Ahh I was just about to ask about this, wondering if this is why the PBTB chose the date
Was Julius Caesar the real Jesus Christ?
- Thread starter Laura
- Start date
The Fates chose the date, not TPTB. It just so happens the ladies know how to make history interesting for those who're paying attention.
Reading a paper by Manfred Clauss called "Deus praesens: Der römische Kaiser als Gott" (Deus praesens: the Roman Emperor as God), in which he critizises modern scholars' tendency to downplay or outright deny that the Romans worshiped the Emperor/Cesar as a living god, i.e. during his lifetime.
Romans did indeed worship living men as gods in many cases even before Cesar, so there is a certain tradition there. But it all went into overdrive with Cesar. Clauss shows that this took place not only in the eastern Empire, which is often said, although it was perhaps more pronounced there (and it's there that the Epiphany holiday apparently took shape): in Rome, too, Cesar was worshipped as a god, and even became a god officially, sanctioned by the state. That is, he was elevated among the "State Gods" even while he was living.
Even in 49, after Cesar crossed the Rubicon, he was greeted as a god in the municipia. After his victory over Pompeius (48) and even more after his vicotry near Zela (47), he was worshiped as a god in the east.
There were of course skeptics in Rome and later detractors, but this is to be expected. Cesar was probably worshipped more in the east than in the corrupt capital, but it speaks volumes that even there the anti-Cesar forces had to accept it. Think Trump vs. Washington DC, except that Cesar actually did clean the Swamp, and was reverred for it (and other reasons).
The paper has lots of interesting things to say, including about the time after Cesar, maybe I'll translate a few passages.
Romans did indeed worship living men as gods in many cases even before Cesar, so there is a certain tradition there. But it all went into overdrive with Cesar. Clauss shows that this took place not only in the eastern Empire, which is often said, although it was perhaps more pronounced there (and it's there that the Epiphany holiday apparently took shape): in Rome, too, Cesar was worshipped as a god, and even became a god officially, sanctioned by the state. That is, he was elevated among the "State Gods" even while he was living.
Even in 49, after Cesar crossed the Rubicon, he was greeted as a god in the municipia. After his victory over Pompeius (48) and even more after his vicotry near Zela (47), he was worshiped as a god in the east.
There were of course skeptics in Rome and later detractors, but this is to be expected. Cesar was probably worshipped more in the east than in the corrupt capital, but it speaks volumes that even there the anti-Cesar forces had to accept it. Think Trump vs. Washington DC, except that Cesar actually did clean the Swamp, and was reverred for it (and other reasons).
The paper has lots of interesting things to say, including about the time after Cesar, maybe I'll translate a few passages.
This is what Manfred Clauss says:
So he focuses on Italy/Rome as opposed to the East, but I'm not sure about the definition of "East" and "West" during Cesar's time. I sometimes read "Hellenistic East", which suggests the distinction had to do with Greek and culturally Greek parts of the empire and the more strictly Roman parts.
Heck, I didn't even think of that before you mentioned it. Duh. This is indeed highly symbolic. I wouldn't put it past whoever runs things dping this deliberately as a sort of revenge fantasy against Cesar. Or, it was MAGA that tapped into this energy first...
No I think it was just coincidental. 6th January (give or take a day) is always the 'cut-off date' for Congress to approve the electoral college votes resulting from the popular vote 2 months beforehand in the presidential election. That's why the rally was planned for that day, to pressure Congress to do something to 'stop the steal'. The 'optimates' pre-empted it with a counter-insurgency operation that was apparently months in the planning, according to this congressman who's investigating what happened:
I agree. I think "East" in connection with "Roman Empire" could have meant different areas around the Eastern Mediterranean during different times.
Later there was e.g. the Western and the Eastern Roman Empire. The latter included Greece, some parts of Western Asia (Turkey et al.) and some parts of North-Eastern Africa (Egypt et al.).
Division of the empire after the death of Theodosius I in 395 (Wikipedia):
Roman provinces on the eve of the Assassination of Julius Caesar (Wikipedia):
msasa79
Jedi Master
Seeing that Caesar got Illyricum (and Gaul) in 59 BC as his own provinces, and by extension was most probably venerated there as Divus Iulius since that time on, i.e. already (at least) during his last 15 years of earthly life, I'd expect that "East" included that part of the Roman Empire too.
On the same link as above cited text, it says that St. Paul in Romans 15:19 used a phrase "even unto" (usually translated "as far as") Illyricum, in relation to his missions, which can be both exclusive and inclusive.
Even if exclusive meaning of the phrase is taken as a correct one, it can be reasoned that there was no need to preach much in Illyricum, because Caesar was already Divus Iulius there long time before St. Paul's missions, at least it seems so to me. Of course, I could be off base with that reasoning.
Link: Bible Map: Illyricum
msasa79
Jedi Master
Addendum to previous post.
In FPTM pp. 526 and 546, Laura made the case that probably the last part "from Jerusalem ... news of Christ." in Romans 15:19 have been edited/inserted, with "from Jerusalem" most likely, if not certainly being added later.
Considering the next line though, Romans 15:20, where St. Paul says "Thus I make my ambition to proclaim the good news, not where Christ has already been named, ...", it seems that the mention of Illyricum in previous verse would fit nicely with what was presented in previous post here, leaving only "from Jerusalem" as an impostor in that sentence.
On the other hand, seeing from the Greek text that what Laura said was an addition to Romans 15:19 forms a 'closed' sentence on its own, her conclusion to remove that complete verse seems also valid and justified.
Greek text can be found at the bottom of the site: Romans 15:19 - Paul the Minister to the Gentiles.
In FPTM pp. 526 and 546, Laura made the case that probably the last part "from Jerusalem ... news of Christ." in Romans 15:19 have been edited/inserted, with "from Jerusalem" most likely, if not certainly being added later.
Considering the next line though, Romans 15:20, where St. Paul says "Thus I make my ambition to proclaim the good news, not where Christ has already been named, ...", it seems that the mention of Illyricum in previous verse would fit nicely with what was presented in previous post here, leaving only "from Jerusalem" as an impostor in that sentence.
On the other hand, seeing from the Greek text that what Laura said was an addition to Romans 15:19 forms a 'closed' sentence on its own, her conclusion to remove that complete verse seems also valid and justified.
Greek text can be found at the bottom of the site: Romans 15:19 - Paul the Minister to the Gentiles.
msasa79
Jedi Master
Additional note about translation of last part of Romans 15:19, where Illyricum was mentioned.
On the same website with Greek original text, there are also comments by someone named Ellicott, and among them:
Which asked for closer look at the Greek text of that part:
The word "kyklo" (Dative form of kyklos - circle, ring) in relation to Illyricum reminded me of Laura's experience with Bible translation interpretation recounted in AG Ch 25 The Boat Ride to Damascus:
All in all, when "Jerusalem" and related words are removed, the Romans 15:19 reads/translates simply as:
"Therefore all around (or in a circle around) Illyricum, I have fully ...",
which connects very nicely with the next verse, and makes perfect sense in the context that one of Caesar's HQ provinces was in fact that same Illyricum.
On the same website with Greek original text, there are also comments by someone named Ellicott, and among them:
Which asked for closer look at the Greek text of that part:
The word "kyklo" (Dative form of kyklos - circle, ring) in relation to Illyricum reminded me of Laura's experience with Bible translation interpretation recounted in AG Ch 25 The Boat Ride to Damascus:
All in all, when "Jerusalem" and related words are removed, the Romans 15:19 reads/translates simply as:
"Therefore all around (or in a circle around) Illyricum, I have fully ...",
which connects very nicely with the next verse, and makes perfect sense in the context that one of Caesar's HQ provinces was in fact that same Illyricum.
Roman provinces on the eve of the Assassination of Julius Caesar (Wikipedia):
Yes, here's what Clauss says later in the paper:
So he counts these places as belonging to the West (but outside Italy), which suggests that the East was everything east of Italy, except Africa. He also excludes Macedonia here, which is strange. I suspect there's no clear-cut consensus here, especially if the Romans themselves didn't make a clear-cut distinction between east + west at the time. Perhaps this is a later thing where historians were used to thinking in these terms?
divusiulius
The Force is Strong With This One
Ancient letter written by Roman emperor leads archaeologists to "monumental" discovery in Italy
The expedition's lead archaeologist announced the find at the Archaeological Institute of America's annual meeting.
www.cbsnews.com
Mind blowing article of fresh new Discovery in Italy that to me is the final proof. About Caesar being venerated in the eastern provinces there is the famous Greek inscription from the Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum (number 2957) :
“Gaius Julius Caesar…Chief Priest…God made manifest and common Saviour of Mankind.”
Lastly About the images of Jesus and the coins tomorrow I will post some Academic sources and places where they were found so I don’t leave you with the youtube video only
