1 2 > 
 
   
 

Expanding the Scripture Project

 
Anti-Pope
 
Avatar
 
 
Anti-Pope
Total Posts:  11
Joined  29-03-2014
 
 
 
29 March 2014 13:56
 

This is Charles N. Pope from www. DomainOfMan.com.  My web site is featured on one of the Scripture Project pages:

http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/Sumerian_Clay_Tablets:_Origins_of_BibleBook_of_Mormon_Quran/

My current web host is not able to maintain my site for much longer.  If there is sufficient interest, I would like to explore bringing the site under the Project Reason umbrella.

The scope of my work has also become far bigger than I can personally sustain.  So, I want to reach out to an organization that has the intellectual capacity to understand it and the determination to carry it forward to the next level.  Although I am not an Atheist per se, my work was pursued in the spirit of independent and honest inquiry.

Regards,
Chuck (the) Pope

P.S.  For those unfamiliar with my work, here is a recent study that was timed to coincide with the sequel to the movie ‘300’:

King Xerxes Versus Leonidas, Reloaded
http://www.domainofman.com/boards/index.php?topic=120.0

[ Edited: 01 April 2014 12:46 by Anti-Pope]
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6362
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
29 March 2014 14:27
 

You are welcome to start a thread or two and see if you can generate some discussion among our 20 to 30 daily patrons.

Actual PR Foundation people do not visit the forum and must be addressed directly via “Contact”.

 
 
Anti-Pope
 
Avatar
 
 
Anti-Pope
Total Posts:  11
Joined  29-03-2014
 
 
 
29 March 2014 16:46
 

I expect my work will be controversial even among the regulars here.  It rains on everybody’s parade.  But yours is the only organization I have found that specializes in that!  Actually, I have been called an Atheist.  However, since abandoning religious beliefs I’ve been extremely reluctant to affiliate with any groups at all.  That has been necessary for the basic research, but it’s probably the right time to unite with those who are similarly disgusted with the status quo and bold enough to act.  If the members feel strongly enough, then I’m sure it will be brought to the attention of leadership.

The premise of my theory is that the ancient royal family put themselves forward as the heads of all major religious and ethnic groups, including and especially Jewish, and were lionized in ethnic histories by provincial epithets (rather than formal royal names).  All of the famous characters of the Bible can be associated with recognizable figures from ancient and Classical history.  The Bible is actually royal (propagandistic) history packaged as folk stories and steeped with sanitized pagan mythology for popular consumption.  Modern critical analysis has failed to detect this, because of the powerful taboo against challenging authority.  This taboo in practice clouds even our view of ancient authority, which was a tightly-coupled royal network that exercised full-spectrum dominance over all significant elements of culture.

Here is another excerpt relating to the time of Xerxes and the proto-Atheist movement of contemporary Athens:

http://www.domainofman.com/forum/index.cgi?read=12561

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17630
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
29 March 2014 17:53
 

Oh boy, another Caesar’s Messiah conspiracy theory.

 
 
Anti-Pope
 
Avatar
 
 
Anti-Pope
Total Posts:  11
Joined  29-03-2014
 
 
 
29 March 2014 18:50
 

I am only contacting Project Reason, because it has made an endorsement of my site.


An objective, intelligent person should be able to recognize that the royal family operated the biggest scam of all time.  To investigate how and why they were able to pull it off (so well and for so long) can’t properly be called conspiracy theory development.  The royal family was fully institutionalized.  Their existence in a time before “separation between Church and State” is an undeniable fact.  However, modern scholarship has refused to gain more than a superficial understanding of their inner workings.  The reasons for this failure are mainly social and psychological, not scientific.

I do accept some of the arguments made in Caesar’s Messiah.  I was even crazy enough to spend a week with the author in Santa Barbara.  Unfortunately (or fortunately as it may be), Joe Atwill was extremely inflexible, so we weren’t able to maintain a collaboration to refine or expand his thesis.  Atwill’s thesis is very narrow, whereas my model is extremely broad in application and shows how each successive generation of royal history built upon the previous ones.

Again, if there is no interest in fully endorsing a well-reasoned, highly-predictive model of the ancient royal family that explains our major religions, then I’m not here to sell you on it.

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17630
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
29 March 2014 21:16
 

I bet that was fun! Did Acharya S join you? Did you get drunk and hook up? Ménage à trois?

 
 
Anti-Pope
 
Avatar
 
 
Anti-Pope
Total Posts:  11
Joined  29-03-2014
 
 
 
29 March 2014 22:45
 

No more awkward than this encounter. 

Nhoj, you tried to warn me!

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17630
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
30 March 2014 01:42
 
Anti-Pope - 29 March 2014 08:45 PM

No more awkward than this encounter. 

Nhoj, you tried to warn me!

I guess I’m not objective, intelligent or interested in fully endorsing a well-reasoned, highly-predictive model of the ancient royal family that explains our major religions. And I’m broke, I’ve been here 6 years now and spent all my money 100’s of secret origins of religions ago.

 
 
Anti-Pope
 
Avatar
 
 
Anti-Pope
Total Posts:  11
Joined  29-03-2014
 
 
 
30 March 2014 02:24
 

I’ve been studying the Bible and ancient history for over 40 years, hosted an Internet web site since the 90’s, dealt with all manner of trolls on the forum there, all while raising a kid and sustaining a professional engineering career!  Sorry, no sympathy from me.  Can I suggest just being glad that someone did not think the problem of reconciling history and religion was impossible and just went ahead and solved it.  But I’m not planning to go it alone much further.  I’ve done enough for the cause.

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17630
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
30 March 2014 03:33
 
Anti-Pope - 30 March 2014 12:24 AM

I’ve been studying the Bible and ancient history for over 40 years, hosted an Internet web site since the 90’s, dealt with all manner of trolls on the forum there, all while raising a kid and sustaining a professional engineering career!  Sorry, no sympathy from me.  Can I suggest just being glad that someone did not think the problem of reconciling history and religion was impossible and just went ahead and solved it.  But I’m not planning to go it alone much further.  I’ve done enough for the cause.

Damn! That makes the Jews 40 years in the desert look easy. But hey I hear you, I’m an atheist and engineer raising 3 kids all while being a troll on the internet.

 
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6362
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
30 March 2014 07:43
 

You are not the first to arrive at this forum heralding the Atwill angle. Previous posters had presented it very aggressively.

Most of us have said our piece on the issue and moved on. Atwill’s utoob appearances sank his credibility.
If you have a different take on it then let’s hear it. Be prepared for an uphill climb.
Previous posters failed to carefully read and grasp the objections raised by our patrons and things got ugly.

Proceed with care but please do.

 
 
saralynn
 
Avatar
 
 
saralynn
Total Posts:  9287
Joined  29-01-2010
 
 
 
30 March 2014 11:26
 

An irrelevant aside….I’ve noticed a lot of atheists here are engineers.

Hmmmm…...

 
Anti-Pope
 
Avatar
 
 
Anti-Pope
Total Posts:  11
Joined  29-03-2014
 
 
 
30 March 2014 12:04
 

If everyone here is too jaded to even consider another idea, then I certainly understand.  I haven’t left many stones unturned either and have nearly given up many times, including now!

I’m not one of those people that plays the “I’ve got a little secret (now buy my new book)” game.  I have financed the entire endeavor myself.  Everything I’ve written has been freely posted.  But, it is past time for some organization somewhere to say, “this is the best model available, let’s work with it and bring in the necessary talent and credentials to make it something we can rally around.”  If not you, then who?

The origins of our religions are not secret.  The royal family was far too proud of themselves to hide their involvement.  They were also obsessed with being worshipped, either directly or indirectly through cults such as Christianity.  If you look at the post on Xerxes, it should be obvious that he was a “type of Christ,” in other words aspects of his kingly career were deliberately used to fashion Jesus of the Gospels.  The same can be said of both Alexander and Caesar, and even more so.  Their “parallel lives” were also mined for source material.  The Gospel writers knew far too much and it betrays their identities as court historians/propagandists.  The Gospels were written in such a way that a person of aristocratic status would immediately know the actual identities and relationships, however to those outside the royal sphere it would remain a complete “mystery.”  We all have a “god’s eye” view of history now, but we refuse to take off the blinders.  The royal family tricked the world into worshipping one of their own.  Isn’t that something that should now finally be recognized, or are we still too afraid of our masters?  Is anybody going to stand with me against this kind of ignorance, or just leave me hanging out to dry?

 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6362
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
30 March 2014 12:52
 

I fear no masters but I fear your premise is unconvincing. Your case may describe the course of the Gospels, but is not a convincing case for the source of the Gospels. In Atwill’s case, there seemed to be a strong intention to find a reason that all Gospel story elements should just go away. Previous advocates insisted our resistance to this theory was because Jesus is still our Lord and Savior or we’re skeerd of challenging conventional views. We’re not and he isn’t (for most of us).

You can find some fairly recent Atwill related threads in the Christianity sub-forum.

 
 
Dennis Campbell
 
Avatar
 
 
Dennis Campbell
Total Posts:  19830
Joined  20-07-2007
 
 
 
30 March 2014 14:14
 
Nhoj Morley - 30 March 2014 10:52 AM

I fear no masters but I fear your premise is unconvincing. Your case may describe the course of the Gospels, but is not a convincing case for the source of the Gospels. In Atwill’s case, there seemed to be a strong intention to find a reason that all Gospel story elements should just go away. Previous advocates insisted our resistance to this theory was because Jesus is still our Lord and Savior or we’re skeerd of challenging conventional views. We’re not and he isn’t (for most of us).

You can find some fairly recent Atwill related threads in the Christianity sub-forum.

Question is he here to really explore and discuss, in which case he needs to research what has been discussed here, or is he only interested in advancing his own opinion? I suspect the later.

 
 
Anti-Pope
 
Avatar
 
 
Anti-Pope
Total Posts:  11
Joined  29-03-2014
 
 
 
30 March 2014 15:02
 

Engineers generally have to live in the real world.  Even scientists can get away with a certain amount of hand waving, but the job of an engineer is to actually reduce something to practice, i.e., a workable, serviceable system.  That said, I don’t claim that being an engineer necessarily made me successful in building a model of the ancient world, but it didn’t hurt either.

My premise is that the royal family was THE source of everything culturally significant in the ancient world, and if not, they certainly took all the credit.  I didn’t just jump into the Julio-Claudian Era and conclude that the power elites invented Christianity.  That is essentially what Atwill did, and with very mixed results.  Despite his faults, I still give him credit for making a contribution to the field.  My approach was to trace the operations of the royal family over centuries and even millennia.  Their system of domination was rule-based.  Although there was rivalry between the candidates for succession, it rarely escalated to the point of actual war.  The battles of Marathon, Thermopylae and Salamis were all contrived. The vast majority of military conflicts were such grand staged affairs as these.  The outcomes were pre-determined (or a “zero-sum game” at a minimum) and based on the evolving royal pecking order, which itself derived from success in producing royal heirs.  The royal women played as big a part (if not bigger) than the men.

When it comes to religion, we need only to “follow the money.”  Judaism was the greatest money maker of them all, and therefore the most tightly controlled by the royal family.  When Judaism became too obstinate, royal prerogative was to architect a more compliant religion, Christianity.  Not everyone in the royal family agreed that Christianity was the best solution to their “Jewish Problem.”  Ultimately, it is no contest that Christianity served the royal family extremely well, perhaps better than any religion ever had.  It was however not the grass-roots movement it seems to be.  There was no such thing in the ancient world, and especially in the Roman world.  The fingerprints of the royal family are all over it.  Jesus of the Gospels was not purely a fictional or mythological character, but based upon a flesh and blood man of the purple.  His Herodian name was Aristobulus.  His Roman epithet was Torquatus, which was the noblest (most Alexander-esque) name a Roman aristocrat could possess.  And he was the progenitor of the so-called “Good Emperors” of the 2nd Century.  Christianity was in effect his mortuary cult.  He did not literally die in Jerusalem any more than Leonidas died at Thermopylae, Alexander at Babylon, Caesar in Rome, or Muhammad from his poisoning.  They all went on to greater kingly glory.  It was a stock model.  They were all fulfilling a role that justified their glorification by history - the history specifically written for their glorification.  Every aristocrat knew that.  They accepted it, but we cannot.

P.S.  I have detailed analysis of Caesar’s Messiah on my own web site forum, much more detailed than is found here.  I even reposted some of the analysis that was originally posted by me on the CM forum, but was removed by Atwill.

[ Edited: 30 March 2014 15:06 by Anti-Pope]
 
 1 2 >