Was Jesus' father a Roman soldier named Pantera?

[jorgammon]

According to early Roman and Jewish scholars Jesus' real father was a roman soldier named Pantera. Although this could be framed as Roman and Jewish smear of an undesirable religion, I would say that this is a much more likely scenario than the Christian theory, which is that Jesus was born of a God fucking a woman.

I feel like if this were true, this would explain a LOT about Jesus' politics, specifically his desire to incorporate non-Jewish people into the Jewish religion. If he was in fact half-Roman, half-Jewish, and a bastard no less, maybe he wouldn't feel at home with either Roman or Jewish society and would thus feel a desire to merge the two, of course under his own control.

Food for thought.

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I thought his name was Diccus Biggus.

[the_antithesis]

...this could be framed as Roman and Jewish smear of an undesirable religion, ...

Too bad it didn't work.

I feel like if this were true, this would explain a LOT about Jesus' politics, specifically his desire to incorporate non-Jewish people into the Jewish religion. If he was in fact half-Roman, half-Jewish, and a bastard no less, maybe he wouldn't feel at home with either Roman or Jewish society and would thus feel a desire to merge the two, of course under his own control.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Like how Adolph Hitler was part Jewish and famously tried to incorporate the Jewish people into German society.

[Mike Cl]

According to early Roman and Jewish scholars Jesus' real father was a roman soldier named Pantera. Although this could be framed as Roman and Jewish smear of an undesirable religion, I would say that this is a much more likely scenario than the Christian theory, which is that Jesus was born of a God fucking a woman.

I feel like if this were true, this would explain a LOT about Jesus' politics, specifically his desire to incorporate non-Jewish people into the Jewish religion. If he was in fact half-Roman, half-Jewish, and a bastard no less, maybe he wouldn't feel at home with either Roman or Jewish society and would thus feel a desire to merge the two, of course under his own control.

Food for thought.

the christian Jesus is a character fabricated for propaganda purposes.  Not real.  So, the story of his father being a Roman soldier is not anything to do with Jesus, but the creator of the story; what was the crafter of the stories point?  The pursuit of the the history of jesus is like trying to determine the 'real' origin of Bugs Bunny--neither are factual.   

[aitm]

Never heard such a theory. Link?

[jorgammon]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius_Julius_Abdes_Pantera

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Very little from that age is reliable information.

[Hydra009]

According to early Roman and Jewish scholars Jesus' real father was a roman soldier named Pantera.

According to early metal scholars, he was also a Cowboy From Hell.

[Shiranu]

Very little from that age is reliable information.

No more than the 1900 years that have followed.

Was Jesus' father a Roman soldier named Pantera?

It wouldn't change the story either way, so... does it matter? Not really.

Impossible to know; might as well speculate on if the denari that rolled from Caesar's toga was heads or laurels.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

No more than the 1900 years that have followed.

Not even close. We know that Jesus was pure fiction. The Council of Niacea is well-documented.

[Shiranu]

Not even close. We know that Jesus was pure fiction. The Council of Niacea is well-documented.

The Council of Nicaea is well documented; it's purpose was largely to deal with the disciples of Arian questioning the metaphysical issues of God the Son being the same and/or different from God the Father and to unify the various branches of Christianity under one umbrella - importantly, the umbrella held by Constantine and the political aristocracy so that the church stopped fighting for better treatment of slaves and less corruption in government.

Likewise we have various regional non-Christian groups, such as Zoroastrians and Manichaeists, as well as Hellenistic, Babylonian, Jewish, Syrian, etc. Gnostics who recognized Jesus as a prophet (but not necessarily a savior figure) by the 100s AD - 200 years before Nicaea.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Very concise answers to questions I didn't ask.

[Shiranu]

Very concise answers to questions I didn't ask.

So then what was the purpose of bringing up the Council of Nicaea - what about it is supporting evidence of Jesus being made-up?

[Cassia]

The gospel was written in the figurative, allegorical style of the day and is a reframing of the Jewish scriptures, incorporating pagan traditions as a Greco-Roman mystery cult.

If it wasn't that pile of BS, it would be some other pile of BS. Are there any cultures anywhere in the world without a tradition of "spiritual" nonsense?

[Shiranu]

Okay?

The Illiad was written in Homeric epic, with the gods taking physical action in the world - does that mean Hector, Achilles and Agamemnon didn't exist or that the war for Troy is fantastic?

We have secular sources of his existence, we have Christian writings outside the Bible, and we have non-Christians interacting with them all within the first century A.D. .

"Did Jesus exist" is not a spiritual question, it's a secular one - and when answering secular questions we cant let our biases get in the way and pigeon hole us into intentionally changing history to fit our own agendas. There is too much of that as it is, and I'm tired of having to sort through centuries of spiritual and secular leaders and their zombies doing exactly that and erasing the details of countless millions of people's existence from history.