From analysis and research, it was Nimrod (aka Gilgamesh) and his associates who were adepts at devising systems for capturing and binding men to their political structures using deception and "religion", etc. It is suggested that they held themselves out as divine god-kings and were tyrants who devised complex 'religions' to help justify their rule, abuses and systems and that such was and is their "craft" or "the Craft". Get it? Nimrod as a
hunter...perhaps even a hunter or snarer of men willing to reduce men to chattel if ever it suited Nimrod's interests--hunter/manhunter. I imagine it might have been rather easy for Nimrod/Gilgamesh to build cities when he could populate them through kidnapping and slavery, eh?
It is also suggested that Nimrod set and his co-horts set themselves up to be gods over men but while in active rebellion against the Godhead.
Its worth noting that Gilgamesh accompanied by a half man half beast type creature set off to the mountain of God to kill "Huwawah" (or is it "Yuwawah"?). If Gilgamesh = Nimrod (Rebel) then the stories of Gilgamesh would tend to point at Nimrod being an "antichrist" (against the Annointed/Annointing) type who was out to kill God, and, if not God, his people.
The link between Nimrod and Rome might have a lot to do with what happened to the Chaldean priesthood (the same ones who Daniel would have been familiar with) post
Belshazzar: it is suggested that they found refuge at Pergamos/Pergamum (Western turkey, Asia Minor) and set up camp there. What links with Rome and Asia Minor might be obviated thusly:
Attalus III bequeathed his dominions to the Romans. Being that Attalus III had no heirs the Chaldean priesthood had to wait for a successor which would be Julius Caesar (born 100BC).
Could it be the account of Jesus' "40 days in the wilderness" serves as a record Jesus' rejection of an offer of kingship under the Chaldean priesthood?
In the book
Passover & Sukkot (pp. 368, 369) by Thomas H. Perdue, it is explained how Julius Caesar became successor to the Babylonian/Chaldean priesthood and heir to the titles held by Attalus III (i.e. "Supreme Pontiff of the Babylonian Order"). In Revelations the seat of Satan is held to have been at Pergamum/Pergamos. It is suggested that the Seat of Satan then was transferred to Rome in 133 BCE with kings of Pergamum up to that point taking the place of Belshazzar for the Chaldean/Babylonian priesthood at Pergamum.
***
I suppose it depends on what one means by "religion".
***
Nonetheless, the eloquent point is in that one of the fascinating things about the article that is the centerpiece of this thread is that the article shows how much "religion" has served to obfuscate the truth about 70 AD.