2025/08/28

Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity eBook : Valliant, James S., Fahy, C. W.: Amazon.com.au: Kindle Store

Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity eBook : Valliant, James S., Fahy, C. W.: Amazon.com.au: Kindle Store

Kindle$8.16Available instantly
 Audiobook
1 CreditAvailable instantly

Hardcover
$54.17

Paperback
$26.31




Read sample


Preview

Follow the authors

Warren FahyWarren Fahy
Follow

James S. ValliantJames S. Valliant
Follow




Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity Kindle Edition
by James S. Valliant (Author), C. W. Fahy (Author) Format: Kindle Edition


4.5 4.5 out of 5 stars (482)







See all formats and editions



Exhaustively annotated and illustrated, this explosive work of history unearths clues that finally demonstrate the truth about one of the world’s great religions: that it was born out of the conflict between the Romans and messianic Jews who fought a bitter war with each other during the 1st Century. The Romans employed a tactic they routinely used to conquer and absorb other nations: they grafted their imperial rule onto the religion of the conquered. After 30 years of research, authors James S. Valliant and C.W. Fahy present irrefutable archaeological and textual evidence that proves Christianity was created by Roman Caesars in this book that breaks new ground in Christian scholarship and is destined to change the way the world looks at ancient religions forever.

Inherited from a long-past era of tyranny, war and deliberate religious fraud, could Christianity have been created for an entirely different purpose than we have been lead to believe? Praised by scholars like Dead Sea Scrolls translator Robert Eisenman (James the Brother of Jesus), this exhaustive synthesis of historical detective work integrates all of the ancient sources about the earliest Christians and reveals new archaeological evidence for the first time. And, despite the fable presented in current bestsellers like Bill O’Reilly’s Killing Jesus, the evidence presented in Creating Christ is irrefutable: Christianity was invented by Roman Emperors.

*****

”I have rarely encountered a book so original, exciting, accessible and informed on subjects that are of obvious importance to the world and to which I have myself devoted such a large part of my scholarly career studying. In this book they have rendered a startling new understanding of Christianity with a controversial theory of its Roman provenance that is accessible to the layman in a very powerful way. In the process, they present new and comprehensive archeological and iconographic evidence, as well as utilizing the widest and most cutting edge work of other recent scholars, including myself. This is a work of outstanding and original scholarship. Its arguments are a brilliant, profound and thorough integration of the relevant evidence. When they are done, the conclusion is inescapable and obviously profound.”

– Prof. Robert Eisenman,
Author of James the Brother of Jesus and The New Testament Code

“Powerful... well-argued... I think it’s great and I heartily recommend it. You’re in for a big surprise if you read this. It’s great stuff!”

– Robert M. Price, author of The Colossal Apostle

"A fascinating and provocative investigative history of ideas, boldly exploring a problem that previous scholarship has not clearly or credibly addressed: how (and why!) the Flavian dynasty wove Christianity into the very fabric of Western civilization."

– Mark Riebling, author of Church of Spies: The Pope's Secret War Against Hitler
Read less



Print length

428 pages
===
Product description
Review
"I have rarely encountered a book so original, exciting, accessible and informed on subjects that are of obvious importance to the world and to which I have myself devoted such a large part of my scholarly career studying. In this book they have rendered a startling new understanding of Christianity with a controversial theory of its Roman provenance that is accessible to the layman in a very powerful way. In the process, they present new and comprehensive archeological and iconographic evidence, as well as utilizing the widest and most cutting edge work of other recent scholars, including myself. This is a work of outstanding and original scholarship. Its arguments are a brilliant, profound and thorough integration of the relevant evidence. When they are done, the conclusion is inescapable and obviously profound."
--Prof. Robert Eisenman, Author of James the Brother of Jesus and The New Testament Code

"A fascinating and provocative investigative history of ideas, boldly exploring a problem that previous scholarship has not clearly or credibly addressed: how (and why!) the Flavian dynasty wove Christianity into the very fabric of Western civilization."
--Mark Riebling, author of Church of Spies: The Pope's Secret War Against Hitler

"Valliant and Fahy have given us a rare and valuable gift worthy of the Magi: A readable, balanced, and scholarly text on one of the most controversial topics in history. What makes this work approachable are its clearly wrought style and beautifully organized sections. What makes it invaluable for anyone (scholar or amateur) with an interest in Christianity (be it religiously inspired or not) is that it provides the reader with research that is too compelling to dismiss."
--Eric Hill, University Honors College Senior Instructor, Rhetoric (Semiotics, Epistemology, Abrahamic Religions, and Translations), Oregon State University

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B01LRP3EDG
Publisher ‏ : ‎ Crossroad Press
Accessibility ‏ : ‎ Learn more
Publication date ‏ : ‎ 7 September 2016
Edition ‏ : ‎ 1st
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 5.9 MB
Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled 
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled 
Print length ‏ : ‎ 428 pages 
=====
From Australia

bluevapo
5.0 out of 5 stars excellent, but controversial
Reviewed in Australia on 14 June 2024
Verified Purchase
Very dense, very detailed; but the conclusion of the book is inescapable: that most of the New Testament wasn't written by who we think it was, and the most important parts were written by the Roman conquerors' in-house historian, whose chief aim was to justify Vespasian's and then Titus' claim that they were the promised Messiah who brought peace and plenty under a benign Roman umbrella. This, mind you, after the brutal destruction of the Jewish world after the revolt of 65 A.D.
Helpful
Report

Annette Williams
5.0 out of 5 stars History Departments Taking Over From New Testament Departments
Reviewed in Australia on 2 January 2025
I am 81 years old, and so glad to have lived long enough to read this book and Caesar's Messiah, and to have heard and seen various scholars outside of New Testament studies affirming the theses presented, albeit with caveats here and there, but all implying that these studies are all heading in a new and fruitful direction.
--

S.D.E.
4.0 out of 5 stars 
Teoria interessante
Reviewed in Italy on 1 February 2019
Verified Purchase
An interesting, if often repetitive, reading about the almost artificial creation of the Christian movement by the Roman Empire. Citing historical facts, drawing heavily from the works of St. Paul and Flavius ​​Josephus, and quoting books by historians and theologians, the two authors demonstrate a Roman origin for the Gospels and the religion inspired by the figure of Jesus. Without confirming or denying the historicity of his figure, they explain the similarities between Jesus' life and that of the emperors of the Flavian dynasty and their historian, a Romanized Jew, Flavius ​​Josephus. The writings of St. Paul, the difficult relationship with St. Peter and Joseph the Just, and the progressive separation of the pacifist Christian cult from the more warmongering ones, are responsible for the friction with the Romans. The thesis is that Vespasian and Titus, to convince Jews to join the multicultural Roman Empire, developed a new cult that abolished the restrictions of the Jewish religion and professed love and peace towards the "gentiles." Despite the many repetitions of concepts, data, and citations, the thesis is interesting and credible. According to the authors, it resolves the many inconsistencies in the Gospels and explains their tolerance of non-Jews and the Roman Empire. Not being an expert on the subject, I can't say whether they are correct or not, but the thesis is compelling and credible. Further reading is urgently needed.
Report
Translate review to English

Timothy Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars Good News of Unification
Reviewed in Canada on 13 November 2016
Verified Purchase
The book is better than I hoped for. There are many books available on New Testament scholarship and they all have their own unique trajectory. This book is signaling a converging of modern thought about New testament authorship that is so welcome. The New Testament has enjoyed a millennium or more of political primacy. In this day and age Christianity is too foolish of a guide to lead us to a more sustainable future. For example Christianity is hugely responsible for unchecked world population growth. Christian ideology may even be at the root of a lot of our widespread schizophrenic reasoning. If we can leave these supernatural delusions behind it will free us up to tackle global warming and family planning. As for the other faiths and the other ideas about higher powers and so forth; at least this will be a good example for them to witness. Humanism will have to fill the huge void that the disappearance of Christianity will leave. It was a long time ago when Christianity filled the huge void left by the disappearance of Paganism. If Humanism had displaced Paganism, instead, we may have been on a more sustainable path millenniums ago.
4 people found this helpful
Report

Theresa
5.0 out of 5 stars Pieces of the mosaic continued to fall into place with the turning of each page
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 9 October 2021
Verified Purchase
As someone who enjoys studying anthropology and understanding the many different aspects of the human experience and having been raised in Catholic Ireland, I have long since questioned why and how people, rarely, if ever, openly question the contradictions found in the bible and why there has been such a widespread willingness to accept it as literally 'gospel' down through the centuries.
I found Creating Christ to be a truly compelling read for two reasons: 1) The methodical and scientific way in which it examines the origins of Christianity by taking the evidence presented at face value and forensically questioning it, leading to an undeniable conclusion and 2) it allowed me to examine a thought process I have long since pondered, is there a difference between what actually makes us human versus what we are told makes us human and what has the messaging associated with the latter done to the human psyche and how many millions of people have been tormented by it and in the name of it.
Creating Christ is one of those books that I know I will return to time and time again and no matter what your views on Christianity or faith are, is a must read.
5 people found this helpful
Report

B.Chayes
5.0 out of 5 stars a fascinating theory and an important book
Reviewed in the United States on 24 September 2017

Creating Christ is a book that is easy to underestimate. That may well be out of an instinctive kind of jealousy, as well: who wouldn’t have wanted to come up with a revolutionary theory about the single philosophy and institution that has shaped the world more than any other over the past 2,000 years? God knows I would have! But another, more benevolent, reason is that when we are used to reading nothing but the most reserved and nuanced explanations for a phenomenon, it becomes second nature to be suspicious of any interpretation which offers a simpler and leaner understanding of something that we have come to regard as mystically complex.
Now my personal acquaintance with ‘the Church of Rome’ was quite limited for a long time. Luckily, my mother did give me a bit of background on her side of the family, and one of the highlights of the family lore was her reference to her grandfather as a ‘Papist-eraser’. Growing up in a country with a dominantly Puritan culture, I can’t say that this view of the Church was ever seriously challenged. The slavishness towards authority made any follower of the edicts of Rome an easy target for ridicule. Now I did learn more about the Roman Catholic Church at a more factual level over the years, but it took quite a few years before my insight was brought to a qualitatively different level. It was an Italian friend of mine who rather matter-of-factly pointed out to me that the Church (as, indeed there is no pretender to that title) is the oldest institution in the history of mankind.
In a nutshell, the theory that Creating Christ develops is the idea that, beyond and underneath that incredibly rich and powerful institution in Vatican City, it was Christianity itself which was the product of the most powerful institution of the era in which it came into being, the Roman Empire. So, for all ideological suggestions to the contrary, which present Christianity as the hope for the powerless, the poor, and the immaterialist, the authors present the theory that Jesus Christ was an invention intended to consolidate the power of the Flavian emperors. I believe their theory, in essence, is inescapable, and whatever my ideas and suggestions are, I believe they would make their case stronger, and certainly not weaker.
The authors’ case is substantiated by archaeological/iconographic, textual, and circumstantial evidence. Prominent in the latter category is the considerable number of interpersonal connections between the Imperial household of Titus and ‘alternatively Jewish’ personae, of whom Flavius Josephus is the most widely known. Flavius Josephus was the Jewish leader who changed sides during the 1st Jewish-Roman war. The authors carefully explain how Josephus’ justification for doing so – he was a prolific writer and documented both his personal history and that of the Jewish people – basically amounted to the co-optation of the Messianic Jewish ideologies which were in fashion in those days, for purposes which were in line with those of emperors Vespasian and Titus. Forgive me if I’d like to avoid giving away more than the nutshell of a book I really think you should read for yourselves, which forces me to be compact in my critique as well.
The authors identify the Roman-friendly versions of Messianic Judaism that we have come to know as Christianity as the result of syncretism. Sun-gods, semi-gods, healing gods and the single God of Judaism all conspired to create a new religious brew. In itself this was not a unique event, but where I believe the case of the writers would gain consistency is if they were to emphasize, over the longer term, how this syncretism remained a winning recipe during the geographical expansion of Christianity throughout Europe, and elsewhere. Now they may protest that this would carry them well beyond the scope of their area of study, but this is exactly where I think they could make a more precisely circumscribed argument. Even if their central idea – that Christianity was an invention by the Flavian Emperors to support their worldly power – is perfectly accurate, it is helpful and enlightening to distinguish that particular photograph of ‘Christianity’ from what we perceive as such (being the result of historical developments), as well as from what the Messianic Jews themselves sought in ‘Christ’. Khristos, ‘the anointed’ – as we have learned from the Dead Seas scrolls – was a non-exclusive concept, like a vacant title up for grabs for anyone who was able to make a strong enough case. If we lose sight of the enormous gap that divides this ‘year zero minus 1’ from ‘year zero plus 1’ (or ‘plus 2,000, give or take’), it may give the impression that even the authors’ revolutionarily new theory substantially argues that somewhere in between, on C-day, what we know now as Christianity was pointedly created. It is easy for retrospect to turn into determinism.
The final point of criticism I’d like to leave here, is the limited attention Julius Caesar and emperor Augustus get as a mold for ‘the Father and the Son’. The authors describe the creation of Christianity as the adoption and transformation of a powerful ideology by the Flavian emperors, in order to subjugate the rebellious territory that was inspired by it, giving it the spiritual fuel to resist Pax Romana. There was a substantive internal motive, however, which was pushing for the development of a different type of ideology. The cursed kings had just made their creepy way back to Rome. The whole concept of empire was intended to get around the taboo of the aborted republic. The point is, the Roman leadership, still very much an upstart entity, was logically looking for alternative foundations for their power. Instinctively, they would always have looked eastwards, but as unattractive as Persian despotism may have seemed in its descriptions by Greek writers, and as mixed a symbol as Egyptian pharaonic power still was, even after the flirting of both Marcus Antonius and Caesar with Cleopatra, it was, perhaps, not strange per se they would have shopped for more spiritual gadgets in Judea. What is for sure is that no one could foresee then what stellar career this particular Khristos would have, both over the course of the following 2 millennia and retroactively. For me, Creating Christ has not only re-arranged – or let’s simply say: ordered – a vital passage in the history of religion, but it has also left me with a number of pertinent questions that are worth examining. The most prominent in my mind is whether the historical misinterpretation of the Flavian apocalypse – leading Christians as we know them to keep waiting for, i.e. postponing, the end of times – actually led the way, by default, for a linear conception of time which was resilient enough to dominate the cyclical idea which was closer to the experience of natural phenomena. And as such, it may even suggest that the super-natural was an – at least historically – necessary step for man to emancipate from nature.
55 people found this helpful
Report

Maureen
5.0 out of 5 stars How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity is a fantastic book by James Valliant & C
Reviewed in Canada on 24 January 2017
Verified Purchase
Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity is a fantastic book by James Valliant & C.W Fahy. These authors present a gold mine of historical evidence to support their claims that the Christian religion was invented by Roman Emperors to infiltrate & convert messianic Jews to the subjection of the Roman Empire and against the orthodox Jewish religion at that time.
2 people found this helpful
Report

PP
5.0 out of 5 stars A compelling case
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 19 February 2021
Verified Purchase
A thorough, compelling, and detailed case is made on the basis of undeniable evidence from a large variety of sources and disciplines. Quite suddenly, all the inconsistencies and puzzles which Christian theologians have struggled with, and in response to which they have constructed and argued over myriad unconvincing theories for centuries, just fall away. All were looking for the clues in the wrong direction, shaped by an inherited faith rather than following the evidence, even that of the NT itself. The collapse of the faith as factual allows the underlying values to be re-evaluated, and perhaps the world to move on to something more humanly positive and life-affirming. This book and the huge effort over thirty years that is behind it, without the support of academe, is a service to humanity. It takes up the challenge laid down in the early 1980s by Cupitt and co in The Myth of God Incarnate and drives the case home once and for all.
6 people found this helpful
Report

Dwayne Davies
5.0 out of 5 stars It is one of those great, invocative titles that tells you exactly what you ...
Reviewed in the United States on 9 February 2017
Verified Purchase
This is the work of over thirty years of research and is one of the most interesting and important books which I have ever read. Let me show you why.

First of all, let me start with the title. It is one of those great, invocative titles that tells you exactly what you are going to get. It is one of those rare instances of a very simple but gripping title. It is hard to imagine that any other title would have sufficed for this book.

The thesis of the book is extremely interesting and one with many important implications (more on this soon). It is extremely well presented and the copious evidence provided should leave the reader with no doubt that the Romans did indeed create Christ.

The authors present much evidence, in many forms. All of which on its own is very interesting and convincing and which collectively makes for an argument so powerfully convincing that the conclusion the authors reach is very easy to grasp and readily agree with. The reader is left with the unavoidable conclusion that it would be surprising if the thesis of the book was *NOT* correct and that Christ is not the result of Roman propaganda.

Many may find the thesis somewhat controversial. I suspect that many of those will not think so by the time that they finish the book. The book addresses many of the objections such people may have, certainly all of the important objections I could imagine them having.

The book itself is also very interesting. One might expect that a book of this sort may be a dry and difficult read, however, I am sure that very few readers would find this book to be so. It presents the material in a very compelling manner and is one of the most interesting books of its type which I have ever read.

It is also very accessible. I was somewhat familiar with some of the history when I read this book, however such background knowledge is hardly required. The authors clearly present whatever information is required to understand the evidence presented. The reader should not require much, if any, existing knowledge of Roman or Christian history in order to be convinced by this highly accessible book.

Whereas, the expert scholar in the field may well find that the authors present material they are familiar with in a very new and compelling light. There is much for expert scholars to digest and I expect that it will cause at least some of them to greatly challenge what they think they know about the history of Christianity.

I highly recommend this to anyone interested in history. But, recommending it purely on the basis of historical interest is not to do it full justice. Obviously, I would recommend this to anyone wishing to understand the history and nature of Christianity. More importantly, I would suggest this to any person wishing to understand the history and possible future of Western civilization.

Please read this book. Even if you are somewhat sceptical, you should read this book. I think that you will end up agreeing with the authors and find it very interesting. Even if you do not agree, I think you will find it interesting and it may give you a lot to think about.

One might ask, what difference it makes what the exact origins of Christianity are and whether it was originally created by the Romans. There are a number of reasons why this is actually an important issue.

Christianity is a religion with a monstrous moral code which led to the brutal domination of much of the Known World for hundreds of years. After finally somewhat escaping the chains of Christian morality, the West is starting to be once more bound by those same chains.

The fact that Christianity was created by the Romans has important implications. It helps to powerfully demonstrate the great power and importance of morality. According to the thesis of this book, the Romans were struggling to win a war against violent fanatical enemies, a war which they felt no guarantee of winning, at least without the loss of countless lives.

Within a relatively short time, they were able to use the moral propaganda of Christianity to help pacify their enemies. If that does not show the power of morality, then I am not too sure what does.

We should also note that this shows us that moral propaganda can be extremely powerful, with very long-lasting and devastating effects. The Romans had no idea that their actions would cause the rise of a religion which would come to rule and suppress much of the world, but this is exactly what happened.

The success of this Roman propaganda should serve as a warning of the extreme danger not just of religion, but the danger of allowing any mix of religion and the State.

There are other implications of this book which I have not touched on, but I hope you have grasped a little of the importance of this book. Not just in regards to Christianity but the past and future of Western civilization. I can say without any fear of hyperbole, that this book helps explain a major turning point in the history of Western civilization. And that it may help grasp the dangers that all religions, not just Christianity, present to the future of civilization.

If that is not a sufficiently good reason to read this book, then I am not sure what might be …
54 people found this helpful
Report

ralphy
4.0 out of 5 stars Good research and cogent arguments....
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 14 February 2019
Verified Purchase
Ralph Ellis proposed much of this more than 20 years ago. Of course the Gospels were inspired by Roman political needs, and written or edited by Jusephus Flavius. It is the only thing that makes sense.

However, Ralph Ellis goes several steps further, saying that the Gospels were a sugar-coated history and version of the Jewish Revolt of AD70, with the biblical Jesus as its leader. And of course Josephus says that the leader of the Jewish Revolt was Jesus — Jesus of Gamala. See Ralph’s revolutionary ‘Gospel of King Jesus Trilogy’, and especially the volume called ‘Jesus, King of Edessa’.

This argument that the Gospels were Roman-inspired is patently true, but the research needs more exposure.

?
4 people found this helpful
Report
====
From other countries

Richard Dagan
4.0 out of 5 stars Well-researched, documented, compelling…
Reviewed in Canada on 9 July 2024
Verified Purchase
This book presents a clearly documented theory that the Roman Flavians created Christ through the writings of Josephus et al., based on Emperor Vespasian, his son Tacitus, and the Flavian dynasty, to quell Jewish violence under Roman rule. The authors have also made a film (“Creating Christ”, 1h49m, 2022; available on Prime), with the following leader: “Did Roman emperors create Christianity. Discovered archeological evidence now links the first Christians with ruling elites of Rome. A conspiracy to end the great conflict between Jews and Rome changed the course of history…”

Authors Valliant and Fahy follow symbols for Apollo in Ancient Greece to Rome and beyond, with evolutions through time, showing early Christian use of these same symbols (anchor and dolphin or fish), noting Christian burials marked with such symbols in Roman catacombs, and shown through Roman coinage stamped on one side with the emperor’s visage and, on the obverse, said symbols. They’ve found this evidence throughout the ancient world, have tracked it in a history much more complex than that of which I’d been aware, and have disproved many of the ideas regarding the treatment of Christians I’d been taught in childhood. The importance of Vespasian (reputed to have restored a man’s sight when the Emperor spit in his own hand and applied it on the man’s lids, just as Jesus was later said to have done) is emphasized, for example, as were other miracles appropriated by and ascribed to Jesus for effect by Josephus and additional writers in the Flavian effort to control Jewish rebellion against the Roman Empire.

The text is extensively footnoted, but, without an index it’s somewhat difficult to refer back to specific portions of the text.
Their work is filled with excerpts from known documents and provides a more complete picture of socio-political ideation and conditions at that time, from classical Greece to Rome, circa 1-100 CE through the time of Constantine (272-337 CE; baptized Christian 337 CE), who shifted the symbol of Christianity from anchor and fish to a cross (Chi Rho > lit., Christ) following a battlefield vision of a cross with the sun above.

Watching the film provided me with a broad overview of the book, an engaging visual synopsis. The book itself is a time-consuming read, I found, because there’s so much material from so many sources that, unless you’re conversant with the history, there’s a great deal to absorb.

See also: A Chronological Revision of the Origins of Christianity. Frans J. Vermieren. 2017.
One person found this helpful
Report

P. Visser
4.0 out of 5 stars Recommended read!
Reviewed in the United States on 3 November 2017
Verified Purchase
A very interesting theory about the origin and rise of Christianity! The book is understandable for non-academics, but it did help me to know a little about Christianity ('thanks' to my upbringing), and the notion of religion as a tool for nation/statecraft with a lot of syncretism involves - 'cultural appropriation' in the old days. (I read Tom Holland's book with a similarly interesting theory about the rise of Islam). The authors have chosen an useful structure for the book, discussing the various lines of (reconsidered) evidence that all point to their main theme: Early Christianity was a product of the Roman state, a piece of cultural/ideological warfare in their battle against the prominent Jewish people in Ancient world that was not too willing to join the 'pluralistic' Roman state. To paraphrase Ayn Rand, the Flavian dynasty was both Atilla and Witchdoctor.

I think this importance (numbers, jobs, spread) could have been described more, because to me 'the Jewish war' does not sound very different from the many other wars the Romans fought, aside from the well known ones like the Punic, Gallic and German wars.

In general the line of argument was not difficult to follow, technical aspects and relationships are explained clearly, but at maybe at times there is too much repetition of previous arguments during later chapters. I understand it helps integrating, but I think I would prefer such an integration at the end of a chapter. The logic and engagement of the authors is clear from reading the book, and it reads a bit like a mystery novel. This works, but also made me pay attention, because it has a bit of Dan Brownian feeling to it, one has to get used to the main claim of the book, even if one is an atheist whom considers ideology including religion a great tool for ruling over people. Aside from the initial conspiracy, it seems to me quite likely that this was never known widely and hence was basically lost throughout the dark ages.

I am not 100% convinced, simply because this is the sole book I read on the topic, and the data-constraints make knowing the full historical reality difficult. However, I do think this book does offer a lot of proof that makes me accept the theory for now, until other scholars address the evidence and conclusions of this book. The recommendation by Eisenman looks interesting in this regard, although I am unfamiliar with his work.
36 people found this helpful
Report

Tom
5.0 out of 5 stars The opposite of a conspiracy theory
Reviewed in Canada on 19 June 2021
Verified Purchase
An excellent, well-argued case for Christianity's true origins. Will we accept the facts at face value, or continue to propagate millenia of lies?
3 people found this helpful
Report

Amazon Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars Enjoyable and eyes-opening
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 16 September 2022
Verified Purchase
Well written, full of informative, well researched facts. A valiant attempt (pun intended) to clarify one of the most important historical events and dispel the myths created around the origin of Christianity.
Report

Amie
5.0 out of 5 stars Very well laid out
Reviewed in the United States on 20 August 2025
Verified Purchase
Lays out the facts! Great book
Report

Marina Landisberg
4.0 out of 5 stars Author had not avoided doing slanders
Reviewed in Canada on 6 July 2017
Verified Purchase
It is correctly revealed in book that xtianity is Roman hoax, manufactured for political reasons, by hellenistic patterns of man-god stories, hero worship.what is offensive, author does share with romans hostility to hebrews, calling them messianic zealots, xenophobic, comparing with islamic invaders. Reality was that "messianic hebrews" were not occupying rome, and stoning nonwilling gentiles for not following kashrut and being uncircumcised, but romans were occupying Judea, legality of their presence was zero, romans provoked rebellion by interfering with how locals worship their God, like demanding statues of emperors to be put in Temple, or banning public teaching of Torah, or banning circumcision, executing many people without any trial. Hebrews were defending their homeland, there was no any "threar to Roman civilization"., judaism is about leaving as separate people by commandments from God in designated area, not about conquering others., proselyting, forcing their religion on other nations. Romans could avoid all the trouble be leaving judea and jerusalem alone and returning to their homeland in italy instead expanding their empire
3 people found this helpful
Report

Amazon Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars How to quickly deconstruct from christianity
Reviewed in the United States on 18 May 2025
Verified Purchase
Great book, A must have for christians, Maybe right after reading the book, they can start their deconstruction from all the years of indoctrination
Customer image
Report

Pedr
5.0 out of 5 stars Tolo Lege
Reviewed in the United States on 19 June 2023
Verified Purchase
Tolle Lege is Latin for the command “take up and read” that St. Augustine heard from a mysterious voice during his conversion to Christianity which he took to mean, pick up the NT and read it.

An excellent book that should be widely read. While the author quotes sources, the author is not a professional academic, but you shouldn't let that put you off. The evidence is not stretched but fairly obvious once you drop the Christian propaganda you've been fed all your life. For example, why is the NT pro-Roman and overtly anti-Semitic? Why does St. Paul in Philippians 4:22 say, 'All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar's household' WTF. Why are people at the top of the Roman Empire saying hi to Christians? Especially so early? Philippians is considered one of Paul's 7 authentic epistles which BTW was written during Nero's reign. All the references are there to refer to. For Roman coins, find a copy of Roman Coins and their values, Vol 1, by David Sear. The edition I have was printed in London in 2000. On pages 464, 466, you can see an example of gold aureus and silver dinarius with the anchor and dolphin symbol on the obverse. I have the book because I collect Roman coins. Of course that doesn't prove anything, but it does show the author is not making up evidence. Read the NT yourself as well as Josephus' The Jewish War and you'll see for yourself the connections the author makes. If you're familiar with the NT, you'll be surprised by the verses that you overlooked. The book will make you look at the NT in a new way. If you find the book troubling or are into this subject, you might want to pick up copies of the books the author quotes and find the references for yourself. Most libraries have copies of the ancient Latin literature like Tacitus, etc or they're relatively cheap to buy. At least before you pooh pooh the book and fall back into the BS you've been fed by the Christian propaganda machine or hear your pastor engage in what about-ism, give the book a chance and check out the evidence for yourself. You don't need to be an expert in the field to understand the point the author is making. It is evidence that demands a verdict.
7 people found this helpful
Report

paul tomlinson
1.0 out of 5 stars ....and if you order in the next 10 minutes, you'll get.........
Reviewed in Canada on 29 August 2024
Verified Purchase
yeah- pretty disappointed; got about 60% of the way through this book and it just doesn't work for me. Firstly, this is not a scholarly work. It tries, but it's not. Feels more like a 1980s late-night infomercial that's trying to convince me to part with my money. The theory is interesting: I want to believe it- but this book is a lot of noise about varying degrees of separation. Yes- there are some interesting coincidences, but mostly it's repetitive. Lots of rhetorical questions and lots of italics. The font and general layout of this book made me think it was self-published. Yeah- disappointed. Would like to read a better book on this same subject. Save your money.
One person found this helpful
Report

Charlottekrn Bookfair
3.0 out of 5 stars Very Interesting!
Reviewed in the United States on 6 September 2020
Verified Purchase
The book, unfairly charged as Christian bashing, points to the origins of Christianity as distinctly Greek-Roman. Though the information is not new, the authors lay out facts with archeological evidence and make use of the New Testament itself, in that the Gospel writers are unknown.
The author’s hypothesis cannot be dismissed as hyperbole for three important facts that become clear with illustration:
1. The archeological evidence of coins, statues, grave markings etc
2. The abject love of the New Testament authors for Rome and their virulent hatred for Jews
3. And, the New Testament was written during Flavian period
Further, the authors clarify that Christianity did Not spring from Judaism and recognized the plagiarism of the Jewish Bible in the New Testament. (Verified: The NT writers not only copied passages of the Jewish Bible into the NT, but changed, deleted or added words to fit the narrative)
After the destruction of the Temple in 70ce, the Flavians determined to redirect Judaism , which was a clear and present danger to Rome, by rewriting the Bible. The New Testament issued a new God and obliviated the commandments. (It just did not work. Judah rose again in 135ce and were then practically obliterated. The only other nation to rise against Rome internally was Sparta and Spartans received the same fate.)
Criticism arises with the authors’ long stretch to attest the bulk of emphasis of the NT onto Josephus, the historian. Even though Josephus “literally lived” under the auspices of the Flavians, and fumed at the rebels he blamed for war with Rome, Josephus never denied Judaism and never turned to Christianity, as is known from his other works.
Secondly, as pagan Rome invaded Judea, and dominated the country for nearly 100 years before the first War with Rome, the Jews fought Rome for their freedom. This hardly made Judeans xenophobic but rather, committed to the One G-d (and the Laws of Kosher or Shabbat) of which pagan Rome had no understanding of. To disregard this and label Jews as intolerant of other beliefs as “polluting” is incorrect.
Moreover, the book lacked clear, definitive distinctions between the differing sects.
James’ sect did Not believe Jesus was a divinity or a god. Therefore, James was not a “Jewish Christian” as the term is an oxymoron.
“Jewish Christian” erroneously implies a Jew who accepted Christ. Christ is the Greek term for messiah, which changed the meaning of messiah to be a god, or a divinity. The Hebrew word messiah simply means anoint.
Further,
The Judean Jews fighting the War with Rome in the 1st and 2nd centuries were all “messianic”, as in hoping for the messiah to deliver the Jewish nation from Rome, though the authors left this particular and important identification unclear in the book.
Pagans and Romans who affiliated with the Jesus message as Christ, were not Jews but were Christians, though grouped as Jews. This blurred message becomes the nutshell of the book.
Jesus was simply not the Jewish messiah, as the authors explain in the book.
Judaism is monotheistic. The Jewish messiah will Not be divine. The Jewish messiah Is Not a god, and will rise from the Jewish nation.
The Jewish Messiah Will Not Replace G-d. The messiah will come when the Jews have prepared the world,
and G-d deigns it the time.
Lastly in contemporary terms:
Those who claim to be “Messianic Jews” are Christian and Not Jews, (which makes the term sneaky).
And:
“Jews for Jesus” are not Jews.” Jews for Jesus” are Christians who are obviously unaware of what accepting Christ means, as the act of accepting Christ makes one a Christian.
In essence, the authors advocate philosophy over religion. Philosophy however, is not inherently moral, and prescribes no moral laws and its concepts are no more immune from evil than “a religion”.
42 people found this helpful
Report
====















Next slide of product details
See all details


====
From other countries

Richard Bellows
4.0 out of 5 stars A very good save at the end
Reviewed in the United States on 9 April 2025
Verified Purchase
I would have loved to give this book the full 5 star rating. The research put into this book is excellent and showing very strong reason. As a comment was made to Occam's razor was made, I have to say through much of this book I got a feeling the author was pushing the crucifixion too really. Since except for the Bible there exists no mention what so ever from all the historians of the era of Christ time period any comment whatsoever of biblical events, I would have to agree more with Joseph Atwill's conclusions. Even though his book is a nightmare to follow, it accounts better for the lack of evidence more clearly.
Report

chris goritz
4.0 out of 5 stars Hard to follow highly detailed
Reviewed in the United States on 3 June 2025
Verified Purchase
Hard to follow. But if it will put priests out of business I'm all for it.
Report

Dr J
3.0 out of 5 stars Interesting, but a somewhat difficult
Reviewed in the United States on 30 July 2025
Verified Purchase
Lots of Roman names repeated many times ad nauseam. Good points were made regarding the origins of Christianity. My main objection is that the author’s points could have been made with a lot fewer words. Instead, he worked hard to sell what he spent years learning.
Report

Matthew Rapaport
4.0 out of 5 stars Interesting hypothesis. A little repetitive, worth a read
Reviewed in the United States on 24 August 2023
Verified Purchase
The thrust of this historical re-telling is that Christianity as it has come down to us in both the Eastern (Orthodox) and Western (Roman) branches emerged thanks to geopolitical maneurvers of the Roman emperors beginning with Nero and culminating in Constantine. The authors are not claiming that Christianity was an imperial idea as such though they leave this possibility open. They are claiming that Rome put effort into fostering the “peaceful and globalist” branch of teachings laid out by Paul (Saul of Tarsus) in opposition to a more militant, Jewish independence, branch represented by James the brother of Jesus, and to an extent also Peter.

Although I find the author’s purported connections between Roman politics and Christianity interesting they are largely circumstantial. This does not mean the authors’ musings are entirely wrong, but it does leave room for misinterpreting symbols, especially writing, histories, that have suffered much modification before coming down to us in the present day. There is room for both misinterpretations of what was said and done in those days while leaving room for the thesis that Rome, deliberately if unevenly, fostered a certain view of Jesus (who may or may not have existed, the authors are ambivalent), and from there the writings of Paul, the Gospels, Acts, and so on.

None of this thesis is likely to be entirely true, there is too much historical room–time’s passage and dilution of the evidence–for error. But none of it is entirely unreasonable either. Even if Jesus existed and was a divine bestowal on the world (the latter mostly discounted by the authors) there is no reason to believe the Roman government did not have a hand in what subsequently became of Jesus’ original teachings.
7 people found this helpful
Report

Patrick Devoy
5.0 out of 5 stars Falsehood after Falsehood
Reviewed in the United States on 15 May 2022
Verified Purchase
So Valiant in his book, for starter's talks about that “Jesus” was some sort of man God, born of a virgin, even though Paul never taught that, nor did the 1st century writers. See Acts-2:22, 1st Timothy-2:5, also 2 Timothy-2:8, finally Romans-1:1-3. He makes a big deal that in book of Mark-7:22- “Jesus made all foods clean,” even though it says in the greek “and it is expelled in the toliet.” He makes a connection to the Flavian emperors via the words of Yeshua that would “he come with clouds of the heavens.” Even though Daniel said those verbatim words centuries before, according to occum’s razor they were quoting Daniel not each other. He makes a big deal about the Iconography, which I might add is one is a dolphin, also ones a fish, with this said he may as well make a connection to the Pharaoh’s crown and the serpent in Numbers-21, images inherently mean nothing, all that matters is what you do with them. He makes a big deal that the church fathers had a cushy life, even though they were listed on a list called the lebellous in 250 C.E. Which indicating they would not offer sacrifices to Rome’s Patron Deities, this effectively declaring themselves “enemies of the State.” Yet they offered torah offerings, in book of Acts, so his case that this the book of Acts was edited is falling apart. Because if it was true, and as he suggests “the temple was only going the people?” Then they would have changed that detail, wouldn’t they? Plus as we see they didn’t do Sacrifices for Rome, Gee sounds more, and more like they loved the god of Israel. If his argument was plausible? Then why did the teachings about him evolve over time, as all roman manuscripts do? As we see in book of Matthew, and in the Book of John, and in the Church fathers? All the evidence dictates is the stories about him were changed over time, and that’s all he is able to say he cannot go beyond that.

In essence this guy has no smoking gun, uses leading evidence, and for the layman presents a credible argument, in essence he should never do such things, it wrong.
11 people found this helpful
Report

swimdb
4.0 out of 5 stars Interesting Hypothesis.
Reviewed in the United States on 21 May 2019
Verified Purchase
First off, I bought it because I saw mention of it online and what it contains. I saw mention of how it differs to Atwill, which was key to me buying it. The basic premise is quite interesting, though quite radical and unorthodox at first sight.

The writing style was slightly repetitive, maybe that is good to reinforce their points and carefully build their case but I was annoyed by it. The location of the notes all at the end was not super convenient, I prefer them on page or at the end of the chapter. They refer to Pericope de Adultera when discussing early sources without mentioning it does not appear in early sources, that was slightly jarring.

Regarding the content, the idea is very interesting and they make an interesting case. The basic idea is that somehow early Christianity was somewhat deliberately encouraged by the Flavian emperors and their administration in a form that would allow Jewish zealots to transition to a more empire friendly theology. They refer to the "Paul is a secret agent" theory and build their case by noting a few factors.

- One is similarity between iconography between early Christianity and the Flavians,

- Another is the huge messy overlap of various characters swirling around in a nexus of connections between the NT and the Roman power elite.

- Another is the exceedingly positive view that Book of Acts, for example, portrays various Roman and Empire connected people.

- They discuss Josephus and his thematic and content similarities to the Gospels.

One thing they do not address which would need some sort of explanation is the synoptic problem and the tension between Mark and Matthew for example. How is the evolution of Mark to Matthew to Luke explained in this model? We may never know the precise mechanism but it seems that this theory of origin needs to account for it somehow.

Whether or not you believe their overall hypothesis, there are points that really strike a nerve. Their discussion of the repeated rescue of Paul by Roman figures really shows the incredibly pro-imperial sentiments in parts of the NT. We know already that Luke is really pushing the Pauline school but he really lauds the Roman authorities. They also point out that 20th century media seems to have forgotten that and made Romans the bad guys in various films and such.

Again neglecting their hypothesis the discussion of the coin and tomb iconography is pretty thought provoking.

In the larger picture, presumably the "fake new religion" just got out of hand and people took it for real within a generation or two. This really has significant echos of both Mornomism and Scientology, so if true, maybe this is the dominant way large new religions are formed and not an outlier.
57 people found this helpful
Report

Plankwing
2.0 out of 5 stars Some good history, but from a wrong premise.
Reviewed in the United States on 29 November 2021
Verified Purchase
Clearly the authors do not come to the table as having a belief in Yeshua. They say, "Whether a man named Jesus existed or not cannot be proved." Well, of course, "Jesus" never appears in the Scriptures or Testimony of Yeshua, because "Christianity" is/was indeed "created" by Greco-Roman philosophy that commenced to corrupt the Israelite Torah/Tanakh during their sojourn in Egypt. That corrupted "religion" was evidenced when Aaron consented to have the Israelites construct the Golden Calf when Moses "took too long" to come down from Mt. Sinai.
The history of the Israelites from the Judges through King Solomon records them wavering between following Yehovah their Elohim and of worshipping Baal, Molech, and many other "Gods/Idols." That idolatry has corrupted "Christianity" from then until our time as evidenced by the names of pagan gods supplanting the Hebrew/Aramaic names of Yehovah, Elohim, Yeshua, and Ruach Qadim. Then there is the supplanting of Sabbath observance with the worship of the various pagan gods of the Sun ... Sunday observance:
Peter Geiermann, C.S.S.R., The Converts Catechism of Catholic Doctrine (1957), p. 50.
"Question: Which is the Sabbath day?
"Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.
"Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
"Answer. We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred
the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday."
Then, when the kingdoms were split into Israel and Judea, Israel never had a king that did not sin against Yehovah, and Judea again wavered between Yehovah worship and worshipping gods of wood and stone. Those kingdoms were banished into other nations, and Judea specifically to Babylon.
The nation was given 70 years in exile, than 490 years to "repent" and "redeem" themselves from their former sins. But, when Alexander the Great invaded Judea, he compelled them to compromise their Torah/Tanakh with Hellenistic philosophy and paganism.
Among those compromises were "God" then "G-d" in place of Elohim so they would not "take the name of the Lord in vain." Then, the two parties, Sadducees and Pharisees formed, each of which added to (Sadducees) or took away from (Pharisees) the clear word of the Scriptures. Over a number of decades, those two parties then agreed to compromise by forming the Sanhedrin.
Because of the Maccabean wars and the defeat of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Jews determined that the prophecy in Daniel 8:14 to 12:12 was fulfilled by the "2300 days" that Antiochus "desecrated" the Temple in Jerusalem. Then, because of that belief, the Jews did not realize that Yeshua was the Mashiyach, their expected Messiah (Messiah means hero) that was to "deliver them" from the Roman rule.
They erred by not understanding Yeshua's mission was to "pay for the sins of mankind," so they rejected Him because they refused to believe He was the Mashiyach (set apart one) that was foretold in prophecies in Genesis, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and Zachariah, among others.
There is no question that Babylonian-Egyptian-Hellenistic-Roman-Catholic philosophy and paganism has resulted in the "creation" of Christianity. But to fall into the trap Marcion created: "By replacing the word covenant with testament, Marcion theologically divided Jesus (sic) and away from YHWH (sic) the Father and turned him into a self-sustained deity that opposed 'the Old Testament.'" AENT p83.
"Old Testament" is a false name for the Scriptures (Jewish Tanakh). Throughout the so-called "New Testament," Yeshua and the Envoys (aka disciples/apostles) referenced and quoted the Tanakh. Yeshua especially referenced "Moses and all the Prophets" that spoke of Him. In short, those "NT" writing are correctly cited as "The Testimony of Yeshua."
All the modern philosophy in the minds of those who dispute whether Yeshua existed does not rebut the Roman guards who testified that He arose from the tomb.
8 people found this helpful
Report

R.H.
4.0 out of 5 stars Intriguing Reading
Reviewed in the United States on 22 September 2016
Verified Purchase
For decades, there's been this ongoing chat or discussion about Roman, Christian, Jewish, and Catholic history.....how some things just don't fit correctly and it begs questions. So, Valliant has taken the discussion to the stage of asking the question....was Christianity developed by the Romans as a counter-religion against the Jews in Judah? Valliant has thrown a number of dots up on a wall, and makes a fairly good case of connecting probably 300 or more dots to the argument of the Romans making Christianity out of nothing.

Now, I will say this to the matter that I don't consider the connections to be enough yet to be absolute about this, but it really begs more research and details on Roman activities in the region. Valliant used a great deal of Roman history details, and lays out a number of stories utilizing the New Testament commentary.

As for those who might say this was all a fraudulent piece of work? Here's the thing....Greeks and Romans weren't idiots. You can examine architecture, engineering, writings, and military conquests. Both cultures were very capable of manipulation. It could very well be that the New Testament is simply a contrived thing to support the Roman quest to bring down the Jewish religion and that it got out of control. So, you might reach a stage where you realize that only the Old Testament is without manipulation. What does that say? Most of what I've read of the Romans in this age or period.....states the obvious when they got to Judah.....that these were not regular people to fight against and their religion was going to be a massive problem to counter.

I will recommend the book, but it does relate heavily upon Roman history and you might want a introduction to it prior to taking up this book. I also think the topic needs more research....particularly over the Greek involvement in this.
19 people found this helpful
Report

Banjo
5.0 out of 5 stars Great book !!
Reviewed in the United States on 5 July 2023
Verified Purchase
The history and the research in this book is great it was a easy read and well worth it coupled with Joseph Atwell book "Creating Christ" it tells you everything you ever needed to know about the "Biblical" Jesus that people worship everyday what I did appreciate is the authors made no stance on whether a "Historical" Jesus ever existed- myself being a gnostic deist I believe a Jesus "type" and some of the named disciples did exist that easily falls in in line with this book. I think Jesus was part of the Essenes probably around 14 years old and was suspended (not uncommon) then went to India and studied Buddhism and Hinduism then returned to Galilee to start his ministry and maintain a loose relationship with the Essenes and probably other groups it also explains the peace and love Jesus and how he was misunderstood about being one with God and the son of God - it doesn't mean the same thing as it does in Jewish or Roman culture. The only negative thing I could say is the first half of the book is a little repetitive.
5 people found this helpful
Report

Peter Aleff
5.0 out of 5 stars The roots of the imperial Catholic Church structure laid bare
Reviewed in the United States on 31 May 2019
Verified Purchase
The authors deserve congratulations for their discovery that the second Flavian emperor, Titus, used the same symbol on his coins and some other artifacts as the early Christians did on their rings and funerary designs -- a dolphin wrapped around an anchor. The use of that identical iconography by early Christians and by the destroyer of the Jerusalem Temple documents at long last the connection between these apparently very different groups. Previous authors had tried to demonstrate this connection but only with limited and circumstantial evidence, such as the unprovable claim that the four canonical Gospels had been commissioned by the Flavian emperors and had been written under their guidance and supervision. However, none of the early Christian writers mentioned any of these Gospels until about 125 CE, and the first listing of all four together had to wait for Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, in about 180 CE.

This alleged literary connection between the Flavian emperors and the nascent Christian sect does therefore not withstand scrutiny, but the use of the identical symbol is a tangible proof of this connection even if the Gospels were written only much later, once Christianity had become independent of this link. However, its roots in the ideology of the Roman Empire remain unmistakable even today: According to a recent cover story in The Atlantic Monthly, "To save the Church, dismantle the Priesthood", by a former priest who became a critic of the clerical hierarchy and its lack of accountability to anyone, the Roman Catholic Church developed "a structure of governance that owes more to emperors than to apostles". Kudos to Valliant and Fahy for having now proven this still influential link!
36 people found this helpful
Report


===
Jose Luis Saavedra
4.0 out of 5 stars Great product
Reviewed in the United States on 11 November 2024
Verified Purchase
Good book
Report

wb56
5.0 out of 5 stars A theory that aligns with justice
Reviewed in the United States on 1 November 2024
Verified Purchase
Today's Christianity is a mess, divisive, violent, and seduced by power. It ignores the teachings of Jesus, especially love of neighbor. Trump has exposed that remarkably. I recommend this, you will learn a lot, dismiss myths that have been around for millennia, and possibly free you from the prison of religion.
One person found this helpful
Report

DRAKON
3.0 out of 5 stars The Author's Agenda Limits the Historical Scope
Reviewed in the United States on 18 October 2021
Verified Purchase
Creating Christ has some interesting insights, such as the use of an Anchor and Fish to symbolize Christ long before the Cross became dominant. However the author fails to make a logical case for his claim that Roman emperors were willing to turn the entire belief system of the Roman empire upside down in order to pacify the ZEALOT Jews who were apparently far more powerful and numerous than history gives them credit for.

For example, the Romans practiced Blood Sacrifice and so did the Jews, including the Zealots. Jesus Christ was killed over this issue when he charged into the temple at Passover with a whip. The Gospels are clear - Not only did Jesus drive out the `money changers', he drove out all the cattle, sheep and goats that were lined up at the temple to be sacrificed. The Jews condemned him to death for this and Jesus was sacrificed THE NEXT DAY.

In Rome an animal was sacrificed every day. The Gladiatorial Games were nothing but mass blood sacrifices. But the Christians denied blood sacrifice as DEMONIC.

So why would Roman emperors `create' a religion which denounced blood sacrifice, an important part of both Jewish and Roman religions? MITHRAISM which required the sacrifice of a bull (tauroctony) was already well established in Rome. Why not popularize Mithraism or a similar religion? Why Christianity which forbade important practices of BOTH Judaism AND Rome?

`Creating Christ' seemed to have a biased, anti-Christian agenda, to the point that it ignored logical questions. This detracted from book's historical impact and reach.
14 people found this helpful
Report

Jeri L. Studebaker, author of *Still Starving After All These Years: The Hidden Origins of War, Oppression and Inequality*.
2.0 out of 5 stars In most indigenous societies, altruism reigns supreme
Reviewed in the United States on 24 September 2022
Verified Purchase
If the author had stuck with his premise that Christianity was invented by the Roman government in order to more easily control its populace, I'd be happy with this book. For that argument he makes a good case. Unfortunately, however, he frequently strays over into Ayn Rand territory, and her contention that altruism is the worst thing that has happened to humanity since the last ice age. Yes, the Romans did indeed build altruism into their invention "Christianity," but it was an extreme altruism, essentially one asking humans to give up critical needs, so that someone else's needs are satisfied instead of their own. Although this level of altruism might or might not be healthy for human societies, a rational level of altruism is a necessity for societies to maintain any level of psychological and/or physical well being. Most indigenous societies are based on this level of normal altruism -- and most of those that don't have been corrupted by nearby state societies. Indigenous societies are exactly the kinds of societies humans lived in for about 95% of our existence on earth, and in indigenous societies when a hunter brings down a deer or giraffe or caribou he doesn't hoard it all for himself or his own nuclear family, he divides the meat and other parts and hands equal portions to the others in his village. In indigenous societies when one family encounters a year of bad luck, other families give them what they need to tide them over. In short, a normal level of altruism is the glue that has always held healthy human societies together, and always will. To say otherwise is just plain ignorance.
2 people found this helpful
Report

Mark Wallace
5.0 out of 5 stars Novel view of the origin of Christian belief
Reviewed in the United States on 17 October 2016
Verified Purchase
While not taking a position on the historical Jesus, the authors do take one on the stories that were written after the Crucifixion, and that now comprise the basis of the Christian religion. The thesis of the book is that those stories were commissioned by the Roman Government, in order to weaken Jewish resistance to Roman rule in the Holy Land. What did Rome want? More peace and less war. One way to achieve it was by (secretly) setting up an alternative form of Judaism, or an alternative to Judaism (take your pick), whose spokesman brought a message of peace and love for one's fellow men ... all of them.

The book points out that the Jesus of the New Testament is unfailing loyal to Rome, perhaps most famously in the command to his followers to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's ..." And it presents a substantial amount of historical evidence, including recent numismatic discoveries, in support of its claims.

I suppose we'll never know for sure, but this book makes an interesting and novel case for the origin of Christian belief. For those who are familiar with Schonfield ("The Passover Plot" and subsequent books), this work carries on the tradition of not taking everything the Church says about the First Century at face value, but now incorporating more recent evidence. It's a carefully argued and fascinating read.
12 people found this helpful
Report

B Houk
5.0 out of 5 stars A Plausible Explanation
Reviewed in the United States on 9 November 2016
Verified Purchase
I liked how the information was laid out. An important question/issue was presented. A solution was given. The authors presented the historical facts well. They presented many sources for their well written arguments. This book was of interest to me because my parents chose a fundamental Christian religion, in which I was raised.
I took the time to study religions/cultures across the world and throughout time from 15 yo to 31 yo. My interests refined to the similarities so as to discover what is required by humans (assuming constants across cultures must be needed and are not just by accident). Eventually, I was looking for what was needed to develop a happy, healthy human.
This book was a step back in time, back to the questions of my youth for me. The authors proposed ideas that had been of some interest of that started when I read the King James Bible cover to cover at 7 yo and continued to my late teens but I had not the resources at that time to answer.
The conclusions the authors draw from their well reasoned arguments make sense to me because of all the historical information I have gathered in my 6 decades of life.
Yes, I do recommend this book to anyone serious about history.
16 people found this helpful
Report

Johnny Rojas
5.0 out of 5 stars Awesome book
Reviewed in the United States on 28 December 2024
Verified Purchase
Great seller fast delivery ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Report

A. Perkins
5.0 out of 5 stars This book is devastating truth. Get your therapist on the line
Reviewed in the United States on 21 August 2023
Verified Purchase
Yeah these guys are right. I’m devastated. And we gotta stop this antisemitic nonsense and spread the truth. I’m ashamed at believing these Roman imperial published nonsense. I’m ashamed at the treatment of the ppl of Galilee since before Abraham/Nebuchadnezzar until today all because they have refused to syncretize their god with outsiders gods for thousands of years and little baby emperor gods can’t handle it and vainly revenge genocide and use books like Ezekiel and so many others to repeatedly blame the Jews for their repeated destruction by foreign conquering narcissistic jerks.
3 people found this helpful
Report

Larry
5.0 out of 5 stars This book answers the question. Who created Christianity and why?
Reviewed in the United States on 18 May 2021
Verified Purchase
When I saw Dr Robert M Price recommended the book and found its conclusions plausible I knew I had to read it. I wasn’t disappointed.

It answered a lot of questions I’ve had about the origins of Christianity. The authors conclusions are believable, IMO.

Predictably, those that are Christians will likely dismiss this book as fiction. Those that have left the faith, or were never particularly religious, will more likely consider the authors conclusions at least plausible.

Religion is an emotional subject, so the believability of the historical evidences presented by scholars often comes down to whose ox is being gored. In this case it seems those offering only one or two stars might have an ax to grind. Whether the reader agrees with the authors conclusions or not, it’s obvious a great deal of scholarly research went into this book.

I tend to believe the authors conclusions are at the very least plausible.
3 people found this helpful
Report

mikemacdonald72
5.0 out of 5 stars Like drinking water from a firehose
Reviewed in the United States on 21 February 2023
Verified Purchase
Creating Christ takes all we have been made to believe and stands it on its head. Citing endless sources, the authors give evidence of what has been taught and why it has been taught.
A challenge to faith, an opportunity to question, and a clear chance to dig deep into who, how, and why Christ is our earthly connection to God is a lot of information. Deserves more than one read.
Report


===


===

CREATING CHRIST - Official Documentary


CREATING CHRIST - Official Documentary
===
555,364 views  Nov 23, 2023
https://creatingchristdoc.com/
The official and complete version of the Creating Christ documentary
====
Based on the book "Creating Christ" by James S. Valliant & Warren Fahy
With Guest Scholars:
Dr. Robert Price
Prof. Robert Eisenman
Acharya Sanning / D.M. Murdock

2025/08/27

이우창 - Choi Hemi 선생님의 천하제일연구자대회 40회(2기 5회) 기고문, "명예로운... | Facebook

이우창 - 이틀 전 온라인에 공개된 Choi Hemi 선생님의 천하제일연구자대회 40회(2기 5회) 기고문, "명예로운... | Facebook




이우창

osSnptrodelta28cct5u1uc322m4J7h8409ma9u9iut93l1nl1ahe03 3i 0 ·


이틀 전 온라인에 공개된 Choi Hemi 선생님의 천하제일연구자대회 40회(2기 5회) 기고문, "명예로운 행위란 무엇인가, 연보를 읽는 새로운 눈"을 공유합니다. 기고자 본인이 속한 한문학이라는 분과의 특성과, 본인이 다루는 연보라는 문헌장르에 어떻게 접근할 것이냐는 고민, 연구의 성격으로 한 칸씩 차분하게 전진하는 글입니다. 품위와 간결함을 고루 갖춘 문장도 빼어난 만큼, 글을 즐기시는 분은 그 때문이라도 한번 천천히 읽어보셔도 좋겠습니다. 저는 기고자의 박사학위논문을 어느 정도 읽어볼 기회가 있었는데, 그때도 문장의 느낌이 인상적이었던 기억이 있습니다.
https://www.kyosu.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=105629

최혜미 선생님의 글이 실렸으니 조금 편하게 말해보자면, 저는 천하제일연구자대회와 같은 기획에 (한)국학, 그중에서도 전근대 시기 문헌을 다루는 연구자의 글이 반드시 포함되어야 한다고 생각하는 쪽입니다. 거기에는 물론 19세기까지의 시기를 다루는 '국학'이 쌓아온 방대한 인적·지적 자원을 고려할 때 이를 충분히 대표하지 못하는 것은 한국 인문학술장의 중요한 부분을 포기하는 것과 같다는 현실적인 판단도 있습니다. 최근 강조되는 인문-첨단과학 간 융합도 좋지만, 일단은 인문사회분야 간의 상호접근성을 높이는 게 시급하다는 생각이 있는데요, 그 때문이라도 이 코너가 전근대와 근현대 연구자들의 접촉을 늘리는 계기가 되어주었으면 하는 바람입니다.
하지만 그보다 좀 더 중요한 이유가 있습니다. 과거의 문헌 자료를 깊이 있게 이해하는 시각과 손길로부터 인문학이 탄생한 만큼, 오늘날의 연구자들 중 그러한 실천의 최전선에 있는 이들에게 주목해야 할 필요가 있습니다. 오늘날 한국 사회, 한국 학술장의 과거의 문헌을, 그리고 그것을 파고들기 위한 필요한 숙련을 지나치게 저평가하는 경향이 있습니다. 그러한 문헌비판 자체를 실용적이지 못한 '훈고학'이라고 경멸하듯 부르는 통념이 대표적인 예입니다. 저는 심지어 적지 않은 수의 연구자들조차 공유하는 이러한 통념이야말로 인문학과 학문적 실천의 역사를 올바르게 이해하기 위해 반드시 교정되어야만 하는 대상 중 하나라고 말씀드리고 싶습니다. (여기에 대해서는 나중에 좀 더 길게 이야기할 기회가 있기를 바랍니다)
바로 그런 배경에서 진작부터 최혜미 선생님의 작업을 소개하고 싶은 마음이 있었습니다. 천하제일연구자대회 1기 때는 아쉽게도 타이밍이 맞지 않았습니다만, 이번에 선생님께서 기획위원회에 합류하시면서 드디어 『교수신문』 지면에서 선생님의 글을 만나볼 수 있게 되었습니다. 일부 대목을 아래에 옮겨놓습니다만, 가급적 전문을 읽어주시면 좋겠습니다.
"대부분의 한문학 연구자는 문헌의 확인과 한문 원문의 교감·입력·번역 등 실제 논문 서술에는 몇 줄 혹은 아예 들어가지도 못하는 기초작업에 태반의 시간을 할애한다. 이 역시 부득이한 것인데 아무리 매끄러운 논의를 엮어낸다 한들 ‘그거 번역 틀렸는데요.’라는 한 마디의 지적이 전체 논의의 구도를 무너뜨리는 것을 막을 방법은 별로 없기 때문이다.
모든 한문학 연구자가 그렇게 생각하지는 않겠으나, 필자는 자료를 제대로 보기 위해서 적지 않은 수련이 필요하다는 점을 제외하면 한문학은 일종의 자유전공에 가깝다고 느껴왔다. ‘연보(年譜)’를 주제로 삼은 필자의 박사학위 논문은 ‘국어국문학’의 이름표를 달고 제출되기는 했지만 ‘문학성’에 관한 논의는 거의 담겨 있지 않다. 이는 한문으로 된 것이면 모두 연구의 주제가 될 수 있고, 자료에의 접근이 신중하면 어떤 방법도 포용하는 한문학 분과의 토양에서 가능한 것이었다고 생각한다."
"연보는 특정 인물의 언행이나 관련 사실을 연도를 기준으로 정리해 놓은 저술로 보통 문집의 부록에 딸려 있다. 연구자들에게 연보는 일종의 사료(史料)처럼 간주되어 인물의 생애 정보를 확인하는 참고 자료로 주로 활용되고, 학문적 분석의 대상으로 접근할 만한 가치는 크지 않다고 여겨졌다. [...]
생애 정보의 진위를 판별하는 작업은 하나의 분명한 역사적 진실이 존재한다는 ―그것을 밝히려는 노력이 흔히 좌절될지라도―전제에서 가능할 것이다. 그런데 자료를 볼수록 그런 것은 존재하지 않거나 적어도 중요한 것이 아닐지도 모르겠다는 생각이 들었다. 연구자는 남겨진 글을 통해서만 과거를 파악할 수 있는데, 그것은 반드시 누군가의 고심 끝에 선별되어 남겨진 것이기 때문이다.
그렇다면 남겨진 글이 보장해주는 것은 기록된 내용의 진실성보다는 그것을 후세에 전하기로 결정한 사람들의 의지에 관한 것이 아닐까. 여기에 생각이 닿고서 필자의 연구는 연보를 편찬한 사람들을 추적하는 방향으로 변경되었다."
"편찬자들이 재구성한 보주의 생애는 보주에 대한 사실이라기 보다는, 편찬자들이 규정하는 혹은 인정받고 싶어 하는 자신들의 정체성에 관한 서사에 가깝다. 이것이 연보에 대한 접근을 내용에서 편찬자로, 내용의 사실 여부에서 명예로운 행위의 선별 기준으로 옮겨왔을 때 얻을 수 있는 유용한 시사점이다."

kyosu.net

명예로운 행위란 무엇인가, 연보를 읽는 새로운 눈 - 교수신문
[천하제일연구자대회 40 연보 연구, 편찬자를 주목하는 이유] 연보의 구성 원리는 기억할 만한 행적을 선별하는 것이다. 선별의 기준이 가장 중요하다. 연보의 메시지는 무엇을 명예로운 행적으로 인정할 것인...

===
Choi Hemi

헉...아니 무슨 이런...감사하고 민망합니다. 그리고 진심으로다 다 덕분입니다

==
이우창

Choi Hemi아니 도대체 몇 시에 댓글을 다신 것인지...ㄷㄷㄷ


===
명예로운 행위란 무엇인가, 연보를 읽는 새로운 눈
최혜미
승인 2023.06.07 08:57

천하제일연구자대회 40 연보 연구, 편찬자를 주목하는 이유


특별기획 ‘천하제일연구자대회’는 30~40대 인문·사회과학 연구자들의 문제의식과 연구 관심, 그들이 바라보는 한국사회와 학계의 모습에 대해 듣는 자리다. 
새로운 시야와 도전적인 문제의식으로 기성의 인문·사회과학 장을 바꾸고 있는 연구자들과 이전에 없던 문제와 소재로써 아예 새 분야를 개척하는 이들을 만난다. 어려운 상황에서 분투하고 있는 젊고 진실한 연구자들을 ‘천하제일’로 여겨도 된다고 생각한다. 새로운 연구자문화를 만들기 위해 노력하는 ‘민교협 2.0’과 함께한다.(‘천하제일연구자대회’ 시즌2를 시작하며_우리 학술장의 ‘소통 공간’ 함께 키워 갑시다)



연보의 구성 원리는 기억할 만한 행적을 선별하는 것이다.
선별의 기준이 가장 중요하다.
연보의 메시지는 무엇을 명예로운 행적으로 인정할 것인가로 결정된다.
이 기준에 핵심적으로 작용하는 것은 편찬자의 관심사다.
연보 주인공의 생애는 역사적 사실이라기 보다는
편찬자 자신의 정체성에 관한 서사에 가깝다.
연보를 어떻게 접근하느냐에 따라 보는 눈이 달라지는 것이다.

필자의 연구 분야인 한문학은 한문으로 기록된 일체의 문헌을 다룬다. 주된 연구 대상은 전근대시대 개인의 문집이다. 한국의 분과 체계상 한문학은 국어국문학의 하위분과에 속한 경우가 많다. 그렇다고 한문학의 연구 범위가 반드시 문학에 한정되는 것은 아니다.

한문학 연구자가 생각하는 한문학

흔히 한문학은 현대적 학문분과 개념이 무색하게 문사철(文史哲)을 아우르는 통합적인 인문학 분야로 간주되는데, 사실 해당 연구자의 입장에서 말하자면 딱히 아우르고 싶어서 그러는 것은 아니다. 연구 대상으로 삼는 인물이 대개 본업 정치가에 문장가·사상가·역사가 등을 겸하고 있고 한 사람의 문집에 각각의 역할에 적합한 온갖 양식의 글이 수록되어 있을 뿐만 아니라 한 편의 글에도 문사철이 다 포함되어 있는 바에야 별다른 도리가 없는 것이다.

때문에 언뜻 고리타분해 보이는 분과명과는 달리 한문학 분야는 학문적으로 연구의 주제나 방법론 선택에 있어서 자못 자유로운 분위기가 있다.

다만 자료에 대한 엄밀성은 강도 높게 요구되는 편이다. 대부분의 한문학 연구자는 문헌의 확인과 한문 원문의 교감·입력·번역 등 실제 논문 서술에는 몇 줄 혹은 아예 들어가지도 못하는 기초작업에 태반의 시간을 할애한다. 이 역시 부득이한 것인데 아무리 매끄러운 논의를 엮어낸다 한들 ‘그거 번역 틀렸는데요.’라는 한 마디의 지적이 전체 논의의 구도를 무너뜨리는 것을 막을 방법은 별로 없기 때문이다.

모든 한문학 연구자가 그렇게 생각하지는 않겠으나, 필자는 자료를 제대로 보기 위해서 적지 않은 수련이 필요하다는 점을 제외하면 한문학은 일종의 자유전공에 가깝다고 느껴왔다. ‘연보(年譜)’를 주제로 삼은 필자의 박사학위 논문은 ‘국어국문학’의 이름표를 달고 제출되기는 했지만 ‘문학성’에 관한 논의는 거의 담겨 있지 않다. 이는 한문으로 된 것이면 모두 연구의 주제가 될 수 있고, 자료에의 접근이 신중하면 어떤 방법도 포용하는 한문학 분과의 토양에서 가능한 것이었다고 생각한다.

연보 연구의 함정, 진실성에 대한 집착

필자가 논문의 제재로 삼은 ‘연보’는 그간 연구 대상으로서의 관심을 거의 받지 못한 자료이다. 연보는 특정 인물의 언행이나 관련 사실을 연도를 기준으로 정리해 놓은 저술로 보통 문집의 부록에 딸려 있다.

연구자들에게 연보는 일종의 사료(史料)처럼 간주되어 인물의 생애 정보를 확인하는 참고 자료로 주로 활용되고, 학문적 분석의 대상으로 접근할 만한 가치는 크지 않다고 여겨졌다. 이와 함께 연보에는 태생적으로 후손이 선조를 칭양하려는 목적으로 작성하는 경우가 많아 종종 윤색 혹은 왜곡된 기록이 포함되는 문제도 존재한다.

이와 같은 통념은, 연보가 실제로 그런 문헌이기에 필자 역시 피할 수 없는 것이었다. 그렇기에 연보에 대한 필자의 최초 접근 역시 연보와 『승정원일기』 등의 관찬 사료, 동시대인의 문집 등을 대조하여 연보에 실린 생애 정보의 진위를 판별하고, 사실의 공백을 메꾸려는 방향에서 이루어졌다. 그런데 같은 사건에 대한 여러 가지 관점을 반복적으로 확인하다 보니 석연찮은 의문점이 생겨났다.

생애 정보의 진위를 판별하는 작업은 하나의 분명한 역사적 진실이 존재한다는 ―그것을 밝히려는 노력이 흔히 좌절될지라도―전제에서 가능할 것이다. 그런데 자료를 볼수록 그런 것은 존재하지 않거나 적어도 중요한 것이 아닐지도 모르겠다는 생각이 들었다. 연구자는 남겨진 글을 통해서만 과거를 파악할 수 있는데, 그것은 반드시 누군가의 고심 끝에 선별되어 남겨진 것이기 때문이다.

그렇다면 남겨진 글이 보장해주는 것은 기록된 내용의 진실성보다는 그것을 후세에 전하기로 결정한 사람들의 의지에 관한 것이 아닐까. 여기에 생각이 닿고서 필자의 연구는 연보를 편찬한 사람들을 추적하는 방향으로 변경되었다.

연보는 특정 인물의 언행이나 관련 사실을 연도를 기준으로 정리해 놓은 저술이다. 보통 문집의 부록에 딸려 있다. 인물의 생애 정보를 확인하는 참고 자료로 주로 활용된다. 조선시대 연보 편찬의 관습은 「퇴계연보」에서 정립됐다. 사진=경희대 도서관 제공

연보 편간의 맥락 속에서 발견한 사실

한국의 연보는 고려시대부터 구한말에 이르기까지 끊임없이 생산되었는데, 인물에 대한 갖가지 정보를 연보에 자세히 수록하는 관습이 정착된 것은 대략 16세기 후반~17세기 중엽의 일이다. 그 이전 시기의 연보는 대부분 보주(譜主 연보의 주인공)의 관직 이력을 나열한 한두 장짜리 약력에 가까웠다. 그러다 16세기 후반부터 강목(綱目)이라는 형식이 도입되면서 연보의 편폭이 급증하는 양상이 포착되는 것이다.

현전하는 주요 연보 문헌을 생산된 시기를 기준으로 일별하자, 드문드문 존재하는 연보들 사이로 심상치 않은 이름들이 수면 위로 떠올랐다. 이황(李滉)·이이(李珥)·성혼(成渾)과 같은 각 당파의 종장에 해당하는 인물들의 장편 연보가 강목식 연보의 역사 첫머리부터 자리하고 있었던 것이다. 강목식 연보는 애초에 전국적으로 정치적·학문적 명성이 현저한 인물들만을 대상으로 작성된 것이었다.

보주의 거대한 권위만큼 편찬자의 존재감 역시 만만찮았다. 이황의 연보는 유성룡(柳成龍)이, 이이의 연보는 김집(金集)과 송시열(宋時烈)이, 성혼의 연보는 윤선거(尹宣擧)와 윤증(尹拯)이 담당하여 학파를 대표하는 직·재전 제자들이 편찬의 총책임을 맡았다. 이 시기 연보 편찬의 사례를 살펴보면 학파의 핵심적인 상징성을 지닌 인물의 연보가 주요 제자들을 중심으로 집단적인 협업을 통해 작성되는 경우가 두드러진다.

이들이 편찬한 연보의 내용을 살펴보면 단순히 선사(先師)의 훌륭한 업적을 나열한 것이 아니라 특별하게 강조하는 범주의 행적이 있다. 특히 성리학에 대한 철저한 이해와 이를 도덕적으로 실천하는 사례와 학문으로 임금을 계도하는 면모 등은 예외 없이 자세하게 수록하고 있다. 문집에 동일한 내용이 있다면 출전을 밝히는 정도로 처리해도 되었을 텐데 중복의 번거로움을 불사하고 연보에 다시 수록하는 경우도 확인된다. 단순히 사실관계가 중요한 것이 아니었다는 의미이다.

물론 상기의 행적은 조선 전기에도 미덕으로 인정되었던 것이다. 그러나 이 시기의 양상이 특수하고 중요한 까닭은 개인의 모범적 행적들이 도통(道統)의 맥락에서 의미부여되고 있다는 점이다. 각 연보는 보주를 국가적인 유현(儒賢)의 면모에 적합한 인물로 그려내고 있고, 이는 보주가 도통의 정당한 계승자로서 적합한 자격이 있다는 주장의 근거로서 기능하였다.

편찬자들이 명시했든 명시하지 않았든 이러한 작업은 문묘종사(文廟從祀)를 염두에 둔 것이었으며, 궁극적으로는 그의 후계자를 자처하는 집단에게 실질적인 정치적 권위를 부여하기 위한 의도로 해석된다.

편찬자에 착목하는 연보 연구의 시사점

조선 후기 인물에게 당색(黨色)은 그의 핵심적인 정체성을 규정하는 요소로 간주된다. 그렇다면 그 당파적 정체성이란 구체적으로 어떻게 구성되어 왔을까. 이 쉽지 않은 질문에 대한 답에 접근하는 데 연보의 연구가 유의미한 도움을 줄 수 있다.

연보의 구성 원리는 기억할 만한 행적을 선별하는 것이므로 선별의 기준이 가장 중요하다. 연보의 메시지는 무엇을 명예로운 행적으로 인정할 것인가, 어떠한 의도로 사실들을 선별하고 해석하며 배치할 것인가에서 결정된다.

이 기준에 핵심적으로 작용하는 것은 물론 편찬자들의 관심사이다. 그렇기에 편찬자들이 재구성한 보주의 생애는 보주에 대한 사실이라기 보다는, 편찬자들이 규정하는 혹은 인정받고 싶어 하는 자신들의 정체성에 관한 서사에 가깝다. 이것이 연보에 대한 접근을 내용에서 편찬자로, 내용의 사실 여부에서 명예로운 행위의 선별 기준으로 옮겨왔을 때 얻을 수 있는 유용한 시사점이다.

필자는 기왕에 수행한 연구에서 17세까지의 연보사를 다루었다. 그러나 문집과 마찬가지로 연보의 양적 폭발 역시 18세기부터 현저하게 나타나는 현상이며, 연보의 생산 밀도는 구한말에 이르기까지 점점 더 높아졌다. 18세기에 들어 연보는 더욱 복잡하고 많은 사정을 담아내게 되는데, 그 정점에 송시열(宋時烈)의 연보인 『우암연보(尤庵年譜)』가 자리한다.

더불어 18세기 연보에 두드러지는 당론서(黨論書)로서의 성격이나 노론계·소론계 인물의 연보에서 드러나는 충군(忠君)에 대한 상이한 입장, 19~20세기의 지방 유림의 연보 간행 양상과 실기류(實記類) 저술의 유행 등 연보와 관련하여 앞으로 해명해야 할 주제들이 산적해 있다.

향후 필자는 남은 숙제를 차근차근 해결하며 조선시대 연보사를 개괄해 나갈 계획이다. 이를 통해서 그간 한국학 연구사의 변두리에 있었던 연보가 활발한 논의의 장으로 포섭되는 초석이 되기를 바란다.

최혜미 강릉원주대 강사
2022년 고려대 국문과에서 「17세기 연보 편간의 역사적 맥락」으로 박사학위를 받았다. 한국고전번역원의 『승정원일기』 국역 사업에 번역 위원으로 참여하고 있다. 조선시대에 편찬된 개인의 연대기를 대상으로 문헌의 생산 과정과 사회문화적 배경을 참조하여 역사적 의미를 탐구하는 작업을 해왔다. 주요 발표 논문으로는 「『忠烈錄』 소재 『贈遼東伯詔』의 위작 여부에 대한 고찰」, 「官人 自撰年譜의 편찬 배경과 서술 의식」, 「『退溪年譜』 편찬의 역사적 배경과 그 의미」 등이 있다.
===

Philo Kalia - 김용휘 교수, 『동학의 개벽사상과 문명전환』(8강)_“문명의 위기와 새로운 세계관의 필요성 /... | Facebook

Philo Kalia - 김용휘 교수, 『동학의 개벽사상과 문명전환』(8강)_“문명의 위기와 새로운 세계관의 필요성 /... | Facebook

김용휘 교수, 『동학의 개벽사상과 문명전환』(8강)_
“문명의 위기와 새로운 세계관의 필요성 /

수운 최제우의 동학 창도와 새로운 삶의 길”(1강)

1.K-Culture라는 단어가 대변하듯이, 우리의 맛, 우리의 멋을 말할 수 있다면 학문 분야에서도 우리의 학문을 말할 수 있는 고유한 방법론, 곧 이론적 안목이 있는가. 학문의 대상에 관해 지역적으로 우선순위를 매길 수 있겠지만, 안전하고 평화롭고 행복한 삶을 살기 위한 인류 공통의 영역은 매우 폭이 넓어졌다. 그렇다면 문제는 더 효과적이고 효율적인 방법을 찾는 일일 것이다. 가령, 경험론이냐, 합리론이냐, 실용주의냐, 방법의 차이가 있을 수 있다. 동학의 학문적 방법은 무엇인가?
2. 과거에는 주로 중국을 통해 학문을 수입했고 20세기 이후에는 압도적으로 유럽과 미국에서 지식을 수입한다. 심지어 국문학이나 한국사를 연구하는데도 서양의 이론으로 연구한다고 한다. 동양학, 한국학, 우리말로 학문하기 등의 노력이 없는 것은 아니지만, 여전히 매우 부족하다. 과학과 정치 경제학은 말할 것도 없고, 인문학과 철학 및 예술과 미학, 종교학과 신학에서 주도적인 이론은 모두 서양에서 수입된 것들이다.
3. 이즈음 나의 눈을 확 사로잡은 것은 『개벽파선언』, 『개벽의 사상사』 등, ‘개벽’이란 말이 들어간 책들이다. 19세기 후반부터 신 지식인들이 성리학 중심의 수구파를 버리고 개화파의 근대화 노선, 곧 서구화에 매진했고 주로 그러한 지식을 공부했다. 그러나 서구적 문명의 한계가 노정(露呈)되고 있는 지금, 문명 전환의 사상으로 19세기 후반 동학에서부터 자랐던 동학과 개벽 사상이 더 적합하다는 주장이 솔깃하고 설득력을 더해간다. 김용휘의 말이다.
“기존의 개화의 시선으로 보아서는 그들의 문제의식을 제대호 포착할 수 없도, 개벽의 관점에서 그들의 비전과 실천을 보아야 한다는 것이 이번에 새롭게 주목한 부분이다. 결국 그들(동학과 천도교 및 개벽 종교:증산, 원불교, 대종교)의 운동은 개화운동이 아니라 개벽운동이라는 것이다.”(10)

더욱 중요한 지점은
위정척사파나 개화사상이 지식인 중심이었다면,
동학은 민중적 차원에서의 주체적 응전이었다는 사실이다.(46)
4. 공통의 사안과 주제로 학파가 형성된다는 것은 사회의 건강한 지표라고 생각한다. 조선 성리학의 시대를 부정적으로 보는 사람이 많지만 성리학 안에 수많은 학파들이 형성되어 사상을 정립해 나갔다는 것은 놀라운 일이다. 퇴계와 율곡을 중심으로 영남학파와 기호학파만이 아니라, 남명 학파, 성호 학파, 간재 학파, 한려 학파, 강화 학파, 화서 학파, 노사 학파, 한주 학파, 화담 학파. 첨 듣는 이름들도 많다. 이론이 있었던 사회, 물론 사대부 중심이었겠지만 시대적 한계라는 점을 감안해서 본다면 사대부들의 정신운동은 실로 놀라운 일이다.
5. 서양철학에서도 20세기에 비엔나 학파니, 프랑크푸르트 학파니, 신칸트학파니, 신헤겔학파니,... 하는 것들이 있었고, 신학에서도 불트만 학파는 꽤 오래갔고, 판넨베르크 학파도 잠시 형성되었다. 인간 정신을 새롭게 하고 확장하며 현실을 새롭게 인식하고 변혁하려는 사유의 집단 운동은 늘 필요하다. 한국에서도 우리 학문을 지향하는 연구자들이 개벽학의 이름으로 모여 사상의 흐름, 그것도 문명 위기에 문명 전환과 새로운 문명을 꿈꾸는 사상운동이 형성된다면 정말 놀라운 일이라고 생각한다. 이름하여 개벽학파. 김용휘 교수는 바로 동학이 우리 학문이라고 말하는 것이다.
6. 수운이 동학을 창도할 때, 나라 안의 위기로서 성리학적 체제의 무능과 부패이고, 나라 밖의 위기로서 과학기술과 무기를 앞세운 서세동점의 위기였다. 하여 수운의 일차적 문제의식은 “輔國安民”의 방책이었다. 학문적으로 말하면 정치학, 경제학, 평화학에 해당한다고 생각한다. 오늘 당면한 위기는 근대문명이 초래한 부작용으로서의 위기이다. 위기의 현상은 생태계의 위기, 자본주의의 위기, 민주주의의 위협, 소수의 부자와 다수의 가난한 사람의 격차 심화, 열패감에 의한 장기적 우울증과 울분의 상태, 젊은 층을 중심으로 자아실현 의지의 현격한 저하 현상. 그러나 오늘 동학과 개벽학을 재론한다면 자기변혁을 시발점으로 동시에 종교와 철학, 명상과 수행에 국한되는 것이 아니라 현실 변혁을 위한 정치, 경제, 과학과 생태, 문화 등을 포함해야 한다.
그렇지만 철학이면서 종교인 동학 공부의 목적을 우주와 생명, 인간에 대한 관점의 확장에 두고 싶다고 말한다.
  • -신에 대한 인식의 확장
  • -시간에 대한 관점의 확장
  • -세계는 영적인 네트워크
7.김용휘는 젊은 시절 종교적 성찰이 매우 높은 사람으로 보인다(첫 강의에서도 책을 쓰게 된 동기에서도 밝힘) 특히 기독교의 믿음과 구원의 관계에 대한 회의가 컸던 것으로 본다(14쪽). 믿음은 객관적 신조에 대한 무조건적 수용이 아니라 “진정한 믿음은 가슴영역에서 일어나는 진정한 변화”라고 생각한다. 하여 기독교의 믿음이란 “예수로 상징되는 진리와 생명이라는 보편적 가치를 자기 삶의 중심적 가치로 수용해서 살아가는 마음의 거룩한 상태”로 이해한다.
10.동학은 儒佛仙(도참까지)의 요소가 있지만 유불선의 종합이 아니다. 특히 수운의 부친 퇴계학파의 맥을 이은 근암공으로부터 성리학을 배웠지만, 김교수는 동학에서 “중국의 유학에 대해 종언을 선언하고 새로운 학문의 필요성을 역설한 의미가 크다”(6)는 점을 부각하고자 한다. 그렇다고 유학을 완전 부정하는 것은 아니다. “유학의 이상에는 동의하지만 현실의 유학은 극복해야 할 대상이었다.”(51)
11. 다른 동학 연구자들보다 김용휘는 서학(기독교)과의 관계에 관심이 높다. 젊은 시절 실망했던 기독교에 담긴 여운과 애정이리라. 어느 학회에서 “동학과 수운은 조선에 나타난 기독교와 예수다”라고 발언했더니만, 대종교이었던 한 분이 이의를 제기했다. 그 발언에는 동학과 민족 종교를 포섭하려는 기독교의 의도가 숨어 있다는 것이다. 그래, 난 그 반대로도 말하고 싶다고 했다. 그러나 어차피 기독교인인 내가 말하는 것은 임팩트가 없어 보였다. 그런데 천도교인인 김용휘 교수의 바로 이 말을 그 분에게 들려주고 싶다.
첫째, 예수. 예수를 인간과는 다른 예외적이고 절대적인 존재, 즉 신적 존재로 격상시킨 예수의 신성의 문제다. “만약 그리스도교에서 예수를 가장 모범적인 삶을 산 인류의 스승으로 脫신화화하고, 예수만이 아니라 모든 사람이 하느님의 아들딸이며 모두가 그리스도가 될 수 있다고 한다면 그것이 바로 동학이다.”(60쪽)

2025/08/25

선교자 바울로의 실천적 형이상학 < 이찬수 - 가톨릭뉴스 지금여기

이찬수

2,500년 서양 사상사를 정리하는 중이다.
20세기 지구사를 왜 서양이 지배하게 되었는지 궁금하기도 해서...

거시적으로 보면 철학, 종교, 정치, 문화...뭐든 연결되지 않은 것이 없다.
요새는 전공이 워낙 세분화돼서 나무만 보고 숲은 보지 못하는 경우가 태반이다.
풀, 나무, 꽃, 벌레 등을 포함하는 숲을 눈여겨보니 생명들의 상호관계성이 자연스럽게 드러난다.
2년, 24회 연재가 끝나면 보완해서 작은 책을 하나 내야겠다.
===
그나저나 사람 이름 하나 통일 못하는 현실은 뭔가.
바울, 바울로, 바오로,...
영어나 독어로는 Paul 하나면 되는데, 한국어로는 세 이름이 통용된다. 
모르는 사람이 보면 다른 사람 이름 같다. 
이것도 전체를 안 보고 자기만 보는 데서 비롯되는 일이다.
가톨릭과 개신교가 함께 번역한 공동성경 표현에 따라 나는 차선책으로 '바울로'를 선호한다.
가톨릭도 독자적인 우리말 성경을 내기 전에는 '바울로'라고 했는데, 지금은 '바오로'로 굳어가고 있다. 
개신교 인구가 많아 '바울'이 대세이고 나도 그게 제일 익숙하기는 하지만...
가톨릭과 개신교는 사람들 헷갈리게 하지 말고 고유명사 통일하는 공동 작업부터 했으면 좋겠다.
#융합으로서의_철학과_신학(😎


선교자 바울로의 실천적 형이상학 - 가톨릭뉴스 지금여기

선교자 바울로의 실천적 형이상학
이찬수

입력 2025.08.25
===

형이상학이라는 말

플라톤과 아리스토텔레스 이래 서양철학은 대체로 형이상학적이었다. 형이상학(metaphysics)이라는 말은 로도스의 안드로니쿠스(Andronicus Rhodius)가 아리스토텔레스의 저작들을 재편집할 때 "제일철학"을 ‘자연학(physics) 뒤에(meta)’ 배치한 데서 비롯되었다. 편집상의 이유로 배치된 '제일철학"이 점차 ‘자연 현상(physics)의 너머(meta)’를 다루는 분야라는 인식이 생겼고, 그 뒤 ‘형(physics) 이상(meta) 연구’가 하나의 학문으로 정립되어 온 것이다. 자연 현상(physics) 너머(meta)에 대한 연구, 즉 metaphysics를 일본에서 “형상 이전의 것을 도라 하고 형상 이후의 것을 기라 한다”(形而上者謂之道, 形而下者謂之器)는 "주역"의 구절을 활용해 번역하면서, 한자 문화권에서도 ‘형이상학’이라는 말이 통용되어 왔다.

형이상학은 말 그대로 ‘형상(形) 너머의 세계(上)를 연구하는 학문(學)’이다. 여기서는 눈에 보이는 자연 현상을 자연 현상 되게 해 주는 원리, 혹은 그 너머의 보편적 존재에 대해 탐구한다. 처음에는 아리스토텔레스의 철학을 가리키는 용어로 시작되었지만, 아리스토텔레스가 스승 플라톤의 철학을 비판적으로 종합하고자 한 데서 알 수 있듯이, 그 사상적 연원은 플라톤에게로 소급된다.

보이지 않는 세계 혹은 진정한 실재에 대한 탐구는 소수 엘리트 사상가에게 맡겨 있던 어려운 작업이었다. 그런데 서양 문화권에서 ‘형이상학적’ 사고방식이 비교적 자연스러워진 데에는 그리스도교의 역할이 크다. 그리스도교는 철학적 형이상학의 영향을 받으며 보이지 않는 세계에 대한 대중적 상상력을 발전시켜 왔고, 그 세계를 신의 단일성으로 해석해 왔다. 신에 대한 논리적 상상이 유일신론으로 전개되었고, 형이상학적 사유를 대중화하는 기초로 작용한 것이다.

택일신론과 이원론적 일신론

물론 그리스도교의 유일신론은 형이상학의 단순한 연장이 아니다. 유일신론은 고대 유대교에 뿌리를 두고 있다. 그 뿌리는 유일신론(monotheism)보다는 택일신론(henotheism, 擇一神論)에 가까웠다. 택일신론은 신들이 여럿이라는 사실 자체는 부정하지 않으면서, 자신들은 그 신들 가운데 하나를 택해[擇] 마치 하나뿐인 신[一神]처럼 섬기는 자세다. 야훼가 자신들을 선택했으니 자신들도 그 신에게 전적으로 헌신하겠다는 신앙적 다짐의 표현이다. 신을 수량적으로 이해하기보다는 질적 헌신의 대상으로 간주하는 자세다.(신명 6,4-5 참조)

그러다가 야훼가 자기들만의 신이라는 생각에 변화가 생기기 시작했다. 기원전 7-6세기의 예레미야나 제2이사야 같은 예언자들은 자기들의 신이 자기들 밖의 세상에도 관여한다고 생각했다. 예레미야는 분단된 조국의 계속되는 분열과 주변 강대국들의 흥망성쇠를 보면서, 자기들이 믿는 야훼는 자기 민족만의 신이 아니라, 다른 민족, 심지어는 적대국에도 관여하는 세계적 신이라고 인식하게 되었다. 예레미야 이후의 인물인 제2이사야도 야훼는 하늘과 땅의 창조주로서, 페르시아의 왕도 구원의 도구로 사용한다고 생각했다.(이사 45,1-13 참조) 야훼는 좋은 일만이 아니라 나쁜 일의 기원도 되고, 나만이 아니라 모두의 기원이 된다는 것이었다. ‘신이 하나’라는 말의 의미를 좀 더 넓게 생각하기 시작한 것이다.

유대인들이 바빌로니아에 이어 페르시아의 지배를 받던 시절(기원전 538-332)에 조로아스터교로부터 받은 영향도 적지 않았다. 조로아스터교의 창조주인 아후라 마즈다(지혜의 주님)에게서 자신들의 신 개념에서 아쉬운 부분을 채웠다. 유대인들은 신이 하나뿐인 양 생각하면서도 그 신을 방해하는 악의 세력과 신의 관계를 명확히 설정하지 못했다. 그러다가 조로아스터교의 악신인 앙그라 마이뉴로부터 악의 개념을 명확히 인식하면서, 그전에는 단순히 ‘적대자’ 정도를 의미하던 사탄의 개념과 위치를 확장시켰다. 조로아스터교는 애당초부터 선(신)과 악(신)이 대결하다가 결국 선(신)이 악(신)을 물리치고, 모든 것을 선(신) 안에 통합시킨다는 세계관을 가지고 있었다. 이원론적 대결을 결국 일원론적으로 해결하는 방식이었다. 이런 세계관을 ‘이원론적 일신론’이라고 한다. 고대 유대교도 희미한 이원론적 일신론의 경향을 보여 주었다.

바티칸에 있는 성 바오로 동상. (사진 출처 = commons.wikimedia.org)

신 개념의 보편성을 전개한 바울로

그리스도교는 이러한 신관을 좀 더 일원론에 가깝게 계승했다. 초기 유대계 그리스도인들에게 역사는 시작과 끝이 있는 일회적이고 직선적인 것이었다. 그 역사의 범주는 그들이 상상할 수 있는 모든 것에 미쳤고, 신이 그 역사 전체의 주관자였다. 하지만 역사와 신의 관계를 논리적으로 명확히 규명하는 데까지는 이르지 못했다. 택일신론과 유일신론을 잘 구분하지 못했다. 현실 너머에 대한 논리적 상상력은 취약했다.

이런 상황에서 유대인들이 예수를 통해서 했던 특별한 경험의 의미를 보편적으로 확장시킬 줄 아는 이들이 생겨났다. 당시로서는 세계적 사조라고 할 수 있을 헬레니즘적 사유 방식을 가지고, 보이는 물질 세계와 보이지 않는 영적 세계를 구분하고, 영적 세계의 보편성과 영원성을 중시하는 유대인들이 등장한 것이다. 바울로가 대표적이다.

바울로(기원후 5년?-64년?)는 로마 시민권을 가진 유대인이었다. 헬레니즘적 문화와 사상이 활발하게 교차하던 타르수스 지역에서 주로 활동했고, 유대인의 종교 경험을 헬레니즘 문화권의 비유대인에게 전달할 수 있는 ‘보편적’ 언어에 익숙했다. 역사적 인물인 예수의 의미를 역사 너머로까지 확장시킬 수 있는 정신적 역량이 있었다.

바울로는 환상 중에 예수를 만나는 체험을 했다. 역사적 예수를 직접 본 적은 한 번도 없다. 하지만 그렇기에 역사적 예수의 모습(physics)을 넘어서는(meta), 예수의 보편적 본질을 자유롭게 상상할 수 있었다. 예수의 역사성보다는 그 예수의 본질이라고 여겨지는, 우주적 차원으로 승화된 초월적 그리스도의 측면을 중시했다. 그것이 예수의 본모습이라고 믿었다.

이것은 당시 헬레니즘 안에 녹아들어 간 플라톤의 이데아론이나 아리스토텔레스의 형이상학, 그리고 로고스를 만물의 보편적 원리로 간주했던 스토아주의 등의 ‘간접적’ 영향이라고 할 수 있다. 실제로 기원전 1세기경 헬레니즘의 영향을 받은 지성적 유대인들 중에는 플라톤의 이데아를 신적 지성(divine mind)과 동일시하는 이들이 있었다. 바울로보다 살짝 앞선 유대인 철학자 필로(기원전 20-기원후 50)가 창세기의 신을 비가시적 플라톤의 이데아론으로 해석했던 것이 그 사례다. 필로와 같은 이들은 이데아를 초월적 존재인 신과 연결시킴으로써 이데아가 종교적으로 해석되고 수용되는 데 기여했다. 이와 비슷하게 바울로는 “보이는 것은 잠시뿐이지만, 보이지 않는 것은 영원하다”(2코린 4,18) 말했고, 일시적인 지상의 삶(현상)과 영원한 천상의 삶(실재)을 구분했다. 물질세계와 영의 세계를 구분하던 헬레니즘 문화와 통한다고 할 수 있다.

자연 현상으로서 예수와 보편적 실재로서의 그리스도

바울로는 이런 관점을 가지고 역사적 인물인 예수의 보편적 본질을 중시했다. 유대 민족의 구원자에 해당하는 ‘메시아’를 특정 민족을 넘어서는 보편적 구원자로서의 ‘그리스도’로 인식하게 하는 데 기여했다. 바울로는 ‘부활’도 육체적 소생이 아닌 ‘영적인 몸’으로의 재탄생 차원에서 이해했다. 그는 죽으면 땅에 묻혀서 썩어 없어질 몸 자체에는 관심이 없었다. 예수의 몸도 썩어 없어졌다고 생각했던 것으로 보인다. 그 대신 ‘영적인 몸’(소마 프뉴마티콘), 즉 신이 높여 줄 현재 몸의 영적 차원에 관심을 기울였다.

‘영적인 몸’이라지만 현실의 육체와 분리되는 것은 아니다. 영적인 몸에는 그 육체를 지니고 산 결과로서의 측면도 있다. 생물학적 육체는 썩어서 없어지겠지만, 그 썩을 것이 마치 씨앗처럼 뿌려졌다가 언젠가 영적으로 재탄생한다는 것이었다. 바울로는 예수가 이러한 ‘영적인 몸’을 입고 있다고 보았고, 제자들도 그렇게 될 것이라고 기대했다: “우리가 흙으로 된 그 사람의 형상을 지녔듯이, 하늘에 속한 그분의 형상을 또한 지니게 될 것입니다.”(1코린 15,49) 여기서 말하는 하늘에 속한 그분의 형상, 즉 그리스도의 형상이 영적인 몸이다. 구체적 몸이 아닌, 영적인 몸으로의 재탄생이 바울로가 생각한 부활이다. 역사적 예수가 사후에 이 몸을 입고서 영원한 신과 더불어 존재한다고 본 것이다.

이런 입장은 1-4세기 지중해 지역에서 세를 떨치던 영지주의와는 다르다. 영지주의는 선과 악의 이원론적 도식에 따라 영은 선하지만 육은 악하다고 보았고, 이에 영향받은 그리스도인은 영혼의 구원만 인정했다. 그에 비해 바울로는 육체를 완전히 부정하지는 않았다. 영적 구원을 이야기하면서도, 바로 그렇기에 육체를 지니고도 선하게 잘 살아야 한다고 말했다. 구원의 전인성을 주장한 것이다. 바울로는 이런 방식으로 역사 내 구체적 인물에서 역사 너머와 연결되는 보편적 근거와 의미를 찾았다.

바울로와 플라톤의 차이

이런 전인적 구원론은 플라톤이나 아리스토텔레스의 형이상학과도 차이가 있다. 가령 플라톤이 영혼과 육체를 구분하고서 영혼이 육체를 떠나서 영원한 존재로 계속된다고 보았던 것에 비해, 바울로가 제시한 ‘영적인 몸’ 개념은 좀 더 통합적이다. 오늘날까지도 부활을 생물학적 소생처럼 여기는 이들이 여전히 많지만, 바울로가 부활 개념으로 말하고자 했던 것은 인간의 삶이 일시적 시간으로 끝나지 않고 영원과 연결된다는 사실이었다. 예수가 부활한 뒤 ‘승천’(昇天)했다고 하지만, 이때의 승천은 손오공이 구름 타고 하늘로 올라가는 것과 같은 공간적 상승 이야기가 아니다. 그것은 역사적 예수가 보편적 하느님, 즉 영원의 세계에 합류해 있다는 사실을 말하기 위한 신화적 표현이다. 육체성을 영원성과 연결 지으려는 사상적 노력의 일환이다.

바울로의 사상을 잘 보면, 부활과 승천에 대한 형이상학적이면서 합리적인 해석의 길이 보인다. 예수를 대상으로 하는 작은 종교 운동이 점차 보편적 의미를 확보하게 된 데에는 바울로의 역할이 지대하다. 헬레니즘 문화에 내재된 형이상학을 수용한 바울로의 실천적 해석학의 큰 공헌이라고 할 수 있다. 종교 운동이 형이상학과 만나면서 신학이 되고, 그 신학이 철학적 형이상학에 대중적 숨을 불어넣는 역할을 한 것이다.



이찬수
서강대 종교학과에서 박사학위를 받았다. 강남대 교수, 서울대 통일평화연구원 HK연구교수, 보훈교육연구원장 등을 지냈다. 신학, 불교학, 철학을 중심으로 이십여 년 종교학을, 십수 년 평화학을 강의하고 연구했으며, 아시아종교평화학회를 창립해 부회장으로 봉사하면서, 가톨릭대에서 평화학을 강의하고 있다.

<가톨릭뉴스 지금여기 https://www.catholicnews.co.kr>






===