The religious bottleneck of the first century.

I have been doing a little armchair research into the historical record surrounding the various religions based on Judaism. From that I have ran across a couple interesting points concerning the Jewish rebellion and the Roman counter insurgency that I think are widely agreed upon in historical facts. As well as some interesting speculation so I will try and separate the two. This led to a religious bottleneck where if any shananigans were to take place.. that’s the time to do it.

Joseph Atwill has this theory concerning Jesus being created by a family of Roman Nobles , the Flavian dynasty. To establish these theories he uses these things that are widely agreed upon.


AGREED UPON VARIABLES:

A) The Romans conquered, occupied and oppressed ancient Judea. It was a very long and very violent occupation and rebellion that culminated in the a brutal crack down and the destruction of the Jewish temple.

B) The jews believe they have a “Warrior king” prophecy that predates that occupation and is fulfilled by freeing the Jewish people from some kind of bondage. So during this occupation they had many “failed” Warrior Kings emerge. Rebellion leaders and such who’s supporters would claim they were the predicted king.

C) the Early strains of both Judaism and the various Messiah cults were a far more militant and violent strain . They would constantly, try to oust the Romans and restore their cities to Jewish rule. The both religions would have been almost totally ethnically Jewish, rather than Roman.



D) The Roman occupation culminated in a massive crackdowns and basically genocide on both Judaism and Christianity. The Romans sacked their cities, destroyed their temples and CONFISCATED OR DESTROYED THEIR HOLY TEXTS and artifacts.

This creates a historical bottleneck and almost certainly the reason we have nothing that predates around 100ad.

The Romans were very thorough.. you are talking a big chunk of the Jewish population being decimated.. and they were specifically targeting religious figures in a lot of cases..

D) The Jews and Christians who do survive are far less militant and far more willing to capitulate to Rome. The Hebrews conform to Roman society and out of that era comes a far less violent Judaism and Christianity.

I believe This is where Rabbinic Judaism takes the stage.

E) At this point the majority of Christian population had shifted to being Roman Europeans, rather than Middle eastern Jews..

In large part because anyone of Jewish decent who was likely to have been a first person witness to the actions of Jesus , was killed in the purges. All the priest unwilling to tow Rome’s line, were killed In the purges as well..



So Joseph Atwill’s theory is that the Flavians used Josephus a d the other subdued priests to change both religions and write Vespasian in as Jewish messiah, and apparently both Josephus and Vespasian claimed exactly that..

Now this is what I consider a “front page “ theory..

A story that you should be learning about from the front page of every paper in the world,not in a ten year old documentary that I had never heard of..

So that would lead me to believe that Atwill doesn’t have mainstream support for his theory..

So I assume he must be making some fairly substantial leaps I. Logic..

What I find fascinating is the religious bottleneck and the shift to a less violent and more secular dogma.

As far as I understand it, this is kinda when The jews started taking a more “esops fables” view of Judaism. Where the stories from the Bible were not necessarily objective history, but more stories meant to teach a lesson.


At the same time this is when Christianity added all the “turn the other cheek” and give unto ceaser what is ceaser’s” type stuff.

If you did ever want to change one of those two religions. That religious bottleneck is the time to do it..

I bet that is literally the time when copies of the Torah and priests who could teach it was at its lowest point in 500 years , either way..(assuming the Torah is considered to be over 2500 years old historically).

CONCLUSION:

So in summery..

You have these 2 violent and militant religions made up of almost entirely Jewish followers. Then you have this massive Roman purge and crackdown on anything Judaism related.

This crackdown was soooooo good that we have no Jewish text that pre-dates like 120ad. .. maybe a hair later.


Then when we do start having pieces of those documents start to surface. Judaism and Christianity are not just radically different,, but in the case of Christianity it is even racially different.

Now the vast majority of Christians were ethnically Roman..not ethnically Jewish..


I just found this “bottleneck” interesting and would suggest anyone interested in the historical accounts of the first century. You should search both Joseph Atwill and Bart Ehrman. It’s interesting stuff.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Star and Flag

Interesting.

You should remember also that it was Paul (Saul), an orthodox? Jew with classical Jewish training in the Torah and a Roman Citizen, who formed the base for the new Christian religion. Paul's letters make up a large part of the new testament, and much of the (then) forming Catholic religion stems from his writings alone.
Many modern Christian denominations still follow the old edicts of Catholicism.

Even fellow skeptics have disowned Atwill’s theory.

HUGE red flag...

Even atheist Richard Carrier (of infidels.org) writes: "Joseph Atwill is one of those crank mythers... Atwill is a total crank, and his work should be ignored, indeed everywhere warned against as among the worst of mythicism, not representative of any serious argument that Jesus didn’t exist."

A Critique of Joseph Atwill’s “Caesar’s Messiah”

Robert Price (who doesn’t think Jesus existed) debunks the book (This review alone, coming as it does from someone sympathetic to at least the idea that Jesus never existed, should tell you how poor Atwill’s work is)

Joseph Atwill’s Josephus Code | Dr. Michael Heiser

The claim made by the book discussed below is one of the most absolute, demonstrably false, completely ignorant pieces of dribble I’ve ever come across. So to sum up, Atwill completely ignores or flat out misrepresents the historical evidence and then wants us to believe that the Roman empire got bored and created the most incredibly elaborate hoax in human history because they thought the Jewish people were itching for someone to flip upside down and essentially put an end to the religious establishment they held dear.

If you can find one recognized/credible New Testament/early church theologian/historian (meaning someone I've actually heard of working at a respected academic institution) who will agree that Atiwll's thesis (and I'm using that term generously) is correct, then I'll read the book

Caesar's Messiah: Rome Invented Jesus?

“Contemporary New Testament scholars have typically viewed their [i.e. Jesus-mythers] arguments as so weak or bizarre that they relegate them to footnotes, or often ignore them completely....The theory of Jesus' nonexistence is now effectively dead as a scholarly question....Biblical scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted.” (Robert Van Voorst, Jesus Outside the New Testament, 6, 14, 16)

“There is simply nothing intrinsically improbable about a historical Jesus; the New Testament alone (or at least portions of it) are reliable enough to provide evidence of a historical Jesus. On this point, it is important to note that even G.A. Wells, who until recently was the champion of the christ-myth hypothesis, now accepts the historicity of Jesus on the basis of 'Q'.” (Jeffery Jay Lowder of Internet Infidels)

"Here is a fact: There is far more evidence for the existence of Jesus than for virtually anyone in ancient history. Anyone who peddles that “Christ-myth” theory, does NOT do so on the ground of historical evidence. The fact of Jesus Christ in history is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as is the fact of Julius Caesar. Get this straight. It is not historians who promote the “Christ-myth” notion...his alleged words and actions were documented by numerous people."
LINK

a reply to: JoshuaCox

You might find this interesting:



Sometimes the coincidences are not as strange as the seem!

originally posted by: Murgatroid
Even fellow skeptics have disowned Atwill’s theory.
HUGE red flag...

Denial is of course the first reaction by most Christians. Would you expect anything less?

a reply to: Murgatroid

So ... just a great deal of name calling.

I am always careful when skeptics foam at the mouth.

Remember always, a portion of all those self labelled as skeptics, are controlled opposition.

This is especially true of the Catholic Church.

P

a reply to: JoshuaCox

The religious bottleneck of the first century.

This is curious.

A bottleneck. Almost as if it culminated a little after the time Christ came into the picture. Thanks for the thread.

If, as according to this discredited fantasist’s “theory”, the Romans really invented Jesus...

Then they must also have invented all the disciples who preached for Jesus.
And surely they must have invented John The Baptist as well.

And not only that, but those crafty Romans would then have had to convince all of the Jews alive at the time to orally pass down the story of the “false Messiah” they considered Jesus to be, throughout every generation that followed them up to this moment in time we inhabit.

Uhhuh... Sure thing, mate.

For me personally, all of that combined is undoubtedly far too complex and elaborate a scheme for me to consider believable.
Moreso when many other Jesus deniers won’t even endorse him.

The religious bottleneck of the first century.

You are only 20 Centuries late for warning us...

a reply to: RedmoonMWC

Yea , but Paul was one of those willing to capitulate to Rome.. just like all the other priests the Flavians adopted/abducted.

Paul was 50 years later atleast.. and one of those who Rome didn’t kill.. which usually meant that the person was willing to “bend the knee”..


All of Paul’s stuff is from “revelation” aka visions.. and appearemtly a lot of those who could contradict Paul’s account were killed in the purges.

So you have a guy radically changing the doctrine, who was a Roman apologist AND had never personally met Jesus..

a reply to: Murgatroid

I said as much in the OP and avoided anything that I felt was his speculation in the “mainstream accepted” list.

The religious bottleneck isn’t part of his theory.

a reply to: dfnj2015

He is right.

Well atleast in the leap from the things I listed, to the actual creation of new religions..

However, if anyone ever had the chance to change both religions. It was the Flavians..


As I said in the OP.. if he had more than speculative evidence, it would be front page news.

However , the variables he uses to build his theory are real..


It’s just a big leap from one to the next..

It’s not a “Christianity is all real” sized leap lol.. but a leap bone the less.

a reply to: 3daysgone

I don’t know what you mean.. but the Jewish rebellions would have culminated in the sacking of the city and destruction of the temple. As well as just massive killings and enslavement...mainly the priest class which was the only real literate faction..

So in the aftermath the Romans destroyed all the texts, and just about everyone Jewish who could read them, or inteicately knew the stories..

Except for those willing to be Rome’s gofers of course.. those got rich and powerful.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

Actually the OP has nothing to do with Rome creating jesus.. though claiming it is impossible while claiming the supernatural is funny....


As far as your point though..

The Romans killed ALOT of the people who knew the oral traditions, AND ORAL TRADITIONS CHANGE FAST..

It’s the telephone game..

The first person only changes a word.. the next only a word.. all by complete accident..

By the time a couple generations go by.. good luck EVER trying to recreate the original perfectly..

As far as it being too complex of a scheme.. it didn’t work perfectly.. the world doesn’t remember Vespasian as the Jewish messiah..

The world remembers some Po-dunk Jew..

So say we assume it is all true, right.. the Flavians set it up.

After starting the ball rolling they could no longer steer it and their motivation for the fake was half lost..

Half lost because tough they didn’t swap in Vespasian, they did create a far more docile Judaism and Christianity..

One that paid their taxes and turned the other cheek.



But obviously this could just be a product of the Roman crackdown as well..

The Romans kinda killed all the militant ones.. and their families.. and all their priests..


Appearently the fact the Flavians were the sole owners of the sacred Jewish texts is real though..

After destroying the temple they confiscated all of them and who knows were they went after that.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Denial is of course the first reaction by most Christians. Would you expect anything less?

Apparently a few atheists are in denial as well...

Even atheist Richard Carrier (of infidels.org) writes: "Joseph Atwill is one of those crank mythers... Atwill is a total crank, and his work should be ignored, indeed everywhere warned against as among the worst of mythicism, not representative of any serious argument that Jesus didn’t exist."

A Critique of Joseph Atwill’s “Caesar’s Messiah”

Robert Price (who doesn’t think Jesus existed) debunks the book (This review alone, coming as it does from someone sympathetic to at least the idea that Jesus never existed, should tell you how poor Atwill’s work is)

Joseph Atwill’s Josephus Code | Dr. Michael Heiser

a reply to: Murgatroid

Well it’s not really poor work...

It just requires quite a few leaps to believe it..

The variables are there.. his theory just isn’t even remotely the only possibility that fits those variables.

For example..

The crackdown alone could account for the kinder, gentler religions. No conspiracy needed.

However, that doesn’t prove it wasn’t orcastrate s either..

Just that it’s a big enough hole to put all kinda stuff in and have it fit..

Partially because the Romans were so good at erasing cultures. We have no surviving documents that predate the Roman purge.

originally posted by: Murgatroid
Even fellow skeptics have disowned Atwill’s theory.

HUGE red flag...

Even atheist Richard Carrier (of infidels.org) writes: "Joseph Atwill is one of those crank mythers... Atwill is a total crank, and his work should be ignored, indeed everywhere warned against as among the worst of mythicism, not representative of any serious argument that Jesus didn’t exist."

A Critique of Joseph Atwill’s “Caesar’s Messiah”

Robert Price (who doesn’t think Jesus existed) debunks the book (This review alone, coming as it does from someone sympathetic to at least the idea that Jesus never existed, should tell you how poor Atwill’s work is)

Joseph Atwill’s Josephus Code | Dr. Michael Heiser

The claim made by the book discussed below is one of the most absolute, demonstrably false, completely ignorant pieces of dribble I’ve ever come across. So to sum up, Atwill completely ignores or flat out misrepresents the historical evidence and then wants us to believe that the Roman empire got bored and created the most incredibly elaborate hoax in human history because they thought the Jewish people were itching for someone to flip upside down and essentially put an end to the religious establishment they held dear.

If you can find one recognized/credible New Testament/early church theologian/historian (meaning someone I've actually heard of working at a respected academic institution) who will agree that Atiwll's thesis (and I'm using that term generously) is correct, then I'll read the book

Caesar's Messiah: Rome Invented Jesus?

“Contemporary New Testament scholars have typically viewed their [i.e. Jesus-mythers] arguments as so weak or bizarre that they relegate them to footnotes, or often ignore them completely....The theory of Jesus' nonexistence is now effectively dead as a scholarly question....Biblical scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted.” (Robert Van Voorst, Jesus Outside the New Testament, 6, 14, 16)

“There is simply nothing intrinsically improbable about a historical Jesus; the New Testament alone (or at least portions of it) are reliable enough to provide evidence of a historical Jesus. On this point, it is important to note that even G.A. Wells, who until recently was the champion of the christ-myth hypothesis, now accepts the historicity of Jesus on the basis of 'Q'.” (Jeffery Jay Lowder of Internet Infidels)

"Here is a fact: There is far more evidence for the existence of Jesus than for virtually anyone in ancient history. Anyone who peddles that “Christ-myth” theory, does NOT do so on the ground of historical evidence. The fact of Jesus Christ in history is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as is the fact of Julius Caesar. Get this straight. It is not historians who promote the “Christ-myth” notion...his alleged words and actions were documented by numerous people."
LINK

"Here is a fact: There is far more evidence for the existence of Jesus than for virtually anyone in ancient history. 

How is there more evidence for Jesus in ancient history than people who's bones we've literally found??

a reply to: dug88

There is not....


People assume he really existed because messiahs were popping up like hot cakes anytime the Jews were in bondage.

So it is not hard to assume something similar happened..

NO non-Christian historian thinks any of the miracle stuff happens AT ALL..

What if the original copy rights of Jesus belonged to the Hebrews rather then the Romans. There was other texts describing his earlier life like the gospel of Thomas, but his feat are little more of the result of some serious mood swings an father issues. It was banned from being used in he NT an yet survived, because they thought of the children.

Then there's the works of the Talmud, which focuses on racial propaganda aimed at Gentiles, but thats ancient history. Nero cruicfying earlier said beleivers of Jesus which would be counter productive in that case if they went through all the trouble spreading his word. He hated them an was considered a figure head of Rome.

There even proof of crosses being found in Pompeii before the event, and the making of the coliseum, where as their tradition was hanging phallic symbols like horseshoes over doors for luck. And this was long before the making of the second beast.

a reply to: Specimen


The original copyright of jesus did belong to the Jews.. however that copyright didn’t last a century. By 100ad when the oldest copies of the New Testament emerge and survive. Christianity was almost a totally Roman sect.

The Romans killed most of the Jewish converts.

The Talmud isn’t the only ancient text that was filled with racial propaganda. The NT became VERY anti-Jew , VERY fast..

So it goes from being a religion “by Jews, for Jews”, to a religion by Jews for gentiles..



The present day glorification of the Jewish people by Christianity is a BRAND NEW THING..

And I mean brand new as in .. brand new WW2.


I’m not sure what you mean about pompi and crosses ???

For the previous 2000 years the Jews were the villains of the New Testament.