Who wrote The New Testament, and why?

[LatinAmericanview]

Joel Benyamin, an Israeli author who has read Caesar's Messiah, has written a piece for the Israeli media based upon it. He has given me permission to reprint it here on the forum. It is well reasoned and, moreover, is an example of the influence that Caesar's Messiah is beginning to have upon the understanding of history and the origin of anti-Semitism.

Who wrote The New Testament, and why?

By: Yoel Benyamin

Tekoa, Israel–When it comes to the origins of the New Testament and the relationship between early Christianity and Judaism we Jews care little. We don't even want to know.

One aspect of the subject that is important to learn is not whether Jesus was "the Messiah" but who wrote the New Testament- and why?

In the first Century of the Common Era, if you were unlucky enough to be a slave Judaism- and the Jews- probably looked very attractive. Slaves must have admired the Jews with their much more sophisticated moral, ethical, family-oriented society. When the Dispersion took place the Jews were already very welcomed with open arms everywhere else in the Roman Empire- in no small part to the admiration felt for their "way of life."

The Gentile slaves looked up to the Jews because it was probably known that the Jews (with the Pharisees- not the Saducees,  leading the way) were fighting for the right of all the slaves in the Roman Empire to be free men. This is obviously something that bothered the Romans who could not tolerate such ideas spreading throughout the Empire if they wanted to continue to enjoy the economic value of slave labor.

If the slaves had begun to see the attractiveness of Judaism as a religion the Romans had to offer a replacement ...

Please keep in mind that the slaves are always offered some incentive to revolt.  This is the great pattern in history.  The rest of the article is at my blog
http://latinamericanview.wordpress.com/

[joeblow]

These attacks against Christianity, especially by a Jew, are so easily disproved that they are on the exact same level as the tirades of Greg Szmanski and Eric Jon Phelps. First, an obsurd hypothesis is made (ex. the Jesuits are behind 9/11) based on unproved facts (ex. the Black Pope controls all the secret services of the world) and, finally, particular bits and episodes of history are taken out of context to support the lie (ex. the Nazis had a concurdant with the Vatican).

Please Latin, I beg you to let go of this militant atheist theme you have been having on your shows and posts lately. It diminishes your talent and future prospects as a future star in the new field of internet conspiracy radio.

Your friend,

Joe Blow.

[joeblow]

By the way, Joel Bainerman used to be the right hand man of Barry Chamish who was made famous in Israel for his book exposing the Rabin assassination as being carried out by the Israeli government. The former Canadian Chamish is a rabid Zionist who later wrote books about UFOs and Nephalim being seen in modern Israel. Later, he fell under the wing of Greg Szmanski and was convinced of the Vatican-led New World Order and now says that Shimon Peres is a Temporal Co-Adjutor. He and Eric Jon Phelps were together at the lastest Conspiracy Convention 2008.

You have to examine the source.

[Roy Hobs]

I concur with JoeBlo.  Stop trashing religions already.

I listened to your last Podcast and you imply that 'evolution' is true.  

Evolution is also "religion".  Something that cannot be proven.  Something believed on 'faith'.  I find it odd that most evolutionists believe in a creator.  But then believe in Evolution.  Total contradiction.  

True believers in Jesus believe in 'faith'.  Faith is something believed which is unseen.  

Don't judge believers in Jesus based upon christianity.  The two are polar opposites.  

No one can prove anything in history.  It is all hearsay.  We can't even truly know who our mother is.  We believe because of what we were told.  

Latin..........leave the "proving of Religion wrong" alone.  Oh oh........I guess you wouldn't have a forum anymore because that is all you offer.  Philosphers love an audience.

[LatinAmericanview]

This is just research. I post articles in order that you may see the thread of logic.  The next show is about the unbroken thread or world view of Kabala. What I am trying to figure out is who has been at the helm of these "created religions." This is an important distinction. I think we can prove that many religions were fabricated.  i LEAVE THE METAPHYSICAL BELIEFS UNTOUCHED.  I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE CAN EVER KNOW IF THE SOUL IS IMMORTAL OR OTHER GREAT MYSTERIES BUT THE RELIGIOUS STRUCTURES DESEMINATING THIS TRUTH.  tHAT IS ANOTHER MATTER.  That shit is false.  And thank you for the advice.  Lastly, I am waiting for the Yiddish piece you were working on?

[LatinAmericanview]

Dear JB and Hobbs,
Recently I began reading the works of Leo Strauss. In a few words Strausse's position on the nature of man and the state can be put rather simply.  Men are generally weak and need to governed by a strong and wise ruler that uses all available resources to govern the state.  This of course implies the use of the Noble Lie. At the heart of th matter Strauss suggest that man is not capable of dealing with the nihilism that develops from knowing the world.  Therefore it is incumbent on the leader to fake piousness in order to lead the masses with challenging their firmly held and cherished beliefs.  I HAVE ENOUGH RESPECT FOR MY FELLOW BEINGS THAT I DON'T HIDE FROM THESE HARD ISSUES.  I ask you guys honestly- Could certain  religions be solely for the purpose of mental enslavement?

[joeblow]

I just got fired, so now I have the free time to record. Concerning the Jew Strauss, who was a close confidant of the top Nazi lawyer to Hitler, anyone such as he who is so throughly evil (in the purest meaning of the word) to praise Nietzsche Nihilism and to promote the idea that "if the world was ever to be near to global peace, then we must destroy all forms of civilization, because the ruling class would lose its power" should have his bones removed from his grave and burned. The Neo-Cons (which I assume you do not consider yourself to be one of) are rabid followers of his degenerate ideas.

The hypothesis that religions were created in order to enslave the vast majority of the population is based on the premise that they have very few or no redeeming qualities. It is up to you to prove this, not we.

[LatinAmericanview]

Yes, Joe you are correct.  But understand that I am looking at something else.  I believe that Strauss is Plato. Plato is Kabbala. Kabala is Mithra worship.  The  Plato's Republic was resurrected by Machiavelli. And I can prove the connections. However, the religions get smeared since they have been vehicles of the ruling cast to enslave the masses.   And just to make things complicated- Romans and Jews were Kabalist while they fought over control of Judaism and Christianity.


Noble lies and deadly truths

Strauss noted that thinkers of the first rank, going back to Plato, had raised the problem of whether good and effective politicians could be completely truthful and still achieve the necessary ends of their society. By implication, Strauss asks his readers to consider whether it is true that noble lies have no role at all to play in uniting and guiding the polis. Are myths needed to give people meaning and purpose and to ensure a stable society? Or can men dedicated to relentlessly examining, in Nietzsche's language, those "deadly truths," flourish freely? Thus, is there a limit to the political, and what can be known absolutely? In The City and Man, Strauss discusses the myths outlined in Plato's Republic that are required for all governments. These include a belief that the state's land belongs to it even though it was likely acquired illegitimately and that citizenship is rooted in something more than the accidents of birth. Seymour Hersh observes that Strauss endorsed noble lies: myths used by political leaders seeking to maintain a cohesive society.[14][15]

[LatinAmericanview]

The hypothesis that religions were created in order to enslave the vast majority of the population is based on the premise that they have very few or no redeeming qualities. It is up to you to prove this, not we.

This is not true. Civilization would not be possible without religion.  It gives meaning and hope to the believers.   Understand my postion "the church will be with us until the end of days"

[joeblow]

Strauss only approved of Plato's hypothesis that ideas concretely change the physical world and his way dividing society into Copper, Silver, and Gold classes, he would have never accepted Plato's idealism nor the realization of the existance of a soul (<- extremely non-Nihilistic).

[LatinAmericanview]

Here is an interestin paper- the rest can be found on my blog

LEO STRAUSS'S PLATONISM
Neil Robertson
mailto:ngrobert@is.dal.ca">ngrobert@is.dal.ca

    For Platonists are not concerned with the historical (accidental) truth, since they are exclusively interested in the philosophic (essential) truth. Only because public speech demands a mixture of seriousness and playfulness, can a true Platonist present the serious teaching, the philosophic teaching, in a historical, and hence playful, garb.

Leo Strauss
"Farabi's Plato"(1)

[1]       Leo Strauss, the historian of political

[Anonymous]

Slaves must have admired the Jews with their much more sophisticated moral, ethical, family-oriented society.

the Jews (with the Pharisees- not the Saducees, leading the way) were fighting for the right of all the slaves in the Roman Empire to be free men.

He tries to make Jews to be the saviors of the slaves... Pharisees may have been somewhat better by comparison to the Sadducees, but they were still highly Talmudic and they are the propagators of the ghetto mentality.  Nice ideas this Benyamin puts forth, but I don't buy it...

Could certain religions be solely for the purpose of mental enslavement?

Many were not created for such a purpose, but all have succumbed to being a tool of that ideal.  People must remember to separate spirituality from religious dogma and allegiance.  One is an individuals own journey, the other is a hierarchical structure of control.  People should stop feeling the need to associate themselves with a religious label in order to be spiritual.

Good discussion guys  Hash it out!

[LatinAmericanview]

Many were not created for such a purpose, but all have succumbed to being a tool of that ideal. People must remember to separate spirituality from religious dogma and allegiance. One is an individuals own journey, the other is a hierarchical structure of control. People should stop feeling the need to associate themselves with a religious label in order to be spiritual.

This part of the problem since the a great deal of the value that religion has is social. And if it is social then it becomes hierarchical in nature.  The problem is that everyone needs some sort of validation.

[Anonymous]

I just have to add that many of the social developments deriving from religions is good, but many are also bad.  When they are used to prevent dissenting thinking and other progressive thinking such as logic, that is where they become a major problem in trying to control everyone.  Adhere to whatever you want as long as I am not prevented from being free to think and act in a ethical manner.

[LatinAmericanview]

Here is the problem! How do we decide what is good or Just?  Clearly Strauss and Plato had some ideas but I am certian that we need better solutions then the ones proposed.   By the way add stuff to the blog.