Greetings all,

according to the Italian scholar Francesco Carotta the historical Jesus was Caesar!
Carotta: "The Gospel proves to be the history of the Roman Civil war, a 'mis-telling' of the life of Caesar-from the Rubicon to his assassination-mutated into the narrative of Jesus, from the Jordan to his crucifixion. Jesus is a true historical figure, he lived as Gaius Julius Caesar, and resurrected as Divus Julius."
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....02986805&EDATE=
http://www.carotta.de

Amazing! Any comments?

Andrew

It sounds quite intriguing... it wouldnt be the first diefication. I've got to get that book!

thats a bunch of bull crap

Why?

Did you read the links?

He certainly did catch my attention... I wonder what is in his book...

yes i read the link and it still bunch of bull crap

Why?

for 1 thing it says he was reincarnation in which you proble dont belive in because you say there is no after life secound of all the story just dosent sound right

Interesting theory. The Christians are going to hate it and dismiss it out of hand, of course.

yes im a christain and i dont belive in it

No... thats what the whole diefication thing is though... Someone is attributed powers that are not true... or mystical ways are found to explain other things he did. Like, say a general won a huge battle and then became diefied. People might say that he won the powers because he is a god, or other gods helped him, or such.

Why doesnt it sound right?



Obviously.

Edit:

I can actually see how such a thing could happen. Its just a matter of if this is the case for the new testament or not...

Maybe you should read a little more. Essential parts of the book are online here:
http://www.carotta.de/subseite/texte/jwc_e/contents.html

dude that jesus could of been a other named jesus dont ya know parents name their sons jesus sometimes

Umm... The books contents arent based on the idea that Divius Julius is Jesus because of the name..

yes i know lol what i wrote made no sence but i still dont belive it

I used to be a catholic, but now I see that the bible...old testament and the new could have been written by anyone. People make up stories of gods and hell and then hang that yoke on the neck of society at large. In the very old days, Kings would proclaim themselves divine...how ludicrous. As far as the book goes, I checked out the foreward and the part about the crucifiction. Interesting. Thanks for the link.

*coughs* Wow.. that was such an insightful responce.

I'm with stellar.. I would very much like to read this book.

Ashley,

One would hope your 290+ intellect could inspire something a bit more constructive than the one given. Either offer substantive criticism or don't participate in the discussion at all.

MM

That is amazing discovery !

Excuse me? One would hope that moderators do not involve themselves in childish squabbles but remain neutral? It's 210, not to 290, get it right before you insult me.

My substantive cristicism is that this is based on a person incorrect assumptions of which someone is trying to profit from.

And, technically, I am only required to respect your authority for as long as you respect the neutrality that you are required to uphold by being a moderator. Bias isn't becoming you know.

And what, that was too difficult to mention the first time instead of initiating the 'childish' squabble with your insulting remark?



Quite a revealing comment coming from you.

I don't require your respect, only your adherence to a simple request. Whether you heed it or not is up to you, of course your participation is contingent on your compliance, but don't let that be a determining factor in your decision.

MM

This had me rolling around in my chair, laughing.

I think the big "similarity" that refutes this whole story....

Jesus was crucified.
Ceasar was stabbed.

just one, among the many that are laughable. Come on, even the Jews accept that Jesus lived as an actual person on this earth, they just don't think he's the son of God.

I want to make a remark on this 'julius caesar is jesus' 'discovery'. As a matter of fact, from the past centuies there had been 'double' of people seen worldwide. For example two persons with the same names were bornt on the same day and suffered accidents on the same day. Some are of diffeent periods but having the similar facial expression. There are numerous record of this phenomenon which few people might had read.

Jesus never encourage war and they ARE ABSOLUTELY, to my wisdom and knowledge, definitely not the same person. I wonder how some one manage to make this foolhardy and audacious assuming story.

My theory is this, in our universe there are numerous constellations and stellar phenomenon prevailing. If 2 person are bornt and departed on the same day, that is because of the influence of their stellar correspondence in astrological terms, some people have similar fate, because their correspondence of planet influence are similar in electromagnetic energy, and their stars might have similar positions.

Another mistake is that this website: http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....02986805&EDATE= stated that Jesus was not mentioned in the pre roman period. How can that be? His name was uttered in many prophecies and also in the Nelphi, Book of Mormons, 500 B.C. ago.

I wanna make further research into this but I think this is a sheer crank-up joke.

You, and certain other moderators have brought up similar insults, which is why I addressed the issue. And techincally, I didn't insult, you did.

And I am far from biased.

"No I didn't, you did..."

-Nuh-uh

"Uh-Huh"

-Did Not

"Did too..."

-Liar

"Am not..."

-Are too!

"Nuh-uh"

-Uh-Huh

"booger face!"

- No, you're a boogerface.

"I'm rubber, you're glue..."

-No, I'm rubber, YOU'RE glue...

"Am not..."

-Are too!

"Nuh-uh"

-Uh-Huh

I luv you Fluffy!

Ha Ha Ha

Try telling the priest to do exorcism in the name of Julius.

other then the bible there has never been any mention of jesus by any other historian: Philo and some minor roman and jewish historian

I had a read over this the other night...all very interesting. It actually makes sense...there's absolutely no reason whatsoever why the Romans would have allowed Jesus' cult to remain (unless it was absolutely insignificant) as a potential threat to their authority....if we're to assume Jesus was a deified Caeser, then it all starts to make a little more sense as to why all of Jesus' followers weren't crucified along with him, as was the practice

At first I thought it was absolute nonsense or a joke, too. But the more I read of it the more I am convinced it is true. Didn't Jesus also say:
"Think not that I am come to bring peace on earth. I came not to bring peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a man's foes shall be they of is own houshold." Matthew 10:34
Doesn't this sound like civil war?

Btw, here is a review of the book:
http://www.smallkidtime.com/

Andrew

And what is this?



Read here:
http://www.carotta.de/subseite/texte/jwc_e/crux.html

oh my gosh you're right! That drawing proves everything!





I believe!

See? I knew you're an understanding peron!


Laudetur JC

Thanks that was the funniest bit of delusion I've seen since Dan Browne's novel.

The web site frankly gives WRONG information. Christianity began right in the time of Christ not the 2nd century.
Christ claimed no earthyl dominion where Ceaser controlled Rome
Christ was executed Ceaser assasinated
Did the idiot who wrote that nonsense even read the bible or just the cliff notes version.

no it did not, christianity started as a cult and after the death of christ and the ressurection people followed him. actually it all does not fit in one time line the 4 main gospels were written many years after each other


so much controversy about christ

Not really. It wasnt a religion then. The Bible was not compiled and it was barely even cult status.



Yes, however, if the man lost power, he wouldnt have control neither.



You realise theres more than 1 Caesar? Caesar became a title.

lol that pic is a joke

Actually, no. What people seem to forget here is that while Christianity may be fairly new, Judiasm (and He was Jewish) is not. He was talking about the separation of Judiasm and the furture Christianity. He also said near that passage that He was here to cause a division. That was the division.

Tell me why any Roman would be celebrating Passover? That's what He was doing on what is now called 'Holy Thursday'. I will agree that the pruning of Judiac roots from Christianity is from the Romans. They believed because they saw firsthand what happened when He died. If something unexplainable happened now wouldn't everyone believe? Of course they would.

Sorry, He was not a Jew! He was the most Roman of Romans! He never celebrated Passover. So what did He celebrate the evening before He was murdered? Let's take a look at the epoch-making book 'Jesus was Caesar':


[...]
The best death is the sudden one

‘The day before the next session of the Senate Caesar however went to supper at the home of Lepidus. Lepidus was his magister equitum. He took Brutus Albinus with him to drink and as the cup passed he raised the question, “What is the best method to die?” While one expressed this opinion and another that, Caesar himself praised sudden death above all. He thus prophesied his own end and spoke of what was to happen the following day.’[384]

For the next day, Decimus Brutus Albinus was to lead him to where his conspirators would be waiting for him; sudden death would overtake him and his blood would flow.

It is easy to recognize the Last Supper scene from the Gospel.[385] Caesar appears as dictator with his magister equitum, Grand Master of the Horse, the dictator’s second-in-command. In the Gospel the disciples are supposed to go into the city and follow a man carrying a stone jar and wherever he enters, say to the head of the house that the master needs a room for supper. Notice how ‘Master’—didaskalos—corresponds to dictator which in Latin can be misunderstood as schoolmaster. It is not by chance that it became ‘Dichter’, poet, in German. Lepidus was really head of the house, oikodespotês. The word resembles—what a coincidence—a mimicry of magister equitum, where despotês stands for magister, oiko for equitum, the first part in sense, the second in sound.[386] Finally, ‘stone jar’—keramos—is a translation of Lepidus, if it is mistakenly derived from lapis, lapidis—‘stone’—reinforced by the real meaning of lepidus, ‘pleasing’: a pleasing stone jar, a delicate ceramic.

Even the betrayer’s name is mentioned: Decimus Brutus. In the Gospel texts the betrayer is named as ‘one of the twelve.’ Decimus means the tenth! Just as Decimus was taken to feast with Caesar, so ‘one of the twelve’ dippeth with Jesus in the dish (Mk. 14:20).

Even the chalice is there, referred to in the Caesar story also as kylix, which with him too refers to his blood that is shed: already during that night his wife saw him in a dream, ‘covered in much blood’—a premonition of his sacrificial death.[387]

And finally the announcement of imminent death is found in both Caesar and Jesus.
However, one thing seems to be missing in the Gospels, namely the exact comment by Caesar we are looking for: ‘the sudden one’. It is not found in the synoptic Gospels. In John, Jesus does say to the traitor:

‘That thou doest, do quickly.’[388]

Here is the sentence, even if it is hidden: ‘What you do—namely lead me to death—do that quickly’. There it is—the sudden death, in the mouth of Jesus.
[...]

http://www.carotta.de/subseite/texte/jwc_e/w&w.html#sudden


Andrew

one cannot draw some lose parallels and say that two things are the same. there are some very big differences between the lives of Jesus and Julius Ceasar. Jesus was born into a poor family as a son of a carpenter, Julius was born into a wealthy aristocratic family. Julius led thousands of troops, Jesus, for most of his ministry led somewhere around 20 people he basicly picked up off the street. there were also differences between early christianity and julius ceasar's cult. ceasar's cult was legal, while pre-constantine christianity got you a breif tenure as a human torch.

the article seems to only mention the vague similarities between jesus and caesar and not the differences

Ah, I see. Of course, the Gospel doesn't follow Caesar's biography word for word.
Otherwise people would have noticed earlier, don't you think?

dude, come on, give it up. Are you trying to sell books for them?
Want to hear a similarity between humans and computers?

Both are capable of logical thought.

Does that mean I'm a computer?


See, that's what the argument is here, and it's beyond lame.

Hey, what's your problem Enlightenment?
I'm simply fascinated by Carotta's work. If you're not, nobody urges you to bother with it. Strange if you wouldn't though, since you call yourself 'Englightenment' and 'Jesus was Caesar' seems to be exactly that: a most enlightening book. Perhaps you chose the wrong alias.

that pic is considered real or not? carota based that on some younger portrets of caesar right?

jesus- baptised in the jordan?
caesar in rubico?

jesus and caesar are both betrayed

Cleopatra falls to the feet of Octavianus Augustus

magdalena washes jesus feet

pilatus=lepidus

nazareth=ravenna

some "similarities"

It would be an enlightening book if it made a strong argument. It does not. You are free to your opinion. I am free to mine.

He's not saying there is no God. Nor is he saying that certain events didn't happen. I think, he's simply stating that we may have a slightly incorrect story on our hands. Back then, Caesar was God. For he could take your life when he saw fit. So why wouldn't he say something like, "there is no other way to God, except through me.". Just a thought. It's something that has always kind of bothered me.

I have plenty of faith in God. But I don't feel the need to worship Jesus/Julius (Gaius) because it was written in some book 3,000 years ago or whatever. What language was the ORIGINAL Bible written in? Aramaic? Hebrew? Then translated into Hebrew, Ancient latin, Refined Latin, Germanic, Gallic, English, French (later), and then the good ol king of England saw it fit to totally re-write it? Strange. Kind of like the game Telephone. Pass a story around enough and it changes completely from what was originally said.

I deem this as being a subject of extreme interest for me. I will read into it. Thanks for the inspiration. And anything is possible...

HOtoke actually again thats simply a lie invented by liberals. All four gospels were written with in 30 years of the death of Christ. The text proves it, fragments that have been found prove it, as does the writings of christians in the first and second century.

To give a specific example of the proof consider the destruction of the temple of Jerusalem. This event occured in 60 ad and was one of the most important events in Jewish history. Why would a Jewish sect make no mention of that event, and in fact make numerous commandments regarding that temple if they were writting after the destruction of the temple? It doesn't make sense.

Jesus was the most roman of romans excuse me while I pick myself up off the ground from laughing so hard. He DID celebrate pass over. Based on what? Ever heard of the last supper? Further he claimed to be the Messiah a jewish title NOT Roman one. Also he claim he came in fufilment of prophecy not to destroy JEWISH law. No rational person who knows any thing about Judaism and has actually read the gospels can conlude Christ was Roman. Remember also it was Paul that created the rift between Christianity and Judaism NOT Christ. When Paul allowed gentile men to convert with out submitting to circumcision he violated on eof the founding rules of Judaism. And low and behold unlike Christ(the descendent of JEWISH King David) Paul was a Roman. I'd recomend you actually read the gospels and look at Christ's lineage. His mother was a Jew tehre for by Jewish tradition Christ was a Jew. The ceasers were not.

hahaha,
look at this all the athiests dismiss the Bible but when it says something false about Jesus you all go wow, oh yeah this is amazing I have to read it. So let me see this, Jesuswas gonna be sent to Caeser so he can charge him for blasphemy but instead the governor said nonon, so Jesus was gonna be trialed by his ownself?
ahhaha, you know this guy, I bet his book has all the truth in it.