DIVVS·IVLIVS

Commentarii de religione Divi Iulii vel primordio Christianitatis

Category: Francesco Carotta

Antonio Piñero on Jesus was Caesar (22 October 2014)

CarottaPineroEscorialGoC

Piñero and Carotta at the Escorial conference

Fulvius de Boer may be known to our readers: he wrote this awesome piece against the detractor Anton van Hooff a couple of years ago (English translation). Now Fulvius just recently came across this blog post by a semi-supporter, Antonio Piñero, a Complutense professor of Greek philology who specializes in early Christian literature (archive; English translation by Google). Fulvius told us that he tried to post a comment there, but his reply hasn’t been published yet. Maybe because it was written in English? Are they translating it? (On that note: is there a benevolent reader who wants to translate it into Spanish for us?) At any rate, we already like Fulvius’ comments in English, so while we wait, we will reproduce his original reply here:

Read the rest of this entry »

Interview mit Francesco Carotta zu War Jesus Caesar? (2012)

Gerade ist ein neues Interview mit Francesco Carotta veröffentlicht worden… und anscheinend gibt es demnächst noch einen Nachschlag.

Direct link: Vimeo

Originalveröffentlichung auf dem Aristoblog (Michael Poost)

Für die, die es noch nicht wissen: Das neue Buch War Jesus Caesar? gibt es z.B. beim Verlag Ludwig zu kaufen.

Read the rest of this entry »

Blog Watch: No Umpire for the Empire

Aptennis

Our redivivus is really a zealot, it seems. He can’t stop posting; see his newest blunder here (archived). We’re not getting tired of wanna-be savants (see our previous articles here and here), but it’s obvious to us that the man is a lost cause. So here are just a couple of quick final points.

Read the rest of this entry »

Blog Watch: Antoninus Impius

Our redivivus has answered again (archived), and it doesn’t get any better. But first let’s make one thing clear: our previous article on A.P.’s blunder was not written to “discredit his blog”, as he alleges, but only to debunk his feeble arguments, and the style was chosen to counter A.P.’s use of derogatory language, with which he had occasionally spiced his original article. But at least A.P. seems to have noticed that some of our comments were tongue-in-cheek: “That’s rich! Divine Julius calling Antoninus Pius senile!” At least that he noticed, but it doesn’t let him off the hook.

Read the rest of this entry »

Blog Watch: A Talking Dead

Barbarbarbar

The Roman emperor Antoninus Pius died in 161 CE. Although he was deified as Divus Antoninus, he has apparently chosen to leave the septentriones and repossess his bones. He now walks among the living again and maintains a blog, where he has just recently posted a short review of Francesco Carotta’s book Jesus was Caesar: “Jesus Christ and Julius Caesar: same initials, same man?” (archived). It is commendable that this Antoninus redivivus mentions another ancient man and god, Divus Iulius, and Carotta’s theory on what eventually became of that god, but upon closer examination we can notice lots of errors, patterns of bias, and it is particularly annoying that the sources are not always quoted correctly. So how about a couple of rebuttals and corrections? That shouldn’t be too hard, so we’ll get right down to business, even if we are aware that it is near impossible to convince biased people. Here are some examples. (To avoid confusion we will refer to this Antoninus simply as A.P. hereafter.)

Read the rest of this entry »

Arcete feles – das Deutschlandradio hat ‘nen Vogel!

CatBird

Jesus war Caesar. Darüber spricht man nicht. Es wird abgewunken, Augen rollen, es scheint förmlich zu riechen, nach allem möglichen, doch keiner weiß so recht wonach. Also lieber die Finger davonlassen und weitermachen wie gehabt. Umso erstaunlicher ist, dass DRadio Wissen, eine Abteilung des Kölner Senders Deutschlandradio, am 6. September 2011 ein Interview zu Francesco Carottas Buch War Jesus Caesar? führte, welches wir weiter unten zusätzlich als MP3 eingebettet haben. Hört, hört… ein Buch, das vor einem guten Jahrzehnt den Jesus-Flohmarkt in Deutschland ein kleines bisschen durcheinandergewirbelt hatte, ist wieder kurz auf der Tagesordnung. Und damit war’s das aber auch schon, denn auch wenn es vom Sender möglicherweise gut gemeint war, ist etwas brauchbares nicht herausgekommen, was nicht nur am Kurzformat des Interviewsegments von lediglich zehn Minuten liegt.

Wo bitte soll man bei solch rasendem Geistesstillstand ansetzen? Vielleicht müsste man zuallererst den Radiomachern die Frage stellen, warum sie das Interview mit Manuel Vogel führten, einem protestantischen Theologen an der Universität Jena und ehemaligen Pfarrer. Sind Protestanten besonders gewandt in römischer Geschichte, oder haben sie sich historisch nicht doch eher durch ihre Abkehr von Rom hervorgetan? Und überhaupt: Ist Francesco Carotta ein Theologe? Geht es in seinem Buch um theologische Fragen? Tatsächlich geht es hier um Geschichtswissenschaft, um Religionsgeschichte, um Altphilologie und Textkritik, um Numismatik, Epigraphik und Archäologie. Um christliche Theologie geht es nicht einmal im Ansatz. Somit ist ein Interview mit einem frommen Theologen nicht nur fehl am Platz, sondern auch gefährlich, denn Theologie vertritt immer eine Agenda, ist also nur bis zu einem gewissen Grad wissenschaftlich. Der Rest ist Dogma. Die Gefahr mangelnder Wissenschaftlichkeit kann man aber in dieser Diskussion nicht gebrauchen. Und so stolpern wir wieder einmal über Schema F: Der Theologe dreht den Spieß um und behauptet unter anderem, die Jesus-Caesar-Forschung sei pseudowissenschaftlich, was sie nachweislich nicht ist. Dazu später mehr. Angefangen wird aber am Anfang, und bereits die Präsentation des Themas vor Beginn des eigentlichen Interviews enthält einige Fehler.

Read the rest of this entry »

Video: Francesco Carotta on the Gospel as a diegetic transposition

The video of an interview held with Francesco Carotta in German, which is embedded below, is apparently an outtake from the documentary feature film The Gospel of Caesar. Here is a paraphrased English transcript of Carotta’s statements on his theory that the Gospel is a diegetic transposition of the Roman sources on Julius Caesar’s Civil War:

Read the rest of this entry »

Jesus and Caesar: Brief notes on Palm Sunday

PalmSunday_JuliusCaesar_Jesus_foal_donkey.jpg

We’ve read lots of interpretations of Jesus’ triumphant entry into the City. We’ve read for instance that it was modeled on Roman imperial triumphs. At first glance this would seem like a false notion because Jesus clearly does not enter the city on a chariot, although all other properties do fit the picture, for example the palm branches, the spread garments, the decorated mount, the procession, the triumphant cry, the praising of both the triumphator and the highest god, as well as the entry into the city and into the temple. But it’s a fact that in two of the gospels Jesus enters the city on a young and unbacked horse, a foal, a πωλοc, “whereon never man sat”. That’s right, not on a donkey. Mark and Luke are quite clear about that. Matthew had added his usual midrash and needed to align his Gospel with the LXX, and—so it would seem—he was forced to introduce a second equid for the Old Testament prophecy to make any sense, a donkey, but couldn’t lose the original foal, which results in Jesus riding into the City on two equids at the same time, a foal and a donkey: πωλοc and ονοc. (John revised it further, merged both properties and only speaks of a young donkey, an “ass colt”.) But is that really what the evangelists did? And where’s the connection to Julius Caesar, if the Gospel is really a diegetic transposition of the historical sources on Caesar’s Civil War?

Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: