Genesis of modern psychological warfare

http://www.covertmessiah.com/

 

Where's the evidence exactly? Could you post it here. Yes, I surfed to the site, it said I would have to go to London or so it seems

Do you believe this yourself?

 

It certainly seems more plausible than the existence of a deity, though I would have to be privy to the evidence as well.

I believe the website mentions a documentary, and I imagine that watching it would have the same evidence presented at the seminar.

 

What seems just as plausible is that there actually was a man named Jesus on which christianity is based. We don't have to immediatly connect him to divinity because of that (if we're looking at this mainly from a historical POV).

 

If you aren't privy to the evidence, why do you think it seems "more plausible'?

 

So Airy Fox has given us an ad for a talk by a couple of professional Jesus skeptics given in London last October, and that's supposed to be significant? The very mention of the title is enough to make us question? Where's the beef?

One of the speakers is Joseph Atwill, a certifiable crackpot. For critiques of the author's recent conspiracy theory see:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnV0cJgTRiM"]Caesar's Messiah Debunked - Joseph Atwill's Covert Messiah Refuted - YouTube


See also the following collection of reviews:

http://caesarsmessiahdebunked.com/?page_id=12

Of particular interest to atheist readers might be the scathing review by Richard Carrier, a militant atheist and outspoken advocate of the "Jesus was a myth" theory, who is particularly critical of Atwill because it gives atheist mythicists a bad name.

This may not be exactly the same as Atwill's "Covert Messiah" talk mentioned in the hype, but it certainly casts doubt on Atwill's credibility. I think it's a pretty good bet that the citation to the talk Airy Fox has given us is to the same or similar tripe.

As for Kenneth Humphreys, the other speaker on the panel, he is a British atheist blogger with a masters degree from the University of Essex whose book, Jesus Is A Myth, published by Iconoclast Press (lol) adds little or nothing new to the decades long debate over Jesus' existence except revved up rhetoric. The book is a polemic written in tabloid style dredging up shopworn arguments that might as well have been lifted from posts on Hip Forums. Humphrey's thesis rests mainly on the contention that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Admittedly the evidence is sparse, but I think Bart Ehrman does a convincing job of making a case for it in his book Did Jesus Exist? Without Jesus these dudes would have to get a real job.

 

Flavius or philo left in his writings that there was a big stir among the jews over "one jesus" which is part of the fragments that he existed. Bishop Pike's "the wilderness revolt", which he asked his grand daughter not to publish until after his death, went more into political theories about the early movement. Youtube? I better hang with serious scholars not "on a mission".

 

How about for sight into these things look inside yourself. The fundamental issue is an authority problem. We cannot avoid the effects of our own thinking.

What possible imperial motive is there to teach that the measure you give is the measure you receive when that formula is the joystick of your experience?

 

The citation to reviews that I gave after YouTube includes serious scholars, and really the facts speak for themselves. The author's thesis is that the Flavians made up Jesus to pacify the Jews. One major problem: Christians were persecuted by Nero before the Flavians came to power. How could that be?