• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

My view on Jesus.

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
I have given outlines of my view on Jesus several times in the last three or four weeks. Some people thought interesting, others obviously disagreed and a couple were outright hostile to the idea.

So i thought (yes it has been known) that a discussion thread would be a good idea to post my belief.

I am a full blown atheist with an interest in religion, particularly (for personal reasons) Christianity. I have also studied as a hobby minus/plus 100 years of the fall of the Roman Republic/rise of Empire. Just so you know this won't be a theological discussion but will have historical contexts based on my understanding of Roman life. I have come to this concussion, not only because of history but the accounts in the bible simply do not make sense given that history.

Where to begin, the beginning i guess is as good a place as any.

Jesus was born as the Talmud and other hebrew texts have it as Yeshu ben Pantera (Jesus son of Pantera). I take this as an illegitimate conception/birth, possibly by rape. Pantera was non other than a Roman soldier, Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera.

From birth to about 30 years nothing is heard of him. There are lots of stories but no facts. Of this period i suggest he was growing up with a deep resentment of his absentee father who was posted to Germany, where his gravestone can be seen.

download (10).jpeg


Which fermented to a deep resentment of the Roman occupation.

It is my view that Jesus joined the Zionist movement the "Fourth Philosophy" and became an agitator, anarchist and terrorist against the Roman occupation. (A view echoed and expanded in books like Jesus the Terrorist by Peter Cresswell). Also possible that he was also a member of the Sicarri.

Remember, Rome was accepting of any religion and gods, to attempt to impose one god was not only traitorous to Roman belief it was also an insult to the emperor who was himself deemed a god.

Jesus was caught, (possibly with the help of Saulus) tried and executed for his crimes against Rome and the Emperor and given a traitors death of crucifixion.

A note here on methods of execution in Rome. There were several methods used depending on the crime, from being thrown off a high cliff or garoting for run of the mill crimes. Two of the most serious crimes were patricide (Rome ranked a father highly) which involved flogging then being sewn into a sack with a dog, a dunghill cock, a viper and a monkey. The sack is thrown into the depths of the sea or a river. And importantly for this OP, treason which require execution by crucifixion.

He was crucified and supposed given to family/followers for interment. This simply did not happen under Rome. The criminal was left on the cross to rot as an example of roman justice. However it seems that in this case it wouldn't make a good story so.

Assume that he was released from the cross before he died. Was nursed to a semblance of health and was later seen walking around town. Unfortunately the iron nails used to pin him to the cross were not sterile, probably rusty and teaming with bacteria. He succumbed to blood poisoning never to be seen again.

Now fast forward 350 years(ish). A growing religion in need of guidance, the bible was compiled using the OT and various selected stories to create a saviour.

Maybe Jesus was remembered in folk memory as one who incited a oneness in the Jewish people. Add to that the works of John the Baptist who really was a good/religious man. And a few tales of magic and miracles and you have a New Testement on which to base a religion.
 

beenherebeforeagain

Rogue Animist
Premium Member
I have given outlines of my view on Jesus several times in the last three or four weeks. Some people thought interesting, others obviously disagreed and a couple were outright hostile to the idea.

So i thought (yes it has been known) that a discussion thread would be a good idea to post my belief.

I am a full blown atheist with an interest in religion, particularly (for personal reasons) Christianity. I have also studied as a hobby minus/plus 100 years of the fall of the Roman Republic/rise of Empire. Just so you know this won't be a theological discussion but will have historical contexts based on my understanding of Roman life. I have come to this concussion, not only because of history but the accounts in the bible simply do not make sense given that history.

Where to begin, the beginning i guess is as good a place as any.

Jesus was born as the Talmud and other hebrew texts have it as Yeshu ben Pantera (Jesus son of Pantera). I take this as an illegitimate conception/birth, possibly by rape. Pantera was non other than a Roman soldier, Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera.

From birth to about 30 years nothing is heard of him. There are lots of stories but no facts. Of this period i suggest he was growing up with a deep resentment of his absentee father who was posted to Germany, where his gravestone can be seen.

View attachment 50597

Which fermented to a deep resentment of the Roman occupation.

It is my view that Jesus joined the Zionist movement the "Fourth Philosophy" and became an agitator, anarchist and terrorist against the Roman occupation. (A view echoed and expanded in books like Jesus the Terrorist by Peter Cresswell). Also possible that he was also a member of the Sicarri.

Remember, Rome was accepting of any religion and gods, to attempt to impose one god was not only traitorous to Roman belief it was also an insult to the emperor who was himself deemed a god.

Jesus was caught, (possibly with the help of Saulus) tried and executed for his crimes against Rome and the Emperor and given a traitors death of crucifixion.

A note here on methods of execution in Rome. There were several methods used depending on the crime, from being thrown off a high cliff or garoting for run of the mill crimes. Two of the most serious crimes were patricide (Rome ranked a father highly) which involved flogging then being sewn into a sack with a dog, a dunghill cock, a viper and a monkey. The sack is thrown into the depths of the sea or a river. And importantly for this OP, treason which require execution by crucifixion.

He was crucified and supposed given to family/followers for interment. This simply did not happen under Rome. The criminal was left on the cross to rot as an example of roman justice. However it seems that in this case it wouldn't make a good story so.

Assume that he was released from the cross before he died. Was nursed to a semblance of health and was later seen walking around town. Unfortunately the iron nails used to pin him to the cross were not sterile, probably rusty and teaming with bacteria. He succumbed to blood poisoning never to be seen again.

Now fast forward 350 years(ish). A growing religion in need of guidance, the bible was compiled using the OT and various selected stories to create a saviour.

Maybe Jesus was remembered in folk memory as one who incited a oneness in the Jewish people. Add to that the works of John the Baptist who really was a good/religious man. And a few tales of magic and miracles and you have a New Testement on which to base a religion.
Thank you for posting your views!

I have also made a study of the historicity (apparently, that is a word) of Jesus, having read a number of books arguing various points of view, including that Jesus was totally a myth, a later construction, to various interpretations on what message the very real person of Jesus was trying to communicate (that is, was he a social reformer, an anti-Roman revolutionary, an ascetic mystic, etc.?).

If such a man ever lived, there is no way we can historically be certain of what he did and taught; and there is a significant chance that he never was, that it's all a pious fiction.

I myself am agnostic about the answer; I find arguments from all of the competing viewpoints to be compelling to some degree, but none conclusively.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Thank you for posting your views!

I have also made a study of the historicity (apparently, that is a word) of Jesus, having read a number of books arguing various points of view, including that Jesus was totally a myth, a later construction, to various interpretations on what message the very real person of Jesus was trying to communicate (that is, was he a social reformer, an anti-Roman revolutionary, an ascetic mystic, etc.?).

If such a man ever lived, there is no way we can historically be certain of what he did and taught; and there is a significant chance that he never was, that it's all a pious fiction.

I myself am agnostic about the answer; I find arguments from all of the competing viewpoints to be compelling to some degree, but none conclusively.


My view is as conclusive as all the others :rolleyes:...its a view based on the Roman way of life at the time and assumes he did exist as a person. Other than that there is very little to go on
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
I have given outlines of my view on Jesus several times in the last three or four weeks. Some people thought interesting, others obviously disagreed and a couple were outright hostile to the idea.

So i thought (yes it has been known) that a discussion thread would be a good idea to post my belief.

I am a full blown atheist with an interest in religion, particularly (for personal reasons) Christianity. I have also studied as a hobby minus/plus 100 years of the fall of the Roman Republic/rise of Empire. Just so you know this won't be a theological discussion but will have historical contexts based on my understanding of Roman life. I have come to this concussion, not only because of history but the accounts in the bible simply do not make sense given that history.

Where to begin, the beginning i guess is as good a place as any.

Jesus was born as the Talmud and other hebrew texts have it as Yeshu ben Pantera (Jesus son of Pantera). I take this as an illegitimate conception/birth, possibly by rape. Pantera was non other than a Roman soldier, Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera.

From birth to about 30 years nothing is heard of him. There are lots of stories but no facts. Of this period i suggest he was growing up with a deep resentment of his absentee father who was posted to Germany, where his gravestone can be seen.

View attachment 50597

Which fermented to a deep resentment of the Roman occupation.

It is my view that Jesus joined the Zionist movement the "Fourth Philosophy" and became an agitator, anarchist and terrorist against the Roman occupation. (A view echoed and expanded in books like Jesus the Terrorist by Peter Cresswell). Also possible that he was also a member of the Sicarri.

Remember, Rome was accepting of any religion and gods, to attempt to impose one god was not only traitorous to Roman belief it was also an insult to the emperor who was himself deemed a god.

Jesus was caught, (possibly with the help of Saulus) tried and executed for his crimes against Rome and the Emperor and given a traitors death of crucifixion.

A note here on methods of execution in Rome. There were several methods used depending on the crime, from being thrown off a high cliff or garoting for run of the mill crimes. Two of the most serious crimes were patricide (Rome ranked a father highly) which involved flogging then being sewn into a sack with a dog, a dunghill cock, a viper and a monkey. The sack is thrown into the depths of the sea or a river. And importantly for this OP, treason which require execution by crucifixion.

He was crucified and supposed given to family/followers for interment. This simply did not happen under Rome. The criminal was left on the cross to rot as an example of roman justice. However it seems that in this case it wouldn't make a good story so.

Assume that he was released from the cross before he died. Was nursed to a semblance of health and was later seen walking around town. Unfortunately the iron nails used to pin him to the cross were not sterile, probably rusty and teaming with bacteria. He succumbed to blood poisoning never to be seen again.

Now fast forward 350 years(ish). A growing religion in need of guidance, the bible was compiled using the OT and various selected stories to create a saviour.

Maybe Jesus was remembered in folk memory as one who incited a oneness in the Jewish people. Add to that the works of John the Baptist who really was a good/religious man. And a few tales of magic and miracles and you have a New Testement on which to base a religion.
Thanks for sharing your views.
I have a question or two.
You said A "Rome was accepting of any religion and gods".
You also said, B "He was crucified and supposed given to family/followers for interment. This simply did not happen under Rome. The criminal was left on the cross to rot as an example of roman justice."

If Jesus was a part of the Jewish system, and they asked for Jesus body to be taken down, based on their religious beliefs (Deuteronomy 21:23), would Rome has consented, according to your statement A, thus rendering your statement B, void?
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Thanks for sharing your views.
I have a question or two.
You said A "Rome was accepting of any religion and gods".
You also said, B "He was crucified and supposed given to family/followers for interment. This simply did not happen under Rome. The criminal was left on the cross to rot as an example of roman justice."

If Jesus was a part of the Jewish system, and they asked for Jesus body to be taken down, based on their religious beliefs (Deuteronomy 21:23), would Rome has consented, according to your statement A, thus rendering your statement B, void?

Releasing a crucifixion victim didn't happen which is why i said
Assume that he was released from the cross before he died.

The acceptance of religion beliefs did not run to criminals who, by their action forfeited their rights as citizens of Rome
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
I have given outlines of my view on Jesus several times in the last three or four weeks. Some people thought interesting, others obviously disagreed and a couple were outright hostile to the idea.

So i thought (yes it has been known) that a discussion thread would be a good idea to post my belief.

I am a full blown atheist with an interest in religion, particularly (for personal reasons) Christianity. I have also studied as a hobby minus/plus 100 years of the fall of the Roman Republic/rise of Empire. Just so you know this won't be a theological discussion but will have historical contexts based on my understanding of Roman life. I have come to this concussion, not only because of history but the accounts in the bible simply do not make sense given that history.

Where to begin, the beginning i guess is as good a place as any.

Jesus was born as the Talmud and other hebrew texts have it as Yeshu ben Pantera (Jesus son of Pantera). I take this as an illegitimate conception/birth, possibly by rape. Pantera was non other than a Roman soldier, Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera.

From birth to about 30 years nothing is heard of him. There are lots of stories but no facts. Of this period i suggest he was growing up with a deep resentment of his absentee father who was posted to Germany, where his gravestone can be seen.

View attachment 50597

Which fermented to a deep resentment of the Roman occupation.

It is my view that Jesus joined the Zionist movement the "Fourth Philosophy" and became an agitator, anarchist and terrorist against the Roman occupation. (A view echoed and expanded in books like Jesus the Terrorist by Peter Cresswell). Also possible that he was also a member of the Sicarri.

Remember, Rome was accepting of any religion and gods, to attempt to impose one god was not only traitorous to Roman belief it was also an insult to the emperor who was himself deemed a god.

Jesus was caught, (possibly with the help of Saulus) tried and executed for his crimes against Rome and the Emperor and given a traitors death of crucifixion.

A note here on methods of execution in Rome. There were several methods used depending on the crime, from being thrown off a high cliff or garoting for run of the mill crimes. Two of the most serious crimes were patricide (Rome ranked a father highly) which involved flogging then being sewn into a sack with a dog, a dunghill cock, a viper and a monkey. The sack is thrown into the depths of the sea or a river. And importantly for this OP, treason which require execution by crucifixion.

He was crucified and supposed given to family/followers for interment. This simply did not happen under Rome. The criminal was left on the cross to rot as an example of roman justice. However it seems that in this case it wouldn't make a good story so.

Assume that he was released from the cross before he died. Was nursed to a semblance of health and was later seen walking around town. Unfortunately the iron nails used to pin him to the cross were not sterile, probably rusty and teaming with bacteria. He succumbed to blood poisoning never to be seen again.

Now fast forward 350 years(ish). A growing religion in need of guidance, the bible was compiled using the OT and various selected stories to create a saviour.

Maybe Jesus was remembered in folk memory as one who incited a oneness in the Jewish people. Add to that the works of John the Baptist who really was a good/religious man. And a few tales of magic and miracles and you have a New Testement on which to base a religion.
Can't say you didn't do your research.
 

MikeF

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I have given outlines of my view on Jesus several times in the last three or four weeks. Some people thought interesting, others obviously disagreed and a couple were outright hostile to the idea.

So i thought (yes it has been known) that a discussion thread would be a good idea to post my belief.

I am a full blown atheist with an interest in religion, particularly (for personal reasons) Christianity. I have also studied as a hobby minus/plus 100 years of the fall of the Roman Republic/rise of Empire. Just so you know this won't be a theological discussion but will have historical contexts based on my understanding of Roman life. I have come to this concussion, not only because of history but the accounts in the bible simply do not make sense given that history.

Where to begin, the beginning i guess is as good a place as any.

Jesus was born as the Talmud and other hebrew texts have it as Yeshu ben Pantera (Jesus son of Pantera). I take this as an illegitimate conception/birth, possibly by rape. Pantera was non other than a Roman soldier, Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera.

From birth to about 30 years nothing is heard of him. There are lots of stories but no facts. Of this period i suggest he was growing up with a deep resentment of his absentee father who was posted to Germany, where his gravestone can be seen.

View attachment 50597

Which fermented to a deep resentment of the Roman occupation.

It is my view that Jesus joined the Zionist movement the "Fourth Philosophy" and became an agitator, anarchist and terrorist against the Roman occupation. (A view echoed and expanded in books like Jesus the Terrorist by Peter Cresswell). Also possible that he was also a member of the Sicarri.

Remember, Rome was accepting of any religion and gods, to attempt to impose one god was not only traitorous to Roman belief it was also an insult to the emperor who was himself deemed a god.

Jesus was caught, (possibly with the help of Saulus) tried and executed for his crimes against Rome and the Emperor and given a traitors death of crucifixion.

A note here on methods of execution in Rome. There were several methods used depending on the crime, from being thrown off a high cliff or garoting for run of the mill crimes. Two of the most serious crimes were patricide (Rome ranked a father highly) which involved flogging then being sewn into a sack with a dog, a dunghill cock, a viper and a monkey. The sack is thrown into the depths of the sea or a river. And importantly for this OP, treason which require execution by crucifixion.

He was crucified and supposed given to family/followers for interment. This simply did not happen under Rome. The criminal was left on the cross to rot as an example of roman justice. However it seems that in this case it wouldn't make a good story so.

Assume that he was released from the cross before he died. Was nursed to a semblance of health and was later seen walking around town. Unfortunately the iron nails used to pin him to the cross were not sterile, probably rusty and teaming with bacteria. He succumbed to blood poisoning never to be seen again.

Now fast forward 350 years(ish). A growing religion in need of guidance, the bible was compiled using the OT and various selected stories to create a saviour.

Maybe Jesus was remembered in folk memory as one who incited a oneness in the Jewish people. Add to that the works of John the Baptist who really was a good/religious man. And a few tales of magic and miracles and you have a New Testement on which to base a religion.
I had no idea that there were hypotheses as to the father of Jesus. I did a little Wikipedia searching to get some background.
It seems the name "Jesus" is anglicised Latin of transliterated Greek of the Hebrew "Yeshua" or Joshua. Apparently Pantera was a common Roman name. With two very common names it seems difficult to draw a hard conclusion.
It also seems from Wikipedia that the Joshua references in the Talmud were either decades before or after the time of NT Jesus.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Releasing a crucifixion victim didn't happen which is why i said
You said that, after you said this... "He was crucified and supposed given to family/followers for interment. This simply did not happen under Rome. ...However it seems that in this case it wouldn't make a good story so."
What did you mean?

The acceptance of religion beliefs did not run to criminals who, by their action forfeited their rights as citizens of Rome
What does that mean? Hopefully, it doesn't mean you get to write the story.
Let's see the Roman documents that tell your story.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
You said that, after you said this... "He was crucified and supposed given to family/followers for interment. This simply did not happen under Rome. ...However it seems that in this case it wouldn't make a good story so."
What did you mean?


What does that mean? Hopefully, it doesn't mean you get to write the story.
Let's see the Roman documents that tell your story.


The body was left to rot, but that would not make a good story. So there are various options. The guards were sleeping and his body (still living) was stolen, this is doubtful, the punishment fir dereliction of duty was death. Or the guards were bribed, again doubtful for the same reason. The governor actually did bend roman law and jesus was released before death (which is what i assumed). Or it didn't happen, he died, and remained as an example. In which case the story of ressurection is just that, a story.

The history of Rome is easily available online. My work on this has happened over 30 years. I just don't remember which books I've read there are a few. SPQR a history of rome by mary eard. Pax Romana by Adrian Goldsworthy. The storm before the storm by mike Duncan.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
The body was left to rot, but that would not make a good story. So there are various options. The guards were sleeping and his body (still living) was stolen, this is doubtful, the punishment fir dereliction of duty was death. Or the guards were bribed, again doubtful for the same reason. The governor actually did bend roman law and jesus was released before death (which is what i assumed). Or it didn't happen, he died, and remained as an example. In which case the story of ressurection is just that, a story.

The history of Rome is easily available online. My work on this has happened over 30 years. I just don't remember which books I've read there are a few. SPQR a history of rome by mary eard. Pax Romana by Adrian Goldsworthy. The storm before the storm by mike Duncan.
Your claim that the story was made up, is not based on Roman documents.
If they are based on your views, that's fine.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Your claim that the story was made up, is not based on Roman documents.
If they are based on your views, that's fine.

Did you a actually read the OP, my view based on reading roman history. And yes its as fine as your views on Jesus
 
Top