Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'

winofiend
reply to post by ltheghost

 

Ahhh... a nice theory. But the "BUY TICKETS" sells me it's .. I mean tells me that it's just a story being sold.

Truth does not come with a price. If it does, you are not given truth but a version of a story...

But I could believe this. It is clear to me the intent of organised religion, is ORGANISATION! Invisible chains to control the populace.

How sad the world would be if the biggest scam of all was not the deception by the devil, but that there was never any reason to be so afraid...

Why do you think all religious people are so afraid? I'm genuinely curious. Did fear or religion come first? It is my understanding that fear came before, and spiritual explanations were used to comfort and reassure. Those with similar explanations got together and formed "religions". Not all religions focus on fear - that is a generalization.

reply to post by TheComte


Perhaps it was a great excuse, and the real motive was making sure their sheep flock did not grow too large to be able to control?

Dianec
similar explanations got together and formed "religions". Not all religions focus on fear - that is a generalization.

I think religion, and its religious leaders have ALWAYS used fear as a tool. Fear of what God wants, fear of what the religious leaders want, and a heavy dose of using scripture, manipulating it to their agendas.

Just the way I see it. I dont think that is a generalization, but a fact. MHO.

danielsil18
reply to post by ltheghost

 

Wouldn't surprise me if it's true.

If it's proven true I don't think it will change much.

There are people that think the Earth is 6,000 years old! Those same people will dismiss this and give an excuse like "Satan put that there to misguide us" or maybe they will say "God put that there to test the true Christians because the end of times is coming".

edit on 8-10-2013 by danielsil18 because: (no reason given)

I'm a Christian and I know the world is millions of years old, it's even Biblical there are 3 total earth ages. The first was the dinosaurs, 2nd is the one we are in, the 3rd is yet to come.

Our earth age is 6-8k years, but the earth is hundreds of millions of years old.

TheComte
My thoughts are:

If this is true, why did the Romans continue to persecute Christians for another 300 years until Constantine made it the state religion? Why actively engage in preventing the spread of the religion that you just invented, that you want to spread, by crucifying and throwing Christians to the lions?

If the nobility of Rome did indeed invent Jesus Christ, then I doubt they would have taken such extreme measures to dissuade people from joining. Because they would want it to spread. And they were smart.

Exactly. The other glaring hole in Atwill's theory is that the new testament displays a very intimate knowledge of not only the old testament, but of Jewish customs and beliefs. The romans themselves would not have that sort of familiarity with Jewish religion. I've heard it argued that they employed Jewish scribes to author the texts for them, but this is an exceedingly ridiculous claim when one considers that the Jews regarded the romans with disdain having lived under the yoke of the roman empire for quite some time. The Jews would not have authored the text for the romans in order to further subjugate themselves, to say nothing of the fact they would have found the entire thing blasphemous to begin with (which they did).

The whole thing is nonsense and is full of so many holes it's rather comical that anyone could actually take it seriously.

hounddoghowlie
and something else no one has addressed,if they did do it, it didn't work. rome brunt jerusalem to the ground 70 ce, then two more times,117ce and then 135ce. before Hadrian renamed it palaestine, in hopes of removing the memeory of the jews. and still there remained jewish people.

then the romans turned on Christians, and killed them wholesale and fed them to loins.

it would seem to be a sad waste of all that time and effort to rid themselves of the jews, only to create a much more powerful belief.

edit on 8-10-2013 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

Can we please stop with the sympathy crap. If that claim is as evidence based as the Jesus claim then that guy Atwill may be on to something.

The strait dope

According to the historian Tacitus, Christians during Nero's time (at least) were mainly torn apart by dogs, crucified, or burned alive — no mention of lions. The Romans did throw people to lions on occasion, and Tertullian, writing later, remarks that the Romans were always ready to exclaim "Away with the Christians to the lion!" whenever times got tough. However, Tertullian doesn't claim he witnessed any martyrdoms-by-lion personally, and anyway he was a Christian himself. Fact is, while the Romans evidently fed Christians to animals, and people to lions, we have no source stating directly that they specifically fed Christians to lions. So theoretically it's possible the whole Christians-lions thing was a Christian ploy for sympathy.

reply to post by ltheghost


So after roughly 2000 years, "biblical scholars" finally figure it out...This reeks of conspiracy. Proper NWO tactics.

Huge affront on Christianity.

Also, the title of the article is misleading. Where is the confession? And who confessed?

I'm not sure about how it all went down back then. But articles like this encourage me to believe in Jesus.

sonnny1

Dianec
similar explanations got together and formed "religions". Not all religions focus on fear - that is a generalization.

I think religion, and its religious leaders have ALWAYS used fear as a tool. Fear of what God wants, fear of what the religious leaders want, and a heavy dose of using scripture, manipulating it to their agendas.

Just the way I see it. I dont think that is a generalization, but a fact. MHO.

I'm pretty sure Jesus came along to reduce the fear in people - stop them from being so afraid of "being bad".

I agree - some religions stay on top of their subscribers through fear but there are also many religions that are present for the purpose intended - to comfort and reassure. When people are sick, hungry, hurting - they are there unconditionally. I think of karmatic religions such as Tibetin. Their purpose is to spread kindless and peace. The bad ones always get the spotlight though don't they? There are also good and bad people/groups in all religions, just like there are in any other organized "anything" - take your pick. To throw 100 apples out because there is one bad one is a little extreme IMO.

And fear is a natural thing. If a religious organization capitalizes on that across the board in such a manner as to make people more fearful that is messed up. I grew up in one of those. But there are many that facilitate taking the natural fears within and transforing them into faith. So do they use fear? Or are the people using the faith because of their own fears? In most cases it is the later. To say they ALWAYS use fear...well...that's why people seek to understand and turn to it to begin with - if all were hunky dory there would be need. Who is using who for what?

reply to post by ltheghost


I've read quite a lot of Atwill's theories and I gotta say they send a chill down my spine. The disregard for humanity and hated for the human spirit that had to be employed to pull off the religious rule and domination of the past 2000 is hair raising.

His story of "Bloody Mary" and the "Fishers of men" is blood boiling, if true. But I find his theory compelling and can't just toss it out.

There's a really good, interesting thread on this and other theories of biblica authorship here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

winofiend

hounddoghowlie
so it worked so good that they made up the books of peter, paul, james and john. just to seal it up hunh?
then there was the gnostic books, all written to fool the jews, yea right.

edit on 8-10-2013 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

So the more complex a story is, the less likely it is just a story?

Do not watch cloud atlas... You'll flip out brother..

i guess my post went over your head.
just about all of paul's writings and preaching was for the gentiles, peter even worshiped with gentiles. and caught flack about it from the other apostles.
there are two schools of thought about james and books of john, one is that james was writing to the jews only and the other was he was writing to both. the same with john as he preached to people in asia minor.

so if the the romans came up with the story to only fool the jews, how do they explain that these others preached to the rest of the known roman empire.

reply to post by DeadSeraph


Yes it all seems quite fantastical. But with just the right amount of plausibility to sell tickets to the lecture. Until I see the discovery in a peer-reviewed archaeological journal I must consider it a hoax. There is not even a mention of where he will publish his findings. The guy is basically an author.

More power to him if he can make a living like this.

reply to post by Dianec


You make some good points.

I just see religion as a giant pyramid scheme. I have nothing against those who need it though. I just wish our modern religions would own up to all the fear, persecution, and deaths they have caused.

Just a wish.

reply to post by TKDRL


You could argue that martyring people en masse grows the flock at a faster rate, but that's just a gruesome way to think.

the gov hated them so they killed him, but then years later this story was tampered with to create a myth

Look at how people in America have distorted the founding fathers to support their religion (OK the same religion).

The founding fathers were intellectuals who were more interested in writing books and socializing with Frenchmen than going to church or shooting guns, but you would think they were right-wing extremist barbarians if you only hear what is said about them in mass media.

TKDRL
reply to post by Khaleesi

 

I didn't say there was none, but the most documented person in history is downright laughable. More documented than ceasar, napolean, atilla? I am sure there are thousands more documented, and also by proper name, rather than some vague description etc.

Actually there is more non biblical documentation of Jesus than there is Ceasar. Research it. Yes by proper name.

reply to post by sonnny1


Yes - So much damage; many causing a lifetime of guilt and fear in some establisments. Others - "leaders" using the ultimate as a tool for pushing their own agenda. I think I've just been able to see some good stuff out there so that changed my own views - which were once similar to some of those on ATS.

I also wish those establishments (groups within groups or even entire thing), that have caused so much damage would "repent" as they preach to others to do. They won't though - and it's the greatest hypocracy in existence. Some have managed to beat the spirituality out of millions; not bringinging them into any sort of relationship with anything other then them and their desire for power and pleasure. Some have spread terror, physical, and spiritual deaths. They have also caused this backlash of hate for religion.

The guy saying Jesus was a made up character - he is capitalizing off of that just as much in my opinion. People always trying to make a buck off of Jesus and/or God; find their personal value through having their views reinforced, or just bask in their own greatness. It will never stop. But there are good people (including spiritual and religious leaders) who can still be found - who do it only for the peace it provides them - knowing they are helping to instill happiness and serenity in others. They just aren't so well known.

Khaleesi

TKDRL
reply to post by Khaleesi

 

I didn't say there was none, but the most documented person in history is downright laughable. More documented than ceasar, napolean, atilla? I am sure there are thousands more documented, and also by proper name, rather than some vague description etc.

Actually there is more non biblical documentation of Jesus than there is Ceasar. Research it. Yes by proper name.

I can find only 3 Primary sources of documentation of Julius Caesar. One of those sources is Julius Caesar himself. Plutarch is another primary source, There is one other that I can not think of the name at the moment.

Khaleesi
Actually there is more non biblical documentation of Jesus than there is Ceasar. Research it. Yes by proper name.

Yes, I read Jesus' famous work "The Gallic Wars."

reply to post by winofiend


Persisting in the usual sorts of insults?

1. My reality testing is likely above that of most folks. LOL. I know the clay whereof I was dug . . . compared to many so smug.

2. I noted that I had experienced praying for one person to sober up and was shocked when they did instantly . . . as was she.

3. Your biases are showing again.

4. Assumptions and biases can DENY TRUTH quite persistently over long periods of time.

However, eventually, all will be known.

reply to post by Klassified


The Biblical text has overcome assaults for many 100's of years.

Those who seek The Truth can find it.

Those determined to avoid the truth . . . can . . . mostly . . . for a while longer.

I rarely detect a micro-gram of fair-mindedness on the other side on such threads as this.

Impressive. NOT.