Atheists Skeptical of Atwill’s Claim of a ‘Fabricated Jesus’

[struggle4progress]

Added by Rebecca Savastio on October 10, 2013.

Self-proclaimed Biblical scholar Joseph Atwill has written a book in which he claims that Jesus was fabricated by a little-known group called the Flavians. He also claims he has some sort of “smoking gun” type of “confession” ... that proves ... they entered into a conspiracy with the Roman government of the time to fabricate a character called Jesus ... to wage psychological warfare on ... the masses so they would pay Caesar taxes without complaining. He is apparently going to present this evidence at a symposium later this month to which he is selling tickets. Atheists don’t believe in God, and therefore, don’t believe in Jesus, so Atwill’s claim must be immediately adopted and enthusiastically promoted by Atheists, right? …Wrong ...

The first thing that jumps out ... when reviewing Atwill’s claim is his description of what he calls “evidence” of his theory: the gospels themselves. He claims that he sees “parallels” and “connections” between the gospels and historian Flavius Josephus’ book entitled The War of the Jews ... Atheists know that whenever people see conspiracies, “connections,” and “parallels” ... it’s generally not because there is any actual connection between the two works in question but rather it’s because our brains are wired to make sense out of chaos, find connections between things, and create order where none is ... available ...

... In a blog post by ... Dr. Richard Carrier entitled Atwill’s Cranked-Up Jesus, he makes no bones about how he feels ... Dr. Carrier goes on to call Atwill “a total crank,” and says it is a bunch of “pseudo-historical nonsense” ...

... Atwill’s story doesn’t seem to gel in any circle, Atheistic or otherwise ...

http://guardianlv.com/2013/10/atheists-skeptical-of-atwills-claim-of-a-fabricated-jesus/

[Warpy]

1. All I have to say is "prove it."

Produce the letter. Enough of us remember high school Latin to figure it out.

Then try to prove it's a fake.

In other words, let's you and him fight it out. I've got better things to do.

[struggle4progress]

6. It sounds like he's claiming he's found a smoking gun in Josephus:

American Bible scholar claims ancient 'confessions' prove story of Jesus Christ was entirely fabricated by Roman aristocrats ...
Made 'discovery' while reading only surviving account of 1st-century Judea
By Simon Tomlinson and William Turvill
PUBLISHED: 09:56 EST, 9 October 2013
UPDATED: 04:49 EST, 10 October 2013
An American scholar claims to have made a controversial discovery that proves the entire story of Jesus was made up by Roman aristocrats ... Mr Atwill argues that these ancient 'confessions' provide 'clear evidence' that the biography of Jesus is 'actually constructed, tip to stern, on prior stories, but especially on the biography of a Roman Caesar' ... But bible academic Professor James Crossley, from the University of Sheffield, compared Mr Atwill's theory to a Dan Brown fiction book ... Atwill ... says he stumbled upon his discovery while studying War of the Jews by Josephus - the only remain first-person account of first-century Judea - alongside the New Testament ...

[dimbear]

7. It's a weak recommendation, but scholars nowadays do more and more consider Wars of the Jews to be

fictional.

Consider the character of Flavius Josephus. A turncoat and boot-licker.

[struggle4progress]

9. The practices of various ancient historians, as indicated by the writings that survive,

may often leave much to be desired -- especially as one usually has nothing remoting approximating a holograph and must be content with copies of copies of copies ... frequently without competing accounts that could provide useful comparisons

The problem isn't limited to Josephus

[struggle4progress]

2. Atwill’s Cranked-Up Jesus (Richard Carrier)

... Notably even Acharya S (D.M. Murdock) doesn’t buy Atwill’s thesis ... Notice his theory entails a massive and weirdly erudite conspiracy of truly bizarre scope and pedigree, to achieve a truly Quixotic aim that hardly makes sense coming from any half-intelligent elite of the era ... Atwill’s thesis is more or less a retooled version of the old Pisonian Conspiracy Theory, by which is not meant the actual Pisonian conspiracy (to assassinate Nero), but a wildly fictitious one in which the Piso family invented Christianity (and fabricated all its documents) through its contacts with the Flavian family ... This pseudo-historical nonsense is over a century old by now, first having been proposed ... by Bruno Bauer in Christ and the Caesars in 1877 ... Atwill is simply the latest iteration ... I see no value in wasting any more time on his work ... I gave him a fair shot. But Atwill never has any defensible examples, rarely knows what he is talking about, gets a lot wrong, makes stuff up, never admits an error, and is generally in my experience a frustrating delusional fanatic ...

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4664

[struggle4progress]

3. A conversation on the Caesar's Messiah thesis (Acharya S)

... 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 ...

http://freethoughtnation.com/contributing-writers/63-acharya-s/729-a-conversation-on-the-caesars-messiah-thesis.html

[struggle4progress]

4. ... I mean this is just golden cow scat. Seriously ... Since this “documentary” first appeared,

it seems that Mr. Atwill is again trying to profit off the ignorance of others. Now, self-styled as an ‘American Biblical scholar”, Mr. Atwill is peddling his book of lies and misleading theories to those in the UK. This nonsense does not deserve another post; but I will update this one because it can’t go along unopposed. First, and let me be clear, nothing Joe Atwill has written is ‘conclusive’. In order for it to be conclusive, it would have to surmount all arguments against it. Unfortunately for him, he fails to grasp even basic knowledge about the subject ...

No, Joe Atwill: Rome Did Not Invent Jesus

[Xipe Totec]

5. It's the Piltdown Jesus nt

[struggle4progress]

8. The dynamics are fascinating here. Richard Carrier, whom I regard as somewhat

Last edited Fri Oct 11, 2013, 12:00 AM - Edit history (1)

of an ax-grinder, but who at least has some genuine academic credentials, feels obliged to revisit Atwill's thesis after a year, simply to denounce it as crankish. At the same time, Acharya S, whom I consider as crankish as Atwill, similarly revisits Atwill's thesis after a year, simply to denounce it. And Thomas Verenna, who questions the historicity of Jesus, likewise revisits Atwill's thesis after a year, simply to denounce it. Meanwhile, Dawkins, who was at least once competent as an expositor of evolutionary ideas, is busily tweeting away to publicize Atwill's forthcoming talk, which exhibits just how intellectually vapid Dawkins can sometimes be

[dimbear]

13. Notice that further down that stream folk suspect that those tweets don't actually originate from

Dawkins. They lack a certain elan.

[struggle4progress]

15. It's his account, according to a webpage at his Foundation for Reason and Science

Follow @RichardDawkins on Twitter ... Please be assured that @RichardDawkins is his personal account

There is, of course, a very similarly named parody account @RICHARDDAWKINS distinguishable only by the variant capitalization

[Xipe Totec]

21. Piltdown was an effective hoax because it reported what we expected to hear

Confirmation bias is very hard to overcome.

[stopbush]

10. Er, isn't the entire Bible a bunch of "pseudo historic nonsense?"

Think about it.

[struggle4progress]

11. If that is in fact your view then I would merely counsel that your appropriate response

should not be to promote pseudo-historic nonsense of your own

But my view, of many religious texts from a variety of cultures, is that they may contain important views of the world and our place in the world

Among the Kamakura koans, for example, is a story that when Tokimune was digging the foundations for a new temple, amid the ruins of an abandoned pagoda, he found a stone coffer which contained a circular mirror engraved with the words "Perfect Realization," from which was taken the name of the new temple. When Bukko later told one of his students this story about the temple's name, he added: Forget that buried mirror! What about that perfect mirror you hold in your hands right now? Bring it from its stone coffer! Otherwise the pagoda cannot be built!

I rather doubt it would matter whether this were historical or whether it taught something scientific. Its object and potential value lie elsewhere. It was provided as part of a tradition, purporting to teach something. Many cultures around the world have their own varieties of such tales, and perhaps we can sometimes learn something from them -- from the tales of the hasidim, or of the sufis, or of the daoists, or ...

[hrmjustin]

12. That is a matter of opinion. I take some of it as Allegory and some as real. It is all a matter of

what you believe.

[cleanhippie]

23. "It's all a matter of what you believe." That is so depressing.

Because it should be a matter of what is factual and can be proven.

Sigh.

[skepticscott]

28. Actually, it's a matter of

what you choose to believe. In other words, cherry picking the parts of the Bible that conform to what you've already decided and putting those down as "real", and dismissing the parts that make you squeamish as "allegory". There is no attempt by either you or any of those "bad" Christians to try to align your beliefs to what "god" actually thinks, says or wants (because in fact, you have no way whatsoever of knowing that), only to what YOU have pre-decided you want to live by. Which you could do without dragging the Bible or "god" into things in the first place.

[xfundy]

14. Modern repigs would stoop to such, and worse, to scare/control/placate/lessen resistance.

Doing such is not a new idea.

I have no dog in this fight, but dismissing the possibility out of hand seems like desperately hanging on to "tradition" if not myth.

[struggle4progress]

16. How can smart atheists be bamboozled by Joseph Atwill? (PZ Myers)

... I think a few too many atheists are seeing “Scholar Says Jesus Was Fake” and are not thinking any more deeply than that. The whole idea is ridiculous.

The Roman idea of social engineering was to plant a legionary fortress, or retire a bunch of legionaries, into an area that they wanted to pacify. Incorporating regional gods into their pantheon by synonymizing them, sure; far-fetched long-term plans that would require centuries to mature into a tangible result, no.

Has there ever been a religion that was created by a government that actually caught on? Most religions die young; they have a very low success rate. It’s not a smart investment — it’s like buying a lottery ticket. If Romans had been in this game of inventing religions to win over the natives to Romanism, we’d see more examples of failures than long term success.

What would you think of a conspiracy theorist who announced that Joseph Smith had been a secret government agent with the mission of persuading a large number of people to settle that barren Utah territory? Or that L. Ron Hubbard was J. Edgar Hoover’s boy, part of a plan to provide an alternative to the Communist Party for impressionable youth? There are always people to whom a conspiracy theory is attractive, but more rational people would just laugh at the very idea ...

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/10/10/how-can-smart-atheists-be-bamboozled-by-joseph-atwill/

[dimbear]

18. Has there ever been a religion that was created by a government that actually caught on?

Emperor cult in Japan, ditto its lineal descendent the North Korean cult of the Kims.

[struggle4progress]

19. Emperor worship has been quite common, including pharoanic worship in ancient Egypt

and worship of the Caesars, from and after Augustus, in the Roman empire

[skepticscott]

20. Well, in those cases

you'd have to clarify what "caught on" means. If it means "adopted by a lot of people who didn't want to get on an authoritarian government's bad side", that may not be quite the meaning that the original question intended.

[struggle4progress]

17. Joseph Atwill has not proven that Jesus was made up by the Romans

October 10, 2013
By JT Eberhard

... Even logically, his analysis is flawed. If this tactic was used against the Jews, why didn’t the Romans use it against an even greater threat: the Gauls?! The Jewish people were never as serious a threat to the Empire as much as the Gauls were–who sacked Rome twice and destroyed Legions. Atwill never seems to consider how basically incompetent his thesis is in this regard. If the Romans had such success against the Jews using this “psychological warfare” (anachronism alert!! Danger! Danger!), why don’t we see this happening against all of their enemies? It is just so beyond absurd. It really is.

Here is the thing; it may be that Mr. Atwill is completely clueless about this. Maybe he isn’t just trying to scam everyone and sell a bunch of books to a group of gullible people. Maybe he legitimately hasn’t read anything relevant on this subject or any recent scholarship on it.

But that is troubling–would you want to read a science book written by a layperson who hasn’t read a single relevant scientific study? Would you pick up a book on engineering written by someone with a background in computer science, and trust that book enough to build a house based upon its designs? I hope not. I sincerely hope that no one would agree to trust either of these books.

This is the issue with Mr. Atwill. He may sincerely believe he has discovered the secret code off a cereal box with his 3-D glasses he found inside; that doesn’t make him an expert in the subject, it doesn’t make him knowledgeable enough to give lectures on it. It certainly does not make him credible ...

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013/10/joseph-atwill-has-not-proven-that-jesus-was-made-up-by-the-romans/

[Goblinmonger]

22. Atheists are skeptical of Atwill

because of have done the very basic research needed to know he is a conspiracy theory nutbag with no credentials.

If believers were half as skeptical as atheists, this would be a different world.

[cleanhippie]

25. Winner!

Look at the effort s4p has put into digging up as much dirt as is possible to demonstrate that Atwill is a fraud. Imagine all that critical thought being put to use evaluating the claims made by his religion.

[skepticscott]

27. My thoughts exactly

He not only seems selectively energetic in trying to show that Atwill has no convincing case for his claims, but also in trying to show that "even" atheists find his case uncompelling (a rather ironic negative argument from authority).

[rug]

31. Well, you did say this was the most likely explanation.

But considering the total lack of extra-biblical historical evidence for the existence of Jesus, I already have concluded that this is the most likely explanation. It's not a new concept.

Kudos to s4p for decisively debunking the OP you put up.

[cleanhippie]

44. Debunked? I don't think you are using that word correctly.

But you know that already.

What's more impressive are the new people and the good conversations that are being had in the OPs about this topic.

You making it personal and adding nothing but sniping was expected.

[rug]

49. I don't think you used the word concluded correctly.

[Walk away]

26. Different and better. nt

[skepticscott]

30. Of course, there's a reason why

some people are believers and some are atheists...critical thinking and the close examination of what you're spoon-fed (even if it's what you want to hear).

[cleanhippie]

24. I find your acrimony to be clouding your thinking.

I'm skeptical of this guys claims. I said so in the other thread. This guy says he has proof, so we are waiting to see what he considers proof.

I think his presentation is today, IIRC, so lets see just what his "proof" really is. If he is full of shit, it will be easily seen.

[struggle4progress]

32. Quelle horreur! I have provided links to the blog of Richard Carrier (who considers Jesus a myth),

to the blog of Acharya S (who considers Jesus a myth), to the blog of Thomas Verenna (who considers Jesus a myth), to the blog of PZ Myers (who considers Jesus a myth), &c&c

Shame on me for being so mean to Atwill!

[rug]

36. He sounds offended.

Meany.

[struggle4progress]

40. Eh-yup: that's me

[cleanhippie]

43. Shame on you for being mean to Atwell?

No, shame on you for being dishonest about your intentions.

[struggle4progress]

47. Here's what they're saying over at The Atheist Experience:

... I’m inclined to conclude .. it’s rubbish ... Atwill has been peddling his .. conspiracy theories for years. He is not a historian, he doesn’t have any credibility ... I’m not inclined to believe his “discovery” of a “confession” by Romans who invented Jesus, and .. if it were verified .. I wouldn’t be inclined to assume they were telling truth ...

... here’s a guy claiming ... a new discovery of significant academic importance, yet he won’t just release it to other scholars ... Instead, you must buy tickets to attend a lecture at which he will reveal his secret information in a week and a half. Scholarship does not work like that ... Jumping the gun like this is just pulling the equivalent of the cold fusion fiasco, and .. it’s clearly a stunt to bring in some money.

Bother us about this stuff again after ... mainstream historians have reviewed his work. Until then, don’t be gullible.

Don’t believe every Jesus conspiracy you read
by Russell Glasser

[struggle4progress]

48. Here's what they're saying over at Planet Atheism:

... Atwill’s webpage has the tagline “Is Christianity The Genesis of Modern Psychological Warfare?” Because “Jesus didn’t exist” doesn’t have enough punch anymore ... Atwill’s evidence, then and now, boils down to parallels. His “confession” is his argument that the parallels add up to an intentional design ... The problems are obvious. Parallels are always subjective, and the argument that they cannot be inadvertent (i.e. someone mistaking a story about one Jesus for another) is even more subjective. The accusation of parallelomania is sure to come up, and .. that’s a hard discussion to have. Finally, what do all those parallels add up to? In his review of Caeser’s Messiah, Robert Price – a fan of parallels himself – argued that the total was less than the sum of its parts ...

http://planetatheism.com/author/vorjack/

[rug]

50. What were your intentions in putting up a debunked conspiracy theory?

[AtheistCrusader]

29. Sounds a tad too convenient.

[cbayer]

33. Thanks for all this. I had seen a couple of them, but not all of them.

I became highly suspicious when I saw that David Icke was a big fan.

[struggle4progress]

38. The "Son of the Godhead" who has warned us about our reptilian overlords? That David Icke?

What a wonderful endorsement for Mr Atwill!

[cbayer]

39. One and the same.

Yep. He's read the book and seen the documentary and he is all about Mr. Atwill.

[struggle4progress]

42. Maybe I should write him a letter:

Dear David --

On your recommendation, I read Mr Atwill's book, and I was startled to see that, although his methods are entirely sound, he has gotten the central point very very wrong. In fact, it was obviously not the Flavians who wrote the gospel: it was the Trilateral Commission. And the texts are not actually references to Josephus; rather, they are sly references to the Warren Commission Report. It is possible to prove beyond doubt that these Trilateral Commission forgeries survived the nuclear war of 13 and 14 March 2111 and were then teleported back in time to thirteenth century Italy, where they languished until Leonardo da Vinci handed them to his Illuminati friends who first took them to Rome and then later to Jerusalem. The evidence for this is so straightforward and convincing, that I must wonder whether Mr Atwill has not deliberately foisted a misleading tale on an unsuspecting public, in order to disguise the power of the Trilateral Commission and to obscure their 1969 sale of almost all Americans as slaves to the Federal Reserve -- a bit of history everybody now pretends not to remember. Mayday! Mayday! It is extremely important that you look into this and stop promoting Mr Atwill's misrepresentations! I am also convinced that further research here could implicate the Shriners

[cbayer]

53. That is priceless! I think you covered just about everything, lol.

[dimbear]

34. This discussion has been inspiring, with believers and unbelievers united to out the truth. When

both sides unite we can destroy practically anything.

[cbayer]

35. It might be possible to also build practically anything.

[skepticscott]

52. If it weren't so rare

for believers to be as interested in the truth about their religions as atheists, that might be an actual possibility. But if they were, they'd be mainly atheists anyway, and we wouldn't have so much trouble getting useful things accomplished, since we wouldn't be wasting so much time, money and effort in society fawning over religiously based superstitions.

[mkirsh]

37. Historical fact verses belief is always a stalemate

I am about as much as a Biblical scholar as Atwill, thought my study is in Biology and Anthropology, I am also Jewish. My impression is that faith and belief follow closely changes to the Earths environmental experiences over long times. If God is a perpetuated motion through the universe that has no knowable beginning or end, a new experience or change might have the finite and infinite redefined, i.e. the introduction of a finite (man or Christ) to embody a new and experienced motion..."son of God", with changes in moral reflections: this also gives no reason why Christ may not had existed, along with possible ways of interpretation to say he was invented when viewing in retrospect. Most important is the way science, that pervades in large radius, views the world.....from Einstein we have the interconcertability of energy (infinite, god) to matter (finite, man) and are able to alternate perspective at will in our testimonies as we hold the infinite universe to be a separate mathematical construct (as in General Theory of Relativity) within which life/man is a minor element(Einstein knew he didnt add up well and was continually working on it while those who proceded him had fewer question). It is better and more logical and arguable to say that the universe is basically the same everywhere and goes on endlessly, unexplanably in rational terms, from each anywhere, if we cannot ever see all places to verify our beliefs. It is better to consider that the premises of the test equipment, and what is tested make up "universe"..e.g. man and all he senses, or a radio station broadcast and the broadcast equipment. Though the tenets of faith seem to associate with historical fact, verified fact is a minor component, but that we understand how our minds and the universe see alike a whole with both forest and trees. Between science/physical fact and what is beyond witness, physical and spiritual there is always a stalemate and we should be wary of attempts to close the gap, what we do in our minds in the construction of forest and trees always measures from behavior into the infinitely older whole. Perhaps in modern setting we do not interpret accurately for meaning, seek historical fact, what is written long ago. It is very interesting that the concept of energy-matter conversion ( infinite god verses a human god) is almost part of ordinary comprehensions, yet the most intelligent of us struggle to understand what the scientist says, who has placed all the parts wrong in the whole....the theory and facts of science are very subjective to history.

[rug]

41. Welcome to DU!

Check out the various religious groups here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1217

And don't forget the liberal use of paragraph breaks.

[hrmjustin]

45. Welcome to DU and Welcome to the religion room.

[gopiscrap]

46. Welcome to DU