Joe Atwill, Acharya S., and the Gospel Tapestry

[Demosophist]

The link below is to a dialogue between Joe Atwill, who is off camera, and Acharya S. (aka D.M. Murdock) who does most of the talking. It's perhaps noteworthy that she is not an atheist, nor am I. Since her conjecture is a bit difficult to follow for those unfamiliar with the history of this research I've transcribed the important bits below. But all of this suggests that there is a much more substantial thread that needs to be followed than what Atwill presents in his books (Caesar's Messiah, and Shakepeare's Secret Messiah). Though his research is essentially accurate and textually astute, many would probably object to his claim that Shakespeare was a Jewish woman, which somehow seems even more outrageous than the notion that Jesus Christ was an exercise in population control.

Acharya passed away 8 years ago on Christmas Day, which clearly suggests that we might be living in something like a simulation. It's sad that after all her work she was denied the ability to connect with the strain of scholarship that begins with Velikovsky, due to efforts of Mr. Billions and Billions. Her conjectures fit the EU Theory like a hand in glove.

Acharya: The Flavian Christians, that you're talking about, may not have even been aware of this Jewish guy who supposedly was named Jesus Christ. They would have been focused on the imperial Christ that you're…
Joe: Absolutely.
Acharya: They wouldn't even have known...
Joe: Of course, I mean the... the...
Acharya: So the Judaizing effort doesn't come in until the second century, which is what I'm saying...
Joe: Right. And that's what's so interesting, is that the Catholic church then claims them as saints. [He's talking about those sainted by the Imperial cult, almost all of whom were members of the Flavian family...Nereus and Achilleus who were chamberlains of Flavia Domitilla, a niece of the "second son" of Vespasian, Domitian.]
Acharya: Why did the Catholic church go for... Why did they claim them [the Imperial Cult saints]? ... Because that's as early as they can get with Christianity, huh?
Joe: I guess... yeah... I mean... and they were big time saints, like Nereus and Achilleus, where they had the diocese... first diocese churches.[Too much overtalking to be sure of what he says here, but this is mostly accurate.]
Acharya: So, their Christ would be Titus... or some hybrid historical or quasi-historical figure... Their Christ would be that, and then you don't find the judaizing effort until later in the second century.
Joe: That's kind of... I think that's very logical.
Acharya: Well, I absolutely agree that it was not Judaized until after Marcion. So... So the Roman... Roman Christi... early Roman Christianity... if the first century... would be focused on this Titus figure. Okay? So what we, what you would seem to have then is in Antioch, for example..., Syria, you have some kind of gnosticizing effort going on with their salvation/cultist figure. You have the Samaritans with their Joshua figure. You have the Egyptians, with... uhh... their various god figures including Serapis, of course. You have Greeks, are... attaching themselves to Serapis at that point. Ah, let's see... you would have... Oh, Marcion is part of... that's later on... he's part of the Syrian effort. But in Rome you have this Imperial cult... with the messianic figure as Titus. Ahh... that actually makes a bit of sense, because then all of those other efforts--the Egyptian, the Syrian, the Judean... the Judean Messiah is the one we're still kind of missing. It's still to be fulfilled in there. But the Samaritans have their salvation cult... the Joshua cult is going on... and I think that's reflected in the Dead Sea Scrolls as well. And so you have those factions going on, and they're all streaming together into the second century... bringing it over... really, kind of towards Alexandria. So then, at that point the one that has the most amount of historicity would be the Titus figure, right? So... you would have these gnostic salvation cults..., all these different streams... but the only one with any... the only one that could be place in history would be the one with this typology... this Titus typology. And so then, at that point that figure takes on the Egyptian parallels, and the Krishna parallels, and then becomes Judaized. That's what it looks like to me. So that by the end of the second century... poof! We have Jesus Christ!
Joe: That is an amazing statement. And I mean I'm in awe. You're the only person in the world that could have done that.
[Much laughing and seasonal joviality.]

Jesus as a Political Ploy