Caesar's Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: chr0naut

Just because it seems absurd to you, doesn't mean it's not a possibility.

Loads of people do things because they're told not to. Why would religion be any different, especially if it fits into what you already believe?

Loads of people do all sorts of things. So what?

What the book proposes isn't possible because it is un-historical.

History (and not just Roman or Christian history) does not support it.

It never happened.

Then prove "historically" that Jesus existed.

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

originally posted by: c2oden

originally posted by: mymymy
Doesn't matter what you say, all of the "Christians" will deny, deny, deny. I have met a lot, and I mean A LOT of self proclaimed "Christians", but I have never met an actual one.

Look at this site for a prime example, so many people claiming to be "Christian", then turn around and advocate for war, or letting poor people die because they simply cannot afford food or health coverage.

To be honest, "Christians" are a truly disgusting breed of human beings

Anyone who thinks someone is a "truly disgusting breed of human being" based only on their religious beliefs is disgusting.

I believe that was based on actions that were the exact opposite of proclaimed religious belief....basically hypocrites.

Nope. All Christians are hypocrites. They just skirt around it by saying, "I'm not perfect, just forgiven".....no matter how much crap they get into. They get the freebie pass to Heaven cause they "accepted Jesus".

What's even more hysterical, is it's only Paul who promoted the "faith alone" doctrine. Jesus himself said to do as He did....and it wasn't any easy peasy task.
You basically have to AT LEAST keep the commandments to love God first and others as yourself.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: dfnj2015

I've never heard that all of Christianity was created by the Romans..but there is ALOT. Of evidence the book of Paul was...

All the "pay your taxes " and "serve your masters" stuff was from Paul..

A guy who never even met Jesus, but made it into the Bible because he had visions..

"Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" - Jesus said that, not Paul.

Wasn't that Paul's quote of what Jesus said??

I'm asking not being sarcastic?

Yup it was mark. Fair enough

All three synoptic gospels mention it: Matthew 22:15-22, Mark 12:13-17 and Luke 20:20-26.

I don't think Paul even quoted it.

Hmmmmm....wonder why Paul never quoted that? Maybe because he NEVER met the actual Jesus??
Oh, I remember now....Paul said (taking completely out of context by the way), that you shouldn't muzzle the ox while it's treading the grain". Yea, somehow ole buddy Paul figured that meant that "pastors, clergy, staff, etc., etc....should get PAID for all their hard labor to build "the church".
Uh yea....and just look at the total cluster F.... we have today in the churches.
They even bend over backwards to get their tax exemption. You know, cause why should the CHURCH pay taxes and all??
I mean, especially when they need to keep the lights on in the building and somehow draw in new converts to PAY for those light bills and clergy salary.
Church is a business, plain and simple.

a reply to: dfnj2015

I recall writing something similar when I was doing a course on Western Tradition at university.

There was a book that was absolutely helpful and quite interesting and you may like a read:


Economic Origins of Roman Christianity

Highly recommend to one and all with an interest in this kind of stuff

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I found this fascinating book on the Christian religion was created by a particular Roman family in response to Judean uprisings and the hope to get the people to willingly submit to Roman authority.

According to the author, the Roman Flavian family invented Christianity as a way to control the masses. After putting down the Judean uprisings, the Romans looked for a cheaper way to control the masses by replacing the old religion with a new religion.

The author claims Christianity was fabricated from previous religions. A composite of all the previous sun and salvation gods. The religion was engineered to get the minds of the conquered people to submit to Roman authority by creating a religious authority. The purpose of Christianity was to convert the Jews to a new religion one that would bring them under the wings of Roman rule willingly.

The problem, with this theory, is that the Jews never accepted Christianity and Roman rule. It was eventually Rome that accepted Christianity and Christian rule.

originally posted by: Matrixsurvivor

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: chr0naut

Just because it seems absurd to you, doesn't mean it's not a possibility.

Loads of people do things because they're told not to. Why would religion be any different, especially if it fits into what you already believe?

Loads of people do all sorts of things. So what?

What the book proposes isn't possible because it is un-historical.

History (and not just Roman or Christian history) does not support it.

It never happened.

Then prove "historically" that Jesus existed.

Why?

What would that do?

originally posted by: Matrixsurvivor

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: dfnj2015

I've never heard that all of Christianity was created by the Romans..but there is ALOT. Of evidence the book of Paul was...

All the "pay your taxes " and "serve your masters" stuff was from Paul..

A guy who never even met Jesus, but made it into the Bible because he had visions..

"Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" - Jesus said that, not Paul.

Wasn't that Paul's quote of what Jesus said??

I'm asking not being sarcastic?

Yup it was mark. Fair enough

All three synoptic gospels mention it: Matthew 22:15-22, Mark 12:13-17 and Luke 20:20-26.

I don't think Paul even quoted it.

Hmmmmm....wonder why Paul never quoted that? Maybe because he NEVER met the actual Jesus??
Oh, I remember now....Paul said (taking completely out of context by the way), that you shouldn't muzzle the ox while it's treading the grain". Yea, somehow ole buddy Paul figured that meant that "pastors, clergy, staff, etc., etc....should get PAID for all their hard labor to build "the church".
Uh yea....and just look at the total cluster F.... we have today in the churches.
They even bend over backwards to get their tax exemption. You know, cause why should the CHURCH pay taxes and all??
I mean, especially when they need to keep the lights on in the building and somehow draw in new converts to PAY for those light bills and clergy salary.
Church is a business, plain and simple.

Why, then, are you not taking advantage of this amazing business proposition?



The truth is that the Christian Churches have been the major sponsors of health, human welfare and education, in the absence of governmental and societal support, for thousands of years.

Since the Churches 'give out' to society, in ways that governments can depend upon, but they have little to offer in the way of increase in productvity, it makes sense for a government not to tax those who's charitable assistance would cease to be viable and would foment the rebellion of the disenfranchised poor and downtrodden against that government.

And less you forget that even up until recently tens of thousands of Americans died unnecessarily each year merely because they did not have the right insurance cover (ObamaCare was an attempt to redress that fact). So it is plain that non-governmental charitable organisations, such as those of the Christian Churches, are still an essential for modern society.

Or, for balance, look to the governments that have actually closed down religious institutions, like Communist, Socialist, anti-Christian and Extreme Right Wing Humanist governments. Look how they have never raised the standards of living of their subjects, every one of them has been a humanitarian disaster!

You should honestly read a little history.

... and Paul's message is not different than that of the Gospels, a fact that has been maintained as self evident truth by the the Christian churches for two thousand years.

originally posted by: auroraaus
a reply to: dfnj2015

I recall writing something similar when I was doing a course on Western Tradition at university.

There was a book that was absolutely helpful and quite interesting and you may like a read:

Economic Origins of Roman Christianity

Highly recommend to one and all with an interest in this kind of stuff

But this is different in that it identifies economic factors in the spread of Christianity from 400 years after Christ up until the Medieval period.

That is quite different than suggesting that Christianity was created as a false religion 400 years earlier to put down an ethnic rebellion.

The problem with the theory is, that Rome doesn't teach Christianity, it perverts it into its own image.

Christianity is the underdog here. "If you cant beat them, take control of them through infiltration".

Roman Christianity js indeed commercial Churchianity, not the real deal. Early translators agree, Rome is the Biblical Mother Harlot.

"I hate religion" - God

a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

Maxtrix, I have spent the last year and half now comparing Jesus Teachings with that of Paul. Paul did not hijack anything thing Jesus via inspiration gave to Paul further knowledge of his teachings to give us because Jesus was not going to return as sson as Peter and the Eleven thought he would.

Jesus said he would be a ransom for many and gave no more information on what he meant. Then Paul was given revelation that Jesus Death on the Cross was for our sins, that we could be forgiven of our sins, Justified and righteous before God, and made holy and given the power to live unto righteousness a new life.'

I would post all the verses if you want. But the last time I did you said you didn't believe the Bible.

a reply to: chr0naut

yes and no

The book does go into the ethnic issues too if I recall. Besides, it is worth having a broader view to make up a whole picture than one lone theory.

a reply to: auroraaus

All one needs is the preserved word of God for this generation. It is the AV the only Bible to have all the verses in it, the only Bible that uses terms in English that best represent the original languages, the only Bible to define every word in it by the context of the said word, and the only Bible to have a supernatural built in Cross reference so simple anyone with a sixth grade reading level can see it and use it, They need only read it constantly and become so familiar with it no one could pull the wolf's wool over their eyes.

a reply to: firefromabove

All the verses cited by op are the writings of Paul, a man whom Jesus never met during his life on earth

How do you know that Saul/Paul never met Jesus? Can you prove that statement?

a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

Nope. All Christians are hypocrites. They just skirt around it by saying, "I'm not perfect, just forgiven".....no matter how much crap they get into. They get the freebie pass to Heaven cause they "accepted Jesus".

Yes Christians are somewhat mystifying in their numerous differences but I do appreciate that they have not as yet, in today's world, resorted to blowing themselves up with the intent to murder as many humans as they can in their mad quest to enter Muhammad's heaven. Even their own it seems. As naughty as Paul was, he truly was a saint when we see the crazy Arabs slaughtering themselves and when tired of killing each other they then blow themselves into fragments of flesh and bone and blood to enter the abode of the higher power called Allah. Which would you care to follow said the pot to the kettle? Your choice of course.

originally posted by: auroraaus
a reply to: chr0naut

yes and no

The book does go into the ethnic issues too if I recall. Besides, it is worth having a broader view to make up a whole picture than one lone theory.

The time periods covered in each book are separated from each other by nearly half a millennium. Long enough to reasonably conclude they are specifically unrelated.

One might draw some inferences from long time period events such as ethnic issues and religious doctrine in regard to the two books. One cannot, however, legitimately say that one book supports the conclusions of the other for short duration historical events.

a reply to: chr0naut

okie dokie so you're saying my reply to OP about a book that may be of interest in their studies isn't all that helpful or interesting.

Cool. I won't try to be helpful in future.

originally posted by: auroraaus
a reply to: chr0naut

okie dokie so you're saying my reply to OP about a book that may be of interest in their studies isn't all that helpful or interesting.

Cool. I won't try to be helpful in future.

Please, I was not saying that (not exactly).

The book, quoted in the OP is, in my estimation, a fiction unsupported by fact.

The book you quoted is both truly historical and factual in basis.

Your contribution is both valid and appreciated.

But a true understanding of the contribution of your book requires a reading of it.

My concern is that there are others who would make the assumption that your book ratifies the OP's one, without due diligence.

a reply to: chr0naut

Thank you for clarifying.

Like I said, it helps to broaden the view about the origins of christianity than from one viewpoint.

a reply to: chr0naut

Why? What would that do?

Give you something to do besides act like Paul.

Why, then, are you not taking advantage of this amazing business proposition?

a reply to: chr0naut

You're funny. Ha.

The truth is that the Christian Churches have been the major sponsors of health, human welfare and education, in the absence of governmental and societal support, for thousands of years.

Yea....lots of folks in churches or who are believers, do much good out there. It's also true that there are many unbelievers in the Bible or just plain simple folks who try to what's right....who also do for others.
Oh, but they are destined for hellfire for eternity if they don't accept Jesus as their "lord and savior". You know..cause Paul say's so.

And less you forget that even up until recently tens of thousands of Americans died unnecessarily each year merely because they did not have the right insurance cover (ObamaCare was an attempt to redress that fact). So it is plain that non-governmental charitable organisations, such as those of the Christian Churches, are still an essential for modern society.

LOL...that's hilarious. You are kidding right? Most churches don't do squat unless you are a member, OR willing to listen to the "gospel of Paul" and be saved.
Seriously. I've experienced it first hand...many times. (when I was a Christian)

Or, for balance, look to the governments that have actually closed down religious institutions, like Communist, Socialist, anti-Christian and Extreme Right Wing Humanist governments. Look how they have never raised the standards of living of their subjects, every one of them has been a humanitarian disaster!

You should honestly read a little history.

You shouldn't ASS-U-ME, Chronaut.
I've studied more than you know. Have you? Spanish inquisition, witch hunts, etc?

... and Paul's message is not different than that of the Gospels, a fact that has been maintained as self evident truth by the the Christian churches for two thousand years.

It's very different....just ask Chester.



Show me how they are the same. Seriously.