-37 votes

Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ' Why governments create false histories and false gods.

I know, this is like the fart in church. I'm not posting this to be antagonistic. I happened to be one of those that don't believe in Christianity but accept that this is what most people in my community believe. I get along just the same....Since we like to question institutions around here then whats wrong with questioning this?

Anyway, check this out as point of conversation:

Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'
Biblical scholars will be appearing at the 'Covert Messiah' Conference at Conway Hall in London on the 19th of October to present this controversial discovery to the British public.

London (PRWEB UK) 8 October 2013

American Biblical scholar Joseph Atwill will be appearing before the British public for the first time in London on the 19th of October to present a controversial new discovery: ancient confessions recently uncovered now prove, according to Atwill, that the New Testament was written by first-century Roman aristocrats and that they fabricated the entire story of Jesus Christ. His presentation will be part of a one-day symposium entitled "Covert Messiah" at Conway Hall in Holborn (full details can be found at http://www.covertmessiah.com).

Although to many scholars his theory seems outlandish, and is sure to upset some believers, Atwill regards his evidence as conclusive and is confident its acceptance is only a matter of time. "I present my work with some ambivalence, as I do not want to directly cause Christians any harm," he acknowledges, "but this is important for our culture. Alert citizens need to know the truth about our past so we can understand how and why governments create false histories and false gods. They often do it to obtain a social order that is against the best interests of the common people."

Atwill asserts that Christianity did not really begin as a religion, but a sophisticated government project, a kind of propaganda exercise used to pacify the subjects of the Roman Empire. "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," he explains. "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."

Was Jesus based on a real person from history? "The short answer is no," Atwill insists, "in fact he may be the only fictional character in literature whose entire life story can be traced to other sources. Once those sources are all laid bare, there's simply nothing left."

Atwill's most intriguing discovery came to him while he was studying "Wars of the Jews" by Josephus [the only surviving first-person historical account of first-century Judea] alongside the New Testament. "I started to notice a sequence of parallels between the two texts," he recounts. "Although it's been recognised by Christian scholars for centuries that the prophesies of Jesus appear to be fulfilled by what Josephus wrote about in the First Jewish-Roman war, I was seeing dozens more. What seems to have eluded many scholars is that the sequence of events and locations of Jesus ministry are more or less the same as the sequence of events and locations of the military campaign of [Emperor] Titus Flavius as described by Josephus. This is clear evidence of a deliberately constructed pattern. The biography of Jesus is actually constructed, tip to stern, on prior stories, but especially on the biography of a Roman Caesar."

How could this go unnoticed in the most scrutinised books of all time? "Many of the parallels are conceptual or poetic, so they aren't all immediately obvious. After all, the authors did not want the average believer to see what they were doing, but they did want the alert reader to see it. An educated Roman in the ruling class would probably have recognised the literary game being played." Atwill maintains he can demonstrate that "the Roman Caesars left us a kind of puzzle literature that was meant to be solved by future generations, and the solution to that puzzle is 'We invented Jesus Christ, and we're proud of it.'"

Is this the beginning of the end of Christianity? "Probably not," grants Atwill, "but what my work has done is give permission to many of those ready to leave the religion to make a clean break. We've got the evidence now to show exactly where the story of Jesus came from. 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. To this day, especially in the United States, it is used to create support for war in the Middle East."

Atwill encourages skeptics to challenge him at Conway Hall, where after the presentations there is likely to be a lively Q&A session. Joining Mr.Atwill will be fellow scholar Kenneth Humphreys, author of the book "Jesus Never Existed."

Further information can be found at http://www.covertmessiah.com.

About Joseph Atwill: Joseph Atwill is the author of the best-selling book "Caesar's Messiah" and its upcoming sequel "The Single Strand."


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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


there were, Jews, pagans, and righteous gentiles. Also the jews who followed Jesus were known to themselves as the Nazerenes.

The mistake you are making is in assuming that anybody can be considered a "lost sheep of Israel". JUadism was not a convert religion, is was a religion based on ethnicity. As such, when Jesus referred to the lost sheep of Israel, he was specifically referring to a specific, ethnic people who had veered away from the covenant that they had made with the god.

The Jews have always had a system for the gentiles known as the Noahide laws wherein gentiles can become "righteous gentiles" by following the 7 laws.

With this reality in mind, Jesus' statement that his message was only for one group of people to the exclusion of all others is put into focus that much more, since there was a label that could have been used for all groups.

To further support my argument Jesus again states in no unequivocal terms:

"Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.

Jesus had only one mission and that was to bring the Jews back into the fold.

No, first you answer my question, as I asked it first, and you..

First you answer my question, as I asked it first, about your bold claim that Paul conspired to paganize the New Testament...

Then I will respond to your question. Until then, I see zero reason to take you seriously.

And the answer is pretty simple, to the question you pose...

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

Obviously there is no direct evidence

regarding the conspiracy, just circumstantial.

Before we proceed and to get on some common ground do you agree that Paul's message of Christ changed when his audience changed?

I already answered your question.

"I believe the Romanization/Paganization did not come until hundreds of years a.d.
Not until after the Council of Nicea (325 a.d), when the Biblical story was Canonized under order of Roman Emperor Constantine, and/or the translation of the New Testament from Hebrew/Aramaic/spoken-word, into Greek."

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

That has nothing to do with what I had asked

I was asking you a question to find some common ground regarding Paul, since he is the issue at hand. I asked you if you believe or don't believe that Paul changed his message of Christ when in front of different audiences?

Yes or No will suffice.

That answer above has nothing to do with the question.

In short... Your theory is bullcrap.

My comment does answer your question, because I am saying your 'theory' is based on nothing, and the paganization of 'Christianity' did not happen until much later. So.... NO.

Paul adapted the message the different audiences he saw, that's all.

This is the 2nd time you've been caught out spewing complete non-sense denouncing Christianity. In fact the 3rd.

You've claimed Paul conspired against Yeshua's message. No evidence, admittedly to back that up. You've claimed Jesus was referred to as Lucifer, &/or vice versa in the Bible. That is complete non-sense, too. You even pretended there was a quote, and then I called you on it, and you gave me mis-interpreted non-sense. You also boldy, collectively lumped all Christians together say "Christians" have a skewed perspective about Masonry.

You are a troll, and an admitted Muslim with a clear anti-Christian agenda.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?


You're all over the place...all I did was ask you a question so I can make my case that Paul had indeed corrupted Jesus' message which was sent to ONLY the jews as I have proved above, no need to go on extremist tangents with other arguments that are in other threads wherein you have been proven wrong.

Would you like to proceed with this argument regarding Paul here or should I discuss Lucifer here, or should I jsut say I am sorry for denouncing Christianity since you are unable to argue against the facts?

It's also called revisionist history.

I certainly will not downvote you, but the New Testament...

predicts "The Great Apostasy," which is the denial of the existence of Jesus Christ. Even Judaism acknowledges, but condemns him; as well, as Islam, which praises him.

Until I became a Gnostic, I never fully understood his purpose in coming and I certainly did not accept the traditional interpretation of his "Second Coming". Modern Gnostic teachings produce a synergy between science and religion, that transcends both. I just wish more here at the DAILY PAUL would approach Gnosticism with an open mind.

Approach Gnosticism with an open mind you say?

To start off with, Gnosticism is a generic term that applies to several distinct belief systems. Are you talking about Manichean thought or Sethianism perhaps? Or classical Valentinianism maybe?

All of these systems of belief owe more to Neo-Platonism than they do to an Orthodox understanding of Christianity as a revealed religion, and in the case of the Sethian approach was condemned by Plotinus as a malignant corruption of Plato's philosophy.

My problem with Gnosticism is that it treats creation as a mistake, which cuts against the logical consistency of God's goodness and omnipotence, not to mention casting aside the moral implications of sin and the necessity of the expiatory benefits of Christ's humiliation, sacrifice and resurrection.

Likewise, while this is more personal opinion and anecdotal, I've noticed a creepy parallel between overtly mystical Pentecostal types and modern Gnostic proponents in how they present themselves, having this odd combination of self-importance and an outright space-case demeanor. I'm not saying this applies to you, but it has definitely been my experience.

“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

Judaism does NOT condemn Yeshua...

This is the ignorant talk about Jews I keep hearing that doesn't make anyone look good.

I am Messianic Jewish. Many conservative and reform sects of Judaism view Jesus as a prophet. We Messianics see him as the prophesized Messiah.

I know of no Jews, except the few in New Testament, the Sadducees and Pharisees, who "condemned" Jesus.

*If you want to say that orthodox Talmudic Rabbinic Judaism, in the respect that it has recognized Yeshua, has dismissed the notion that he is the Messiah, &/or the Son of G-d, that would be an accurate statement. One that NOT all Jews, by any means, agree with.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

Gnostics were ascetics.

Are you ascetic? Just curious.

Many gnostics also were completely celibate. I realize, not all.