this right now. You're insane.

I'm not interested in your links at this point, you're clearly completely missing where I'm coming from. I'm not debating Christianity with you, I'm debating your methods for debating Christianity. But you're too dense and too set in your ways and too bigoted against anyone who opposes your beliefs that you'll never see that. So I'll just wish you the best, and say

Peace out.

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

Read the post that I responded to.

You stated that Aslan was being unreasonable and illogical because he quoted scripture. You did nothing to support this claim and left it as a blanket assertion, which prompting me mocking your viewpoint, thus your bruised little ego.

Tell you what, I just posted links to 7 videos refuting this nonsense, how about you go there and get cracking. By your own admission, you have no basis in this discussion apart from a singular video, which would definitely play into your viewpoint that there is no "hundreds of years of scholarship" since you've probably not read anything on the topic.

I'm sure you believe everything you see on the History Channel too, right? lol

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Hmm. I am honestly completely

Hmm. I am honestly completely lost. You live in a very different reality, and have obviously already chosen to associate me with things I have never once associated with.

All I'm saying is, you quoting scripture isn't going to convince people who don't believe scripture to believe scripture.

How absurd that this is difficult for you.

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

Are these quotes suppose to

Are these quotes suppose to convince me of something?

Yes

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God"

I pray that unbelievers receive faith, which comes through hearing God's word.

Quick!

He's not convinced! Need more copypasta!!!

"Lighthouses are more useful than churches."- Ben Franklin
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise."- James Madison

.

.

Here is another perspective

"But that is troubling–would you want to read a science book written by a layperson who hasn't read a single relevant scientific study? Would you pick up a book on engineering written by someone with a background in computer science, and trust that book enough to build a house based upon its designs? I hope not. I sincerely hope that no one would agree to trust either of these books."

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013/10/joseph-atwill-has...

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul