jeebuswalas strategizing:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->This is an interesting discussion about Caesar's Messiah among concerned Christians, that I posted previously in another thread:
http://www.apologetics.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/...13;t=000106;p=1
discussion excerpt (initial post by ISoG:
Caesar's Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus
By Joseph Atwill
I happened to pick this book up today as an argumentative non-fiction text for my lit. class.
The book is profoundly troubling.
The author's thesis is that Christianity was the invention of the Flavian family of Roman Emperors to squash the messianic uprisings of the Sicarii and create a pacified messianic Judaism. The writings of Josephus read "intertextually" with the Gospels are apparently a satire on the Jewish uprisings of the first century. A more thorough summary could be found in the book's reviews on Amazon.com, but the book primarily relies on parallelism between the four Gospels and the Josephus's War of the Jews to support its thesis.
The book is approximately 350 pages, though I'm only at 90, I am ill at ease with some of Atwill's arguments which, unfortunately, are rather compelling.
(snip)
Like I said, I haven't finished the book, but the primary arguments center around paralleling Josephus's War of the Jews with the Gospel accounts by comparing conceptual similarities.
Atwill offers the case of the Gadarene demoniac as one example. Jesus goes to Gadara and orders "Legion" out of the man. The Legion of demons enters a group of two thousand swine, who then plunge into the sea and drown. Forty years later, Titus leads a campaign in the same area and drives two thousand Jewish rebels to drown in the sea. He notes that in Josephus's account of all that is taken when the Romans plunder Gadara, "No swine are mentioned."
This, he declares, is because the "Swine" are actually the Jewish Rebels. Of course, if there were a Real Jesus, who really did drive two thousand swine into the sea, there simply might not be any pigs left in the region.
Consider also that War of the Jews contains an account of a woman, Mary the Daughter of Eleazar/Lazarus, who, during the siege of Jerusalem roasts and devours her own son. This is held in comparison to Jesus, son of Mary, instituting the Last Supper with the command to eat his own flesh and blood.
Atwill asserts that Jesus' supposed ministry exactly mirrors the campaign of Titus in War of the Jews, and that the record of the former is meant to be a satire of the latter, a mockery of the messianic Jews - I think. Atwill is not yet clear on what the Romans are satirizing.
He also argues that the prophecies of the NT were actually invented by Josephus to be "predicted," and then "fulfilled" by Titus in the War of the Jews. The prophecy that (paraphrasing here) Jerusalem would be destroyed in one generation (40 years) is of course fulfilled by Titus.
There are some flaws I can think of in Atwill's argument:
First, he has not explained why Domitian was so bent on oppressing Christianity since he had a hand in creating it.
Second, he begs the question a good deal - if you believe his thesis, everything seems to fit, if you don't, alternate explanations can be offered.
Third, Atwill ignores the issue of Canonization (so far), since in AD 70 there was no official "New Testament," something decided 300 years later.
I think the strongest counterhypothesis could be that Josephus wrote the accounts in War of the Jews to mock the preexisting gospels in a satirical style for the entertainment of the Roman Government. This is not to say that his accounts are falsified, but that he may have chosen to arrange them in such a way as to mock the Scriptures of the new Slave Religion. I really don't have the time to fully develop such an argument right now, but I think it has potential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 2 | Registered: Oct 2005 | IP: Logged |
Mathetes
Emeritus (Level 1)
Member # 192
Member Rated:
posted October 04, 2005 05:01 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does Atwill agree that the Christians existed prior to Titus?
--------------------
"This is for posterity's sake, so be honest." (Count Rugen, in the "Princess Bride")
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 5402 | From: The Cliffs of Insanity -- hanging on for dear life! | Registered: Jan 2002 | IP: Logged |
Beckett
Neophyte
Member # 2233
Rate Member posted October 08, 2005 09:51 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISOG:
After reading your review I got the book. You are right the book is very troubling. What I want to know is has anyone ever done any research at all as far the the parallels Atwill shows? If not, he seems to have discovered something that is hard to believe has been overlooked.
Let me know if you know of any other scholars, particulary Christian scholars, who write about the relationship Titus's military campaign and Jesus's ministry.
--------------------
Beckett
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 2 | From: Santa Cruz | Registered: Oct 2005 | IP: Logged |
Eliot5
Neophyte
Member # 2236
Rate Member posted October 09, 2005 03:03 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree Atwill's book Caesar's Messiah is very problematic. I was especially struck by the recent review on Amazon from a Bible translator.
Regarding ISoG's alternative that the Romans created the authorized history of the Roman-Jewish war by satirizing the gospels...then a few decades old, seems improbable. Wouldnt people have noticed?
As regards Beckett's question about whether other scholars have noticed thes parallels, yes they have, some of them, and cant explain them. For instance
H. Chapman in her SBL paper A Myth for the World about early Christian cannibalism was troubled about the virgin Mary/Cannibal Mary parallel, Chad Myers in his book on Mark notes the Gadara parallel etc
Atwill seems to provide a consistent if very problematic explanation for all of them. I wish scholars or clergy wouid answer his points since a lot of folk I know are really concerned and we cant just ignore it hoping it will go away
regards
Eliot
(discussion ends)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->This is an interesting discussion about Caesar's Messiah among concerned Christians, that I posted previously in another thread:
http://www.apologetics.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/...13;t=000106;p=1
discussion excerpt (initial post by ISoG:
Caesar's Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus
By Joseph Atwill
I happened to pick this book up today as an argumentative non-fiction text for my lit. class.
The book is profoundly troubling.
The author's thesis is that Christianity was the invention of the Flavian family of Roman Emperors to squash the messianic uprisings of the Sicarii and create a pacified messianic Judaism. The writings of Josephus read "intertextually" with the Gospels are apparently a satire on the Jewish uprisings of the first century. A more thorough summary could be found in the book's reviews on Amazon.com, but the book primarily relies on parallelism between the four Gospels and the Josephus's War of the Jews to support its thesis.
The book is approximately 350 pages, though I'm only at 90, I am ill at ease with some of Atwill's arguments which, unfortunately, are rather compelling.
(snip)
Like I said, I haven't finished the book, but the primary arguments center around paralleling Josephus's War of the Jews with the Gospel accounts by comparing conceptual similarities.
Atwill offers the case of the Gadarene demoniac as one example. Jesus goes to Gadara and orders "Legion" out of the man. The Legion of demons enters a group of two thousand swine, who then plunge into the sea and drown. Forty years later, Titus leads a campaign in the same area and drives two thousand Jewish rebels to drown in the sea. He notes that in Josephus's account of all that is taken when the Romans plunder Gadara, "No swine are mentioned."
This, he declares, is because the "Swine" are actually the Jewish Rebels. Of course, if there were a Real Jesus, who really did drive two thousand swine into the sea, there simply might not be any pigs left in the region.
Consider also that War of the Jews contains an account of a woman, Mary the Daughter of Eleazar/Lazarus, who, during the siege of Jerusalem roasts and devours her own son. This is held in comparison to Jesus, son of Mary, instituting the Last Supper with the command to eat his own flesh and blood.
Atwill asserts that Jesus' supposed ministry exactly mirrors the campaign of Titus in War of the Jews, and that the record of the former is meant to be a satire of the latter, a mockery of the messianic Jews - I think. Atwill is not yet clear on what the Romans are satirizing.
He also argues that the prophecies of the NT were actually invented by Josephus to be "predicted," and then "fulfilled" by Titus in the War of the Jews. The prophecy that (paraphrasing here) Jerusalem would be destroyed in one generation (40 years) is of course fulfilled by Titus.
There are some flaws I can think of in Atwill's argument:
First, he has not explained why Domitian was so bent on oppressing Christianity since he had a hand in creating it.
Second, he begs the question a good deal - if you believe his thesis, everything seems to fit, if you don't, alternate explanations can be offered.
Third, Atwill ignores the issue of Canonization (so far), since in AD 70 there was no official "New Testament," something decided 300 years later.
I think the strongest counterhypothesis could be that Josephus wrote the accounts in War of the Jews to mock the preexisting gospels in a satirical style for the entertainment of the Roman Government. This is not to say that his accounts are falsified, but that he may have chosen to arrange them in such a way as to mock the Scriptures of the new Slave Religion. I really don't have the time to fully develop such an argument right now, but I think it has potential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 2 | Registered: Oct 2005 | IP: Logged |
Mathetes
Emeritus (Level 1)
Member # 192
Member Rated:
posted October 04, 2005 05:01 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does Atwill agree that the Christians existed prior to Titus?
--------------------
"This is for posterity's sake, so be honest." (Count Rugen, in the "Princess Bride")
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 5402 | From: The Cliffs of Insanity -- hanging on for dear life! | Registered: Jan 2002 | IP: Logged |
Beckett
Neophyte
Member # 2233
Rate Member posted October 08, 2005 09:51 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISOG:
After reading your review I got the book. You are right the book is very troubling. What I want to know is has anyone ever done any research at all as far the the parallels Atwill shows? If not, he seems to have discovered something that is hard to believe has been overlooked.
Let me know if you know of any other scholars, particulary Christian scholars, who write about the relationship Titus's military campaign and Jesus's ministry.
--------------------
Beckett
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 2 | From: Santa Cruz | Registered: Oct 2005 | IP: Logged |
Eliot5
Neophyte
Member # 2236
Rate Member posted October 09, 2005 03:03 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree Atwill's book Caesar's Messiah is very problematic. I was especially struck by the recent review on Amazon from a Bible translator.
Regarding ISoG's alternative that the Romans created the authorized history of the Roman-Jewish war by satirizing the gospels...then a few decades old, seems improbable. Wouldnt people have noticed?
As regards Beckett's question about whether other scholars have noticed thes parallels, yes they have, some of them, and cant explain them. For instance
H. Chapman in her SBL paper A Myth for the World about early Christian cannibalism was troubled about the virgin Mary/Cannibal Mary parallel, Chad Myers in his book on Mark notes the Gadara parallel etc
Atwill seems to provide a consistent if very problematic explanation for all of them. I wish scholars or clergy wouid answer his points since a lot of folk I know are really concerned and we cant just ignore it hoping it will go away
regards
Eliot
(discussion ends)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->