Myths, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians

0
14
0 0 vote
Article Rating

Here’s the link: http://video.google.com/vid eoplay?docid=93300172502678 0717&ei=nuSdSayGAYrSjgL up4zvDQ

To summarize: Back in the day, you know, with the ancient Roman and Egyptian empires, some emperors were occasionally deified – Like the Pharaos. This was also the case of Julius Caesar, whose adopted son was Octavian (Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus), often called Augustus (don’t ask me why he has three names, I guess he was important 😉 ), who became the “son of god”, or “divine son” in the beginning of his reign when Julius was deified.

Anyway, what these Roman god-wannabes would find someone to write them a genealogy for every culture they subdued to convince people they were rightful heirs of the throne – As you may know, kingship and divinity was often closely connected. 

So here’s a guy who ruled the “entire known world”  ;from 27 BCE to 14 CE – literally around 0 CE, in case your deductive powers are, uh, limited. He was the son of a god, a great king, extremely powerful person who wanted to convince people he had a divine heritage by basically making shit up. 

What’s more, the stories about Jesus’ earlier life were written later than the stories about his later life. Frankly, our information becomes less and less accurate as we look back in the Jesus character’s past. Would it be strange to think he didn’t really HAVE a past, that he’s a character based on a man who wasn’t the kin of David at all, who never showed up in Palestine until later in his life? We know very well what an emperor’s propaganda can do to persuade people of myth. 

And here’s another interesting tidbit of information: Several places mentioned in the Bible, such as Bethlehem and Nazareth (could be mistaken, watch the vid) have been shown by archeology to not have been inhabited at all around 0 CE? This only corroborates the fact that the story of Jesus’ heritage was made up – the fact that there are two different, conflicting stories is bad enough. 😉

Considering that the earliest part of the New Testament was written some time after 70 CE, and there’s no historical evidence of Jesus, the Augustus Jesus hypothesis doesn’t seem to have any evidence against it.

Anyway, the guy can explain it better than me, so listen to him: http://video.google.com/vid eoplay?docid=93300172502678 0717&ei=nuSdSayGAYrSjgL up4zvDQ

Uh, and in case the video title puts you off, this guy isn’t a satanist, don’t worry.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments