Is Christianity basically ripped off from Caeasar and Alexander the Great?

[jorgammon]

There are very odd similarities in the general outline between Jesus and Caesar's lifestory, and very distinctive story points that Jesus' story shares with Caesar's and Alexander's.

Both Caesar and Jesus came from oligarchical societies that disdained kings. (The Roman Senate hated kings, and the Old Testament characterized the kings as representing utter misrule) Both Caesar and Jesus were hailed as kings in spite of this. Both Caesar and Jesus received foreknowledge of their own deaths that they ignored. (Ides of March vs "One of you will betray me")

From Alexander the Great's story you have the "virgin birth" (AKA a god cucks a man by impregnating his wife). Alexander the Great was told by his mother privately that his real father wasn't Philip II of Macedon but Zeus taking the form of a snake and slipping into her bed.

If just feel like these similarities are too distinctive to be ignored and are rather damning.

[Shiranu]

1. Caesar's society absolutely did not despise kings - the Republic was nearly 450 years old at his birth and was on it's last legs; society didn't overthrow Caesar, they celebrated him - the people who assassinated him were all aristocrats and were quickly killed; apparently assassinating the guy who was giving the people employment and land wasn't kosher.

The Tanakh also celebrates king Cyrus, King David, Saul, Solomon... it's not the position that was despised, it was the actions. To this day King Solomon and Cyrus both are highly regarded within Jewish culture as examples of what a ruler should be.

2. Odin received foreknowledge of his death; Achilles and Hector knew of their impending doom; the idea of "knowing you are going to die and then" dying is an incredibly common trope - both in historical media and modern.

His "fore-knowledge" was also written down by Plutarch decades later, after Yeshu would have already been executed so I don't see much link there.

3. The Buddha was born of a virgin through immaculate conception, Horus to a virgin Isis, Krishna as well - all three far more likely to have influenced the Jesus-mythos due to their (relatively) peaceful interactions with the Israelites while the Romans were... let's say... not people Jews were big on after they might have done a small bit of mass genocide from 77 AD to 130 AD.

[Hydra009]

Yeah, ancient Israel absolutely did not despise kings.  Like the rest of the region, they were quite accustomed to kingly rule.  I'd go so far as to say that they could scarcely conceive of anything but kingly rule and their religion reflects that.

The early Roman Republic, established due to the killing of a monarch (a Superb move, I might add.  :P  Kudos to the one, maybe two people who will get that joke) took a very dim view of monarchy.  But that was centuries before Caesar and views towards one-man rule had become fairly mixed, hence the Roman civil war.  Caesar was not hailed as king (at least, not to his face) but instead as a dictator in perpetuity, or more tactfully, the first among equals.  Though it is true that the Senate despised any sort of one-man rule, primarily because it severely weakened their own power.

[jorgammon]

 I get your points about the mythological aspects, which I admit I am less versed in, but I think when it comes to you disputing the political similarities, you're getting into arguments that are semantic at best, and petty contrarianism at worst.

Caesar was a king in all but name, and you admit that the Roman political system was built out of anti-monarchist roots. Even if the masses loved Caesar the system was still fundamentally anti-monarchist, even if the tendency over time was towards concentration of power in one person's hands.

As for the Hebrews, yes they had kings, but that doesn't mean they didn't encode resentment of this fact into their religion. The Book of Samuel ends with Israel asking for a king, which results in their god saying that their king will utterly ruin them.