mountainman

"Flavian hypothesis" - About 1,000 results (0.32 seconds).


What evidence tends to support the value of the Flavian hypothesis?

What evidence tends not to support the value of the Flavian hypothesis?

Please discuss the evidence FOR and AGAINST atm.

sotto voce

This is just someone's disguised argument for Roman Catholicism. It's 100% political. It's utterly desperate.

The patricians could not eliminate Christians, whose honesty undermined their own inherently corrupt system, so they simply called their existing 'pleb-control' religions 'Christianity'. Complete with Pontifex Maximus, a title of Julius Caesar; a title of 'popes'. So was born 'the Catholic Church': everyone was a 'Christian', and immune from the real thing.

It's the history of pagans.

Toto

Well, I hoped this thread would just die, but sotto had to go and reply.

If you search the archives for Atwill or Carotta, you will find enough discussion - threads like this. Carotta's supporters showed up here to attack Atwill. More recently, Atwill has been pushing his theories on the JesusMysteries yahoogroup.

I don't think there's anything new here.

Lots of things in Christianity don't make a lot of sense. You can accept that lots of historical events just don't make sense from a modern rationalist viewpoint, and that our transmission of historical facts has been spotty, or you can construct a grand conspiracy theory that Explains Everything and tidies up all the uncomfortable details to your liking.

I don't think there is anything of interest left to this topic. Supporters can show a few interesting parallels, and attack each others' theories, but it comes down to the problem that all conspiracy theories have - you can't fool all of the people all of the time. No one has the real power to dictate historical events like this, and conspiracies almost always leave some sort of evidence, someone who blows the whistle or doesn't edit every document the right way.

Besides, if you were going to invent a religion, why would you invent one as illogical as Christianity?

Please don't drag this out unless there is something new to discuss. It's a dead parrot topic.

aa5874

Who invented Christianity??? Please, Toto if the majority of people in antiquity Believed Myth Fables why would the Christian religion be illogical??

Justin Martyr, Aristides, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Hippolytus, Eusebius, Jerome, Clement of Alexandria, Arnbobius, the Pauline writers, and others wrote BOOKS to show that the Christian religion was NOT illogical in antiquity.

Toto

Why do you have such a problem with grammatical constructions? I wrote, "if you were going to invent a religion..." implying that this never happened.

For example, explain the Trinity. It makes no sense whether or not one believes in myths. Or consider the contradictions in the gospels.

And they had to work very hard at it.

Look, aa - this thread is about the Flavian hypothesis. You haven't mentioned that theory. Why are you posting here?

sotto voce

This is well known as an antichrist teaching.

aa5874

Toto, there was a Christian religion in Antiquity. Please get familiar with the recovered DATED sources.

The Jesus cult of Christians did HAPPEN.

Because you do not understand the Trinity you think Christianity is illogical??

Please, Toto. Tell us what else you don't understand??

People of antiquity who did NOT understand the Trinity perhaps BELIEVED the Christian doctrine of the Phantom from Marcion or the Christian doctrine of Valentinus, or Simon Magus.

Please, Christians of antiquity BELIEVED all sorts of Doctrines.

That is the nature of religious doctrine at any level. There are people who are working hard at it.

I am responding to YOUR POST, Toto.

Toto

That doesn't mean it was invented. Religions often evolve.

I don't understand what you are doing in this thread.


You picked up one off hand comment from my post to drag this thread off topic. What does this have to do with the Flavian hypothesis?

stephan huller

Hee hee hee hee

mountainman

What evidence tends to support the value of the Flavian hypothesis?


Here are four issues which may mitigate towards a Roman influence in the authorship of the tetrarchy of gospels ....



(1) Military Logistics & Defence Budget for the Christian Kingdom



Jesus (to the Roman Pilate) said "then would my servants fight".

Jesus therefore instills a healthy attitude to Christians fighting for their kingdom.

As far as what was to happen to the enemies of such a kingdom we have:



(2) The fundamental Importance and Honor of always paying the Roman Imperial Taxation


Jesus said "Render unto Caesar all that Caesar says belongs to him".



(3) Jesus was a Roman Ascetic: Loved wine, hanging out after work in the bars with the ladies, etc


The Omnipotent God loved drinking wine and gnawing on the bones of dead animals. We dont have any vegetarian ethics with this god. He was a partial ascetic who inhabited the night life and its subtle attractions. Water was not good enough; but it could be turned into wine. This is quite an intoxicating point.



(4) The Roman Execution System killed God

Dont fuck with the Romans.