Peter

Maybe he didn't because it wasn't required reading for this thread. Are you the paid publicist for this Jesus = Caesar book? No, and btw you can read it for free on Carotta's website. From January 06 the whole book will be online. You're correct maybe my response was not pertinent in this thread, however don't forget that Paul and Jesus (Divus Julius) belong together. No Divus Julius -> no Jesus -> no Paulus -> no Christianity as we know it. Peter

In reality it was the other way around: The Roman Divus Iulius was hijacked by Judaizing him, by way of adding all the quotations from the books of the Jews to the original gospel (especially in Matthew). This was done after the Jewish war in order to make Jesus the awaited messiah of the Jews, in order to integrate them into the empire. "Jesus'" original followers were the Roman people and especially his veterans, most of them being settled in the East in exactly those places whence later Christianity emerged. You certainly have not read 'Jesus was Caesar'. It provides an abundance of evidence that the historical Jesus was Gaius Julius Caesar.

At that time there was no "Israel". And a village named "Nazareth" didn't exist in the beginning of the first century AD. Isn't it possible that Caesar and Jesus (Divus Julius) are the two sides of the same coin? That's okay, I like to make new friends, too. But here I'm primarily interested in a discussion of the fascinating discovery of Carotta. Don't compare his work to "The DaVinci Code". That's not fair. Peter

You have said some interestings things in your post, however, as far as the above comment is concerned I have to differ. Why? Not the earthly Julius Caesar was the Christ but Divus Iulius the god he became at the end of his life and ever more after his assassination and funeral which is the original Easter. The Easter liturgy does not follow the gospels but the funeral ritual of Caesar as was discovered by Ethelbert Stauffer (cf. Christ and the Caesars (1955) and particularly 'Jerusalem und Rom im Zeitalter Jesu Christi' (1957), the latter is not available in English unfortunately). For a comprehensive understanding of who Divus Julius was there is the work by Stefan Weinstock 'Divus Julius' (1971), Oxford. One of the problems grasping the discovery presented in 'Jesus was Caesar' is that most people have no idea who Caesar really was and they know even less about Divus Iulius who became the highest God of the Empire (equated with Jupiter) and whose cult permeated the Empire especially the East where many of his veterans had been settled. You don't hear about that at school and hardly, if at all, at university either. Another problem lies in the fact that we have two thousand years of Christian theology behind us which many of us learned in that form or another from childhood on, so we have problems understanding the concept of apotheosis. However, some ancients knew that the gods had once been kings and queens who were elevated to godhead and worshipped after their deaths because they had been benefactors. Euhemeros of Messene wrote a book about that. Peter

These questions gain even more importance in light of the discovery that the apostle Paul was none other than Flavius Josephus, see 'Jesus was Caesar': "Jesus is the Divus Iulius of the Flavians: on behalf of a Flavian—Vespasianus; under supervision of a Flavian—Titus; formed by a Flavian—Flavius Josephus alias Paulus; and opposed by a Flavian—Domitianus. His resistance was in vain, for Domitianus was murdered. But that is another story." So let's read Paul's epistles and Flavius Josephus' works anew. Peter

Apropos Hollywood, there have been some TV broadcasts in the Netherlands about 'Jesus was Caesar'. Here is the talk of Professor Cliteur in favor of Carotta's work in the program Buitenhof. For streaming video see right side, choose bandwith. You'll need some Dutch though. And this is the link to the recording of a NOVA-TV production with the author and again Prof. Cliteur. Unfortunately only the questions are in English but it's interesting and understandable nevertheless. Peter

What do you want to know about Christ specifically? As to Caesar, yes he was a descendant of Venus (who became Mary) and he was proud of that. But he was also very popular among the common people because he stood on their side. And his proverbial clemency, the clementia Caesaris, was known throughout antiquity. Suetonius writes that he" was numbered among the gods not only because of the proclamation of a decision but because of the conviciton of the people". Suet. Jul. 88: [

I don't think Caesar "reduced himself to the status of a Jewish fisherman...". This was done by others. Maybe you should read the book in order to know what you are talking about. Peter

The real name of the new Pontifex Maximus Benedict XVI is Joseph Ratzinger.

Who is disparaging someone else's faith? I'm sorry if my posting was perceived that way by anyone, it wasn't meant to. I just thought pompeius magnus remark was dispensable, and it also smacked a bit of an attempt of censorship.

Nobody urges you to read this thread if you're not interested. No wonder pompeius magnus says this. After Pharsalos, Plutarchus, Pomp. 74-5, reports: "I see, my husband, that you are lost in sorrow." "You know only of one lot in my life, Cornelia, the better one that perhaps also deceived you, because its faithfulness to me was unusually prolonged. But we must also suffer this because we are human..." And this is said in the gospel of John 3:29-31 "He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must in- crease, but I must decrease. He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly..." Laudetur JC

Has anyone of you guys ever read the Quran? Do you know what it says about Jesus? In Sura 4, 157 it says: "... And they did not crucify him, but a simulacrum (an effigy) was made of him. And those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow..." ... which again substantiates Carotta's thesis...

Just correcting a little misinformation. Which misinformation?

Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." There is no mention of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament. The Old Testament is a Judaic book. Moses wrote that passage. Hebrew lexicon implies that 'image' and 'likeness' indicate our similarity in form. That we are differentiated from animals. If 'Moses' really wrote that, fine. But what has this to do with the historical Jesus? Voltaire wrote: "If God created Man in His own image, Man has more than reciprocated."

Actually, in this case, I feel there is a need to argue, especially when a tenuous link at best is professed to be an all-revealing truth and changes history. The "tenuous link" is not professed to be an all-revealing truth, it just reveals who the historical Jesus was. And it won't change history, it will only correct historiography. This might have consequences of course... Since Jesus was a Roman it might be a good idea to learn Latin again, for Christians at least and it won't hurt atheists either.