A conversation on the Caesar’s Messiah thesis

UPDATE: As concerns the “news” about this thesis rocketing around the net, forgive me if I’m a bit skeptical. This “announcement” is a paid press release, which is significant because it’s not a news item that anyone’s investigated. Rather than some newly discovered confessional document, I’m imagining Joe’s found a “pun” that only works in English in a text we already know about.

Here’s an article that indicates it’s just Josephus Atwill’s talking about, who most assuredly does not make any such confession. My comments about this thesis below remain the same. See also Carrier’s dissection.

Here is an hour-long DVD of a discussion I had with Joe Atwill, author of Caesar’s Messiah. I haven’t actually watched it, but my recollection that it is contains important information. 🙂

A Conversation on the Caesar’s Messiah Thesis

Please note that I do not concur with Atwill’s Josephus/Flavian thesis vis-a-vis the origin of the canonical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. There remains no clear, scientific evidence for the emergence of the canonical gospels as we have them until the end of the second century, when they suddenly burst onto the scene with a slew of commentary. (For more information, see “When were the gospels written?”)

Joe and I do agree that the “Jesus Christ” of the New Testament is a fictional compilation of characters, real and mythical. We also concur that this effort to create what eventually became known as “Christianity” began in the first century, but the facts indicate that the Vespasian/Titus cult was evidently involved with the cult of Chrestos, not Christos, at that time. The real effort to compose the canonical gospels, moreover, did not occur until the middle of the second century, with the publication of the “heretic” Marcion’s “New Testament” at Rome.

Joe and all the other people involved in this process were very nice, and we had a marvelous time filming it. So, thanks to all those good folks, including and especially Fritz Heede and Nijole Sparkis of NlightningworkZ!

Another link to the DVD:

A Conversation on the Caesar’s Messiah Thesis

Is Jesus a fictional allegory created by the most powerful families in the 1st Century as a device for political control?

Could the title of “Christ” actually apply to a Roman Caesar?

In this informal discussion, Acharya S/D.M. Murdock and Joseph Atwill offer their perspectives on Atwill’s provocative “Caesar’s Messiah” Thesis, which concludes that Jesus is not a historical figure, that the Gospels are literature not history, and that the ministry of the fictional character Jesus is modeled on the military campaign of Roman Caesar Titus Flavius as he battled against the Jewish revolt in Judea.

The two scholars discuss why this “savior god” myth needed to be anchored in history in contrast to earlier similar myths that were not. The purpose was to create the ultimate Super State with the authority to represent God on Earth.

Title #337920
Format: DVD-R

Here’s a review of this video:

“In this DVD I could clearly see the depth of Acharya’s knowledge and wisdom. I was riveted by the conversation between her and author Atwill as they exchanged their knowledge of the people and places that may have created Christianity. Although Acharya has said she doesn’t concur with Atwill’s thesis of a ‘politically’ created myth of Jesus, it is pleasure to hear two scholars with differing opinions politely and professionally debate each other. Definitely very enlightening!” Deirdre Simone

One clarification: I do concur that Christianity was created significantly for political reasons, but there is no scientific evidence that the canonical gospels were written by any Flavians, whether Josephus or otherwise, as they do not emerge clearly in the historical record until the last half of the second century. The works of Josephus factor into the picture when the author of Luke-Acts apparently uses them in order to flesh out the tale with “real history.”

Yes, as one can see, I do not go around smearing and sullying the reputation of other scholars and mythicists with calumny and libel, as others have done to me, mendaciously and dishonestly pretending to be experts on my work without even having read it. One of my goals in doing this work, in fact, is to bring people together in a sense of intellectual exchange, rather than the typical competition that we see so abundantly and that has gotten us nowhere. A fascistic tyranny of Jesus mythers is not an improvement over a fascistic tyranny of Jesus believers.

Which ‘Caesar’s Messiah?’

In this quest to unravel Christian origins, the evidence leads us to factor in the biographical details of many individuals, both historical and mythical. This compilation includes not just one emperor/caesar but several, such as Julius Caesar (100-44 BCE) and Caesar Augustus (63 BCE-14 AD/CE), both of whom were likewise considered to be saviors or “messiahs,” the Greek epithet being soter. Many other historical figures such as Ptolemy Soter bore this epithet of “savior” or “messiah,” and many gods were likewise called “Savior,” such as Dionysus and Serapis. Their “biographical” details must also be included in this analysis, as must be those of Horus, Mithra, Attis, Buddha and numerous other figures, not a few of whom resolve themselves to sun gods.

Decades earlier than the time of emperor Titus, some of the “biographical” details attached to the story of Jesus were circulating about the previous emperors Julius and Augustus Caesar. For example, it was said of both Julius and Augustus that their father was the Greek sun god Apollo, thus giving them a divine birth. The very notion of a caesar implies divinity, as he would be given the Latin epithet divus, a word meaning “divine” or “deified” and “god” or “goddess,” “often as epithet for dead and deified emperors.” As Dr. J. Dominic Crossan remarks:

“On every coin you have inscriptions of Caesar as divine. In the ancient world, being divine was a job description, meaning somebody who does something very important for the human race.”

The mythology surrounding the caesars included their resurrection from death and ascension into heaven, events recorded on the coins of Julius Caesar the year he died, 44 BCE. The coins below depict the goddess Nike or “Victory” instructing the lunar goddess Selene to wake Caesar from his death slumber.

Following is the so-called Priene inscription from announcements of the calendar change based on the birth of Caesar Augustus in 63 BCE, “found on marble stelae in all the Asian temples dedicated to Rome and Augustus”:

“Whereas Providence…has…adorned our lives with the highest good: Augustus…and has in her beneficence granted us and those who will come after us [a Savior] who has made war to cease and who shall put everything in [peaceful] order…with the result that the birthday of our God signalled the beginning of Good News for the world because of him… therefore…”

The original Greek here for “Good News” is evangelia, the same term used in the New Testament to describe the “gospel” of Jesus Christ.

The caesar was thus considered the divine “son of God” and “Savior,” whose birth brings the “good news” (evangelia), the same name used in the New Testament to describe Jesus’s “gospel.” Caesar is murdered, resurrects and ascends to heaven – all decades before Jesus supposedly lived and before Titus became emperor.

Adding to these various biographical details of pagan deities and emperors the numerous “messianic prophecies” of the Old Testament used as an outline or “blueprint,” we can account for the creation of the savior/gospel tale, which was expanded upon and worked over by the Gnostics and then Judaized/historicized at the end of the second century.

A piece of the puzzle?

As concerns my remarks to Joe Atwill about his piece of the Christianity puzzle, when/if I have time, I may do a detailed analysis of the aspects of the Vespasian/Titus story that may have been utilized to flesh out the historical framework of the gospel tale, such as the placing of it in Galilee, mainly (except for in the Gospel of John), with the focus on the cities of Capernaum, Chorazin, Bethsaida, etc. However, it is possible that some of these city-names are, like much of the rest of the gospel story, midrash based on Old Testament scriptures. This part of the mythicist position still needs to be worked out in detail, as does the role of the Flavians in the Chrestos cult of the late first century, which appears to be the real contribution of this faction to the Christian effort.

In this regard, I have a lengthy article on the Chrestos cult of the first century AD/CE, which appears to have been given a boost by the Flavians during the last quarter of that period. In consideration of Vespasian’s visits to the multinational cult center at Mt. Carmel, where he purportedly received the oracle’s approval as emperor, and to the temple of Serapis at Alexandria, where he supposedly obtained the gift of healing, we would not be surprised if Vespasian was involved in what would be known as “Christianity.” The hypothesis that Vespasian’s visit to Mt. Carmel was to discuss the amalgamation of Judaism and Paganism, which had already been achieved there for centuries, may possess some truth. Moreover, it is likewise hypothesized that one of the reasons Titus wanted to take the surrendered Josephus under his wing was in order to obtain the Jewish scriptures, generally forbidden to non-Jews. If all of these contentions are true, it becomes obvious that these Flavians were involved in the early Chrestian effort, which was utilized in the later organization at the end of the second century that eventually became Christianity.

Regarding the overall thesis, therefore, a relatively small percentage of the Titus biography would have been used in the creation of the gospel story, but the Flavians, including Josephus, did not compose the canonical gospels as we have them.


The Caesar’s Messiah thesis doesn’t incorporate the thousands of years of pre-Christian mythology that my own work highlights rigorously. It doesn’t investigate the actual GREEK of the texts in question. It doesn’t incorporate the scholarship that the canonical gospels as we have them do not emerge into the historical record until the end of the SECOND century, and it assumes that Josephus composed the so-called Testimonium Flavianum. The thesis also ignores the massive body of mythicist literature dating back centuries, in which this “puzzle” of Christian origins had been solved already and needed no new theories.

As I state, there may have been a few details from Titus’s life used in the creation of the “history,” but even these may have been included based on midrash from the OT and other texts written long before Josephus.

Further Reading

Caesar’s Messiah on DVD
On the Ignorance of Ancient Mythology
Jesus as the Sun throughout History
‘Atwill’s Cranked-up Jesus’ by Richard Carrier


  1. Non-believer in Pennsylvania.

    I do not think that there is “bright line” as to w
    I lean towards Acharya’s view that the Jesus Christ figure was created out of centuries of fictional accounts whose origins can be traced to widespread areas such as Egypt, India, the Kingdom of Israel (Samaria), the Kingdom of Judah, Assyria, and Babylonia. The accounts coalesced in second century Asia Minor pursuant to the efforts of religious cultists whose motives were self-aggrandizement.

    However, I do appreciate hearing contrary views such as the theory that the Romans, after destroying Jerusalem in the year 70, conspired with rabbinical Jews to create Christianity which appeared to pose no threat since its alleged founder was dead and his supposed teachings did not encourage insurrection against the empire.

  2. Acharya And the Jesus Myth Competition
    First, thank you Acharya for including my review of this DVD. Yes, you have always claimed Jesus was created for “political” reasons. What I meant to say was the difference between you and Atwill is that his thesis claims Jesus was created by politically powerful families like the Flavians.
    To me, Atwill’s thesis, though I will see the film, is yet another of thousands about the historical Jesus, or myth of Jesus–and I am sure there is more to come.

    In my opinion, no scholar can even come close to the real facts about the Jesus myth without including your work. Other authors must be blind not to see the parallels in the Jesus myth to Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Buddhist, Hindu and other mythologies, astrotheology, paganism. YOU have made us see this! This is YOUR incomparable contribution to this 2000 year old quest!

    Don’t give up! Keep carrying on your work, for you have discovered the truth that is inherent in all religions: the worship of Gods began with the worship of the Sun!

    1. Thanks, Deirdre, for “getting” it and for the encouragement. So long as one other person is interested, I will be hanging in here.

      It’s frustrating that all this great, juicy information is being widely ignored for bigoted, egotistical and childish reasons. I see myself as a “computer” of sorts when it comes to my field of interest, study and expertise – little different from the brain of scientists in other fields. The data go in, conclusions come out. I factor in as much data as I can and then see the connections and make the conclusions based on as much science and logic as I can find and absorb.

      It should be recalled that the world into which Christianity was born – the Roman Empire, for the most part – was highly multicultural and multilingual. People were more knowledgeable about other cultures and languages than they are in many places today. The educated elite could usually function in at least a couple of languages, if not many more. They saw the world more broadly in many important ways, including and especially religion. This more cosmopolitan, multilingual perspective is what I bring to the table. The myopic views we find in pet theories are just that, ignoring the bulk of the data.

  3. Justin Martyr, The First Apology, XXI (around 150 CE):

    “And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter. For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribed to Jupiter: Mercury, the interpreting word and teacher of all; Æsculapius, who, though he was a great physician, was struck by a thunderbolt, and so ascended to heaven; and Bacchus too, after he had been torn limb from limb; and Hercules, when he had committed himself to the flames to escape his toils; and the sons of Leda, and Dioscuri; and Perseus, son of Danae; and Bellerophon, who, though sprung from mortals, rose to heaven on the horse Pegasus. For what shall I say of Ariadne, and those who, like her, have been declared to be set among the stars? [b]And what of the emperors who die among yourselves, whom you deem worthy of deification, and in whose behalf you produce some one who swears he has seen the burning Cæsar rise to heaven from the funeral pyre?[/b]…”

    – Of Caesars, Plato and Divine Births ([url]https://freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1338[/url])

  4. Where else,
    Where else can we go from here? Nowhere. Because the present of such wisdom acharya shares is with us presently ! Will she become a myth someday? Maybe. I hope you are smart enough to see that she exemplifies the pursuit of free thought , which we all know is the very enemy of suppressive organizations? No. So much info out now freedom to choose is dangerous. Acharya seems to guide us through such malady with wisdom and grace. Acharya for pres!
    – peace

  5. truth is never negative
    I applaud Acharya and her work! She has done so much to expose the biggest lie ever fed to the race of man on this planet.

  6. Purchasing the DVD by download, other than Amazon?
    Hi everyone, this looks like an interview I want to watch!
    Amazon offers it as a download to people in USA only… 🙁 Do anyone know any other means to buy this interview by download, other than through Amazon?

    I’m not really up to owning it as a hard-copy.

  7. A friend has written the following on Facebook, which prompted me to respond with a fuller critique and statement of perspective.

    [quote]John Holmdahl Hi Acharya … The identical sequence of parallel events between that Roman Emperor’s life and Jesus’s life is way beyond coincidence! For me, this is solid proof of Joe’s hypothesis that trumps anything anyone could say. How else can one explain all those one-to-one correspondences??? Really!!! John[/quote]
    Thanks, John, a [i]few[/i] of the biographical details are similar between Vespasian/Titus and Jesus, leading to the notion that the [i]Chrestos[/i] movement at the end of the first century [i]may[/i] have had to do with the Flavians.

    However, the canonical gospels as we have them are full of [i]myths[/i] that have nothing to do with Vespasian, Titus or Josephus. When we peel away the “messianic prophecies” or blueprints of Old Testament scriptures used in the NT, as well as the numerous mythical aspects from the “biographies” of other gods and goddesses, there are a [i]few[/i] characteristics left that [i]might[/i] be based on Josephus’s or others’ writings about Vespasian/Titus.

    That fact does not make the “Caesar’s Messiah” thesis to be true. In my estimation, it is not. I make my case as outlined in the paragraph above in my various books and articles over the past 25+ years since I’ve been studying these subjects in earnest. It’s as solid a case as you will find, in my opinion, and does not rely on sketchy puns and the rest.

    What it appears happened is that by the end of the second century, the Chrestos movement had been intertwined with the Christos faction, so that would explain the very few “biographical” details that might have come from Vespasian/Titus.

    If you would like to know the “whodunnits” of the Christ-myth creation, you will want to read my books, including the various chapters on Alexandria, which is clearly where the Christian effort solidified. The Flavian input by this time was nil, other than this one, fairly small faction.

    Here are my books and ebooks:

    http://stellarhousepublishing.com/ ([url]http://stellarhousepublishing.com[/url])

    Here are many articles:

    http://truthbeknown.com/christconspiracy.html ([url]http://truthbeknown.com/christconspiracy.html[/url])

    The “biography” of Jesus Christ is made mostly of OT scriptures, pagan god attributes and pre-Christian “logia” or sayings. These were worked together for a period of a couple of centuries before Christianity was created. There were [i]many[/i] factions involved during that time, not just the Flavians. These others included the Therapeuts, Philo and the Gnostics.

    The problem I pointed out to Joe is that he didn’t look more closely at the MYTHOLOGY that clearly influenced the Christian effort, so he worked far too hard to find correspondences to Titus, where the proposed correlation is actually from mythology. I said that a few biographical details such as the names of places in Judea and Galilee may have come from these earlier political figures, but that’s about it. The rest of the tale comes from MYTHOLOGY and MIDRASH of OT scriptures.

    So, the bottom line is that I don’t actually agree with the assessment that the lives of the Roman emperor and that of “Jesus Christ” are as similar as is claimed. We must also factor in the “Gospel” of Caesar Augustus’s birth, a century before Titus – some of the gospel story is clearly based on HIM as well, including the announcement of “good news” at his miraculous birth, using the very term “evangelion,” translated in English as “gospel.” Atwill’s theory likewise does not factor in the caesars Julius and Augustus, which it should. My view is far more inclusive of the [i]numerous[/i] factors well beyond Titus and Josephus that were included in this effort. In order to accept Atwill’s theory, I would need to remove about 90% of what I’ve learned and written about over the past several decades.

    Remember that chart we discussed so many years ago? ALL of those “biographical” details of gods side by side with their comparisons to Jesus? [i]that’s[/i] where this stuff comes from largely, other than a few mundane characteristics, such as where Titus traveled, perhaps. And that’s what I told Joe and what he ignored. I’m not about to remove 90% of my knowledge on this subject and toss it out the window when I can clearly SEE what happened here during the first several centuries of the common era.

    I should add that I have written [i]reams[/i] about these parallels, in detail, as concerns numerous GODS and GODDESS in antiquity, using the extant [i]primary sources[/i] to show these correspondences. They have [i]nothing[/i] to do with the emperor, except as where he may have taken them and applied them to himself in order to “fulfill prophecy.”

    One thing that appears to have come from the Vespasian biography is the story of curing a blind man with spittle. However, that “miracle” apparently was a fairly common wandering mendicant trick in antiquity. It would not surprise me, nevertheless, if the gospel writers did take it from Vespasian, as his purported miracle was quite famous. But let us recall that he supposedly derived this power from the Greco-Egyptian hybrid god SERAPIS, who shares more in common with Jesus than does Titus. I cover all of these bases in my books and articles, such as this one:

    http://truthbeknown.com/attis.html ([url]http://truthbeknown.com/attis.html[/url])

    In order to make the claim that Atwill’s theory “trumps” what I have written, one would need to throw away all of the information in the link above, as well as all the other articles and books by hundreds of mythicists over the past several centuries.

    You can find much more of this research also in my forum, which includes actually primary sources in their original languages.

    https://freethoughtnation.com/forums ([url]https://freethoughtnation.com/forums[/url])

    The creation of Christianity occurred over a period of at least two centuries and involved numerous factions, including BUDDHISTS during the second century. Again, the canonical gospels had next to nothing to do with Vespasian, Titus or Josephus, except as the latter’s work was used to flesh out “history.”

    CM all sounds like a nice, neat and sexy theory, but it’s incorrect overall, based on all the facts.

    1. The Uniqueness of Ceasaro Mytho-Theology
      The Ceasar Worship under Rome (as the originator of Christianity-Messianism) was more unique and sophisticated than the proto-emperor worship of the ancient empires. Of course, it was a refinement and synthesis of its predecessors, but it was more methodic and systematic given Rome’s syncretist and cosmopolitan tradition. Julius Ceasar, as Julius Divus, was the epitome of the Roman Ceasar cult-theology of Julian God-Man Emperator upon which Flavian God-Man-Messiah-Ceasar was founded.

      Carotta’s and Atwill’s hypotheses are consonant, not dissonant. The Antonine-Julian source is the proto-logia of the pre-scripta Gospels while the Josephus-Flavian source is the logia of the scripta of the written Gospels. The typology is both fluid-organic and fractual-structural.

      The deceptive-creative process behind the emergence of the originating materials lies in the Roman genius of making tradition and tradition making.

      To unravel the creative deception of evil genius, we do not need a lot of moot and academic scholarship, we pray for poetic serendipity and common sense.

  8. Here’s a work-around to get Amazon videos outside the U.S.:

    How To Watch Amazon Instant Video Outside the US ([url]http://vpnfreedom.com/amazon-instant-video/how-to-watch-amazon-instant-video-outside-the-us/[/url])

    1. Thank you! 🙂

      Too bad it costs money, which unfortunately will have me doubting whether or not to proceed with this step. Pay another company money just so I can pay Amazon money…

      All of this and the main figure delivering this information (D. M. Murdock) won’t get a single cent from the amazon purchase, right?

      Anyway thank you for your help, I’ll think about my next move! 🙂

  9. Titus,vespasian/Domitian Father, Son,Holy spirit
    I think you and Joe Atwill are right. It is clear that the Titus Vespasien Domitian are the holy trinity, Yes there were triple Gods and Goddess all over the ancient world, including Rome, but the reason for the double entendre. Everything is described to fool the regular people and to cleverly alert the patracin class of the day who were informed about the details of the war of 70 ad, by the works of Josephus read side by side with the emerging gospels when they both first emerged, and Josephus’ work goes back to the second century like the Gospels. Also who said the 70 ad war and the campaign and all that really went down like JF says, his book was carefully put togather and was really a myth about the Jewish war to say what the Flavians wanted in order to make them {Flavian emperors the trinity} I dont know if Atwill relizes this, but think he is starting too, that just because the Flavians meant for Jc to mimick Titus does not mean that they did not employ the previous Christos myths in manufactoring the story, nor that it wasnt tried before by afore mentioned emperors that you stated in above, but met with various degrees of success but the war with the Jews made this attempt much much more succesful because a vehicle for creating the Christos narrative,{the jewish war presented itself} The fact that the Earliest known Christians were also the first Christians, the fact that the first so-called Pope of Rome was Tituses nepphew, the plain out alagoress in the bible of Joseph of Aramethia and Josephus Bar aramathias.

    The paralells between Titus Sparing john and kiling simeon ,Two rebel leaders of 70 ad and the sieon peter and John in the new testament who suffered the very same fates. The paralels with Joshepus asking Titus to take down three men off the cross and two of them dying and one living like JC, just too many paralels to dismiss Atwills theorys. 😮

    1. I find much of Joe’s thesis very compelling. The bare fact that Christianity seems, at it’s core the process of Roman syncretization of Judaism, casts tremendous suspicion on the Flavian dynasty. That there are obvious similarities with previous incarnations of the imperial cult and other pagan beliefs does not detract from the Flavian hypothesis, at least to me.

      1. Thank you. As I write in my post above, a very few characteristics may have been used in the gospel story, but the Flavians had nothing to do with writing the canonical gospels as we have them, except that Josephus may have been used by Luke.

        I have also demonstrated that there were [i]other [/i][i]Caesars [/i]who preceded the era in question, and their stories evidently were used in the gospel effort as well.

        Moreover, as I show in thousands of pages of writings, many of the attributes of the Christ character can be found in other mythologies and religions. When those elements are removed, along with the midrash from many Old Testament verses, there is very little left over.

        So, the thesis is not at all as compelling as one would believe, without all the knowledge as outlined above. Indeed, it is as I stated above, which one may wish to read before commenting.

    2. Thank you, but I don’t think you read my article above. I don’t concur with Atwill’s thesis. Read my post and the comment below.

  10. Hello Acharya, how do you account for Tituses family being the first archeologically known Christians that actually existed, and for his nephew Clement Flavian, being noted by different chatholic records as being the first or the fourth pope, or Constantine, the first emporer who gave Christianity tolerance and even backing Christianity either being b birth Constantine Flavian, or taking that name to be known as a flavian, the first family even being characterized as Christian, and Domitilla Flavin giving the first recorded money for the earliest known catacomb, by the way Domitilla was !st Popo Clemens Flavius’ mother or Aunt, and these are people who really existed, and are not Mythological, and even slaves in the flavian household neruses, being the first Christian scholar, And Titus having the first Arch being named for him by domitiain where Titus is named as a god, and being the son of the god his Tituses and domitians father Vespasian being a god, and later Domitian a god.ater Constantin was supposedly a god and he too built an arch, and he is the first person to acknowledege, Christianity and he too was a Flavian. Tituses ancestors name was peir, as was simeon peter in the gospels, and just as simeon peter was the rock and foundation of the Christian early church so too was petr flavius the foundation of the Flavian family being in the position tobecome emperors, its just too many coincidances, and I hace many more.

    Even though the Christain myths predate the Flavians it is clear that the Flavians where the first touse thes myths as the whipping boy that the Gospels were against the messianic Jewish movement.

    1. From the writings of the time, the Flavians may have been part of the Chrestos movement, not the Christos movement. This movement was only one of many that eventually ended up as Christianity. However, the Flavians had nothing to do with writing the canonical gospels, so the thesis is simply erroneous, for this reason and the reasons stated in my blog post. If you know the data I’ve put together in my books, you will see that my assessment is accurate.

  11. Societal and cultural context of mythic narrative
    So does Christianity perhaps represent a “liberal” or “enlightened” way for cosmopolitan Greeks and Romans to assimilate the stubbornly separationist and messianic elements of Temple Judaism into the cultural mainstream of the Empire. These “new Jews” (according to Marcion’s “New Covenant”) could now dine, mingle and intermarry with the other (pagan) elites of the Empire, in cities like Alexandria, Damascus, Antioch or even Rome itself. And this would also enhance trade and capital flow, tax revenues and (most immediately) co-opt, pacify and dilute the subversive tendencies in Jewish messianism, preserving meekness and order among household slaves especially.

  12. The apostles deceived humanity about God and Jesus
    It is what the apostles wrote about Jesus as a literal son of God and God in the so-called New testament that is the real Hoax.

    The real Jesus that existed is only a descendant of David. May i share this: There is a Word of God about Jesus-the descendant/offspring of King David that we should know:

    “And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.”
    II Samuel 7:12 (KJV)

    The promise given to David – a descendant will come from his bloodline. What would be the work of the descendant?

    “He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.”
    II Samuel 7:13 (KJV)

    The first choice was King Solomon a “real son” or descendant of David. King Solomon built the house with the Name of God. (1 Chr.22:9-13) What was the promise of God?

    “I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:”
    II Samuel 7:14 (KJV)

    “WHEN HE COMMIT INIQUITY” – the descendant of David would be punished. King Solomon was not punished with “chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men”,( I kings 11:1-13, v.41-43) but we know that Jesus was punished in that manner.

    In the said verses: 2 Samuel 7:12-14(KJV) – we can read that God speaks of a coming offspring of David and not a literal “son of God” as what the religions preach.

    Is it really true that Jesus was a descendant of David?
    “… To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary.” Luke 1:27 (KJV)

    Jesus’ true father is Joseph who belongs to the house of David. So if we are to believe the teaching of the religions that Jesus is the “son of God,” then it should be Mary who should belong to the house of David.

    And in:
    “And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.”
    Luke 1:31 (KJV)

    And who was Jesus’ father?
    “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David.” Luke 1:32 (KJV)

    “shall be called” – As you have read it, Jesus was only a son or a descendant of David not a real son of God;” he was just a man.

    Is it true that Jesus is a son of David? Let us read in:
    “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.”- Matt 1:1(KJV)

    Now we can see that the prophecy in 2 Sam7:12-14 about a coming descendant of David and not a son of God has been fulfilled.

    Considering the prophecy in II Samuel 7:12-14, if the descendant of David commits iniquity, he will be chastened with the rod of men. Was Jesus-the descendant of King David punished by the rod and floggings of men?

    Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified. Matthew 27:25-26 (KJV)

    Indeed, Jesus was flogged by men which when we read again what God stated in the prophecy in 2 Sam 7:14(KJV) “I will be his father, and he shall be my son. IF HE COMMIT INIQUITY, I WILL CHASTEN HIM WITH THE ROD OF MEN, AND WITH THE STRIPES OF THE CHILDREN OF MEN:”

    We can discover for ourselves that based on what God said in the prophecy that the real reason why He allowed Jesus -the descendant of king David to be beaten by men was not for our sins but for his (Jesus) own iniquity.

    It appears now that the Apostles-the writers of the New Testament who claimed that Jesus was sent by God to be beaten for our sins were hiding from us what really happened to Jesus. Worse than that, the apostles made us worship Jesus -who in reality was punished by God for his own wrongdoing!
    One of the greatest wrongs that Jesus did was:

    “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matt.16:18 KJV

    Jesus was sent by God to lead his people to the house with the Name of God that was built by King Solomon. Instead, he built another house in his own name. Jesus had put up his own church which was not part of his work as specified in the prophecies. This deception was used as the foundation of faith of the many religions. By building a church in his own name, Jesus had made himself to be known as a god rather than making his fellow Israelites know the true name of God!

    Since the religions made us worship Jesus who- as based on God’s word in the prophecy in 2 Samuel 7:12-14 was punished by God for his own wrongdoing and not for our sins as the apostles claim, it is clear that we were taught by the religions an erroneous teaching about God. This is why God does not hear the prayer of the peoples of the world for peace but continues to let mankind suffer from all these wars and disasters because they are calling on a false god made by the apostles.

    To know what wrongdoings Jesus had done which the apostles had hidden from us- kindly read this link: http://www.thename.ph/thename/revelations/apostles-en.html Whether you accept what is revealed in that article or not is your decision. The important thing is you were informed.

  13. Hi Acharya S,

    I came across your book “The Christ Conspiracy” about 2 years ago, and I’ve used it in debates quite often too! I’m really a great admirer of your work.

    As I understand it, Atwill’s thesis really consists of two parts – one that the Flavians created Christianity, and two, that once it worked, and having observed it for about 2 centuries, it was finally imposed as the State religion.

    As a matter of fact, the second part is rather non-controversial, yet I would say Atwill does uncover a few new pieces of evidence, like here:


    While I understand that the ones creating the myths went to extraordinary lengths to incorporate (assimilate / co-opt – you choose) myths from a wide variety of sources – as we can learn from your work – but what I want to know is – “Why this specific mix of myths?”

    Let me try to be clearer.

    A number of mainstream historians too agree today that the Roman Empire never ended, it merely transformed (itself?) into the Catholic Church. And as we know, the Church was hardly only a religious enterprise back in the day – it was involved into politics quite heavily.

    In this context, would you agree that the four canonical gospels always had a higher, more central importance than the other (apocryphal / gnostic) gospels? At least Charles Freeman in his “A New History of Early Christianity” says so.

    And if so, what characteristics of these canonical gospels set them apart (from the ones rejected) that make them more suitable to form the basis of an illiberal theocracy?

    Best Wishes on your wonderful work!

    1. Thank you for your kind regards. I appreciate you reading my work and your support.

      Obviously, I know what Atwill’s thesis is, as I’ve discussed it and given reasons why it is not true in general, other than appropriately designating Jesus as a fictional character. If one has read The Christ Conspiracy, one will know why the thesis is incorrect, as explicated here as well. The gospel story was not created by Josephus or any other Flavian and does not revolve around Titus. The story reflects significantly the biographical details of numerous gods and goddesses dating back to remote antiquity in a variety of cultures, as can be found in my writings.

      As I’ve also stated, a few details of Titus’s life may have been incorporated, such as a couple of place names he visited, but that addition to the tale would not have occurred during his lifetime. Atwill also supposes the Testimonium Flavianum is not an interpolation, which in my opinion is an error, as I am convinced it is a forgery in toto. Atwill also does not do a comparison between the original texts and unfortunately relies on puns in English that aren’t there in the Greek.

      In any event, I’ve made my points clear, I believe, as to the flaws in this thesis. It does not include scrutiny of the original texts; nor does it account for the numerous influences upon the gospel story that preceded the common era by centuries to millennia. It ignores the mythology, which is one thing I told Joe and that he chose to forget.

      As I believe I make clear in my books and other writings, the reason these specific myths were chosen was because they were popular, and the reason they were popular was because they were part of nature-worshipping/astrotheological religion in many places for thousands of years.

      Hope this helps.

  14. I was first made aware of you, Acharya, while watching Mr. Atwill’s Caesar’s Messiah. I was instantly drawn to your work, and that of Kenneth Humphreys. I enjoyed Messiah very much, though I admit I wasn’t convinced the theories pointing to the Pios and/or Flavians as being fully responsible for biblical texts were completely accurate.

    What it did was to start a hunger inside me to begin my own journey into comparative religion (my new hobby). So my thanks to all who were involved with this project. After more than three decades in Christendom I am finally truly free.

  15. “Atwill’s conclusions have been thoroughly debunked – it’s not hard to do when one actually reads Greek and knows the primary sources. Acharya tried to help him and explain to him that late puns in English are not credible evidence of ancient Greek that did not exist at the time. Some of Atwill’s claims are an embarrassment. It’s sad that they edited out all of Acharya’s criticisms from the DVD. She did not want to be apart of it and told them so because she knew Atwill was way bad wrong but, they promised her critique would be heard – obviously all of that got edited out. Now, Acharya is left to deal with the fallout for even being apart of it.”


    ; )

  16. .

    .Atwill is right when he says that at the basis of the birth of Christianity (or catho-Christianity) there was the imperial power + the one aristocratic senatorial; however, he is wrong to place the event in the time of Emperor Vespasian, since everything happened in the first half of the second century. As a first step, to get to this truth, we must thoroughly study the ‘Judeo-Christian’ phenomenon, which did not have ANYTHING to do with Catholic Christianity (catho-christianity), although the founders of the catholic cult were inspired largely by christian models present in the new cult Judeo-Christian (*), such as the savior Messiah of ‘souls’, a concept alien to traditional Jewish messianism. It is highly probable, if not certain, that the jew historian Josephus contributed, along with others, to the drafting of the ‘sacred’ texts of Judeo-Christianity, including a gospel, in which the figure of Jesus did not appear anywhere …

    (*) – defined by the Orthodox Jews ‘heresy’ (minuth)


Comments are closed.

© 2015 Freethought Nation, Acharya S, D.M. Murdock & Stellar House Publishing