Most recently, there’s been another finding that threatens to dispel the psycho-drama that spun out of Constantine’s Rome. Joseph Atwill, applying the technique of linguistic topology, presents a reasoned argument that the entire New Testament was a Roman concoction, and an insulting parody of the Jewish Old Testament. My only complaint is that Atwill fails to take it back far enough by placing it in the lap of Egypt’s eighteenth dynasty.
Much of the Roman myth involves the throwing salt into a more ancient wound: The slaying of Tutankhamun by his father’s high priest, Panehesy/Phinehas, fingered in biblical text as ‘the wicked priest’. The father being: Akhenaten (AKA Moses). This is most likely what Atwill is referring to when describing Rome’s new testament as a comidical slap in the face to the Jewish old testament.
Because of this dastardly deed, Akhenaten was hounded out of Egypt…the so called exodus, severing all ties, physically and psychologically with their Egyptian heritage. All of the biblical patriarchs were Pharaohs of Northern Egypt, centered around On and Heliopolis, links that were buried.
Atwill points out a series of events in Jesus’ ministry that are precise parallels with the events of the battle campaign of Titus Flavius as recorded by Josephus Flavius. Contending these correlations, Atwill talks about linguistic typology and the reasons why the imperial Cult of Rome, with the Flavians at the center, manufactured the New Testament and the story of Jesus for their own benefit; a Roman comedy, and a slap in the face to that warring upstart that dared break away from Rome’s prison of Nations.
The etymology of the word “Gospel” indicates it originally meant: Good news from the battlefield – in this case, Titus’ battlefield.