|
January 27th, 2011 | #1 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 169
|
"Caesar's " Messiah
http://api.ning.com/files/M6WAOx*iam...b/roman1_2.pdf
Although he titles it a Roman conspiracy the evidence he presents is for a Jewish one. http://library.nu/docs/8QN1K34VOU/Ca...Invent%20Jesus Worth a read and he definitely uncovers new stuff about Josephus. To demonstrate that Christianity's divine origin parallels Judaism's, the authors of Christianity took the events from the story of the original Exodus that had numbers associated with them and inserted those numbers into their story of the birth of Christianity. In other words, since God gave the law to Moses fifty days after the first Passover, Christianity would give the "new" law 50 days after its Passover, the crucifixion of Jesus. On the day that the law of Moses was given, 3,000 died for wor- shipping the golden calf.185 On the day the "spirit" was given to the disciples of Christ, 3,000 were added into Christ and received life,186 signifying that the improved covenant with God brought life. These parallels were obviously created to establish Christianity as the new Judaism. The Gospels and the writings of Josephus work together to this end. The New Testament records the birth of the new Judaism while the history of Josephus records the "death" of Second Temple Judaism. All the parallels I have given above, between Christianity and Judaism and between Jesus and Moses, are well known. In addition, the authors of the Gospels also established something else hereto- fore unknown. By mirroring the sequence found in the story of Exo- dus and by establishing Jesus' crucifiction as a new Passover, they established a continuum, one that mirrored the story of the Israelites leaving Egypt and "wandering" until they were permitted to enter the promised land forty years after the first Passover. As with the time sequence for the fulfillment of the prophecies of Daniel, once the continuum of the "new Exodus" had begun, there could be no stopping until all had come to pass. What is the conclusion to the forty years of wandering in the New Testament? Since the Gospels end shortly after Jesus' death, where is the conclusion to Christianity's forty year Exodus recorded? The answer is found within War of the Jews. To conclude Christianity's forty-year cycle, Josephus links the date of Jesus' crucifixion to the date he established for the destruc- tion of Masada. Josephus "records" that the year the stronghold was destroyed was 73 C.E. Scholars, citing archeological evidence, often date the fall of Masada to 74, not 73 C.E. They may well be correct, but Josephus was interested not in recording history but in creating Building Jesus 281 mythology. He therefore entitled the chapter that contains the pas- sage describing Masada's destruction as follows: Concerning the interval of about three years: from the taking of Jerusalem by Titus to the sedition of the Jews at Cyrene.187 Josephus does not need to be any more precise than he is in the phrase "about three years." If his time span is inaccurate, and it surely is, who had been there to point out his error? Josephus is only interested in using "history" to convey his message. In this instance, he wishes the reader to believe that Masada fell three and a half years after the destruction of the temple, that is, in 73 C.E. Josephus then gives the day and month of the conclusion to the siege at Masada. They then chose ten men by lot out of them to slay all the rest; every one of whom laid himself down by his wife and children on the ground, and threw his arms about them, and they offered their necks to the stroke of those who by lot executed that melancholy office; and when these ten had, without fear, slain them all, they made the same rule for casting lots for themselves, that he whose lot it was should first kill the other nine, and after all should kill him- self. . . . Those others were nine hundred and sixty in num- ber, the women and children being withal included in that computation. This calamitous slaughter was made on the 188 fifteenth day of the month Xanthicus [Nisan]. Josephus records that the fourteenth of Nisan is the day when the Jews celebrated Passover. The Gospel of John states that Jesus was crucified on the thirteenth of Nisan and arose on the fifteenth. The fifteenth of Nisan, 73 C.E., is forty years to the day after Christ's resurrection. Only readers of both the Gospels and Josephus would be aware of this exact forty-year time span. In other words, the Gospel of John establishes the date of Jesus' resurrection as the fifteenth of Nisan, 33 C.E., and Josephus estab- lishes the date of the end of the Jewish war as the fifteenth of Nisan, 73 C.E. It is only when the two works are read together that readers are able to understand that it was, just as Jesus had predicted, exactly forty years between the two events. Again, either Josephus inadver- 282 CAESAR'S MESSIAH tently recorded something truly supernatural, or the two works had been aligned to create this effect. There is another parallel between the signs in Matthew 23 and the signs in Josephus. I will analyze it separately because of its unique comic nature. This parallel has long puzzled scholars. The confusion has been due to its not being understood both as a joke and as another of the parallels between Jesus' ministry and Titus' campaign, that which were created to give their two stories the same broad outline. In the Gospels, Jesus states You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell? Until All Is Fulfilled 193 Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechari'ah the son of Barachi'ah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly, I say to you, all this will come upon this generation. Matt. 23:33-36 In War of the Jews Josephus writes: And now these zealots and Idumeans were quite weary of barely killing men, so they had the impudence of setting up fictitious tribunals and judicatures for that purpose; and as they intended to have Zacharias the son of Baruch, one of the most eminent of the citizens, slain, so what provoked them against him was, that hatred of wickedness and love of liberty which were so eminent in him . . . Now the seventy judges brought in their verdict that the person accused was not guilty, as choosing rather to die themselves with him, than to have his death laid at their doors; hereupon there arose a great clamor of the zealots upon his acquittal, and they all had indignation at the judges for not understanding that the authority that was given them was but in jest. So two of the boldest of them fell upon Zacharias in the middle of the temple, and slew him; and as he fell down dead, they bantered him, and said, "Thou hast also our verdict, and this will prove a more sure 132 acquittal to thee than the other." . . . As I have pointed out, Matthew 24 is a continuation of the same speech Jesus begins in Matthew 23. Jesus leaves the interior of the temple, where the dialogue of Matthew 23 occurs, and then contin- ues this speech (Matthew 24) outside the temple. Therefore, the par- allel between Zacharias, son of Barachiah, and Zacharias, son of Baruch, both slain in the temple, should be understood to be in the 194 CAESAR'S MESSIAH same stream of prophecy Jesus gives in Matthew 24, because it is from the same speech. In light of the numerous parallels in Matthew 24 and War of the Jews, we are on solid footing when we understand this to be another example of Jesus "seeing" something in the future that Josephus documents. There is a problem with accepting that the parallel belongs in the same set as Jesus' famous eschatological prophecies, however. The character that Jesus refers to appeared not in his future but in his past. The prophet "Zachari'ah the son of Barachi'ah" is a charac- ter from the Old Testament, so how can Jesus be foreseeing him in the future? Further, how could Josephus then record that Jesus was right, that Zacharias' death occurred in 70 C.E., along with the other prophecies envisioned by Jesus in Matthew 23 and 24? I include Whiston's fascinating comment regarding the passage from Josephus. He was aware of the parallel between the Zacharias in Josephus and the Zachari'ah in the New Testament and was trou- bled by its implications. Some commentators are ready to suppose that this "Zacharias, the son of Baruch," here most unjustly slain by the Jews in the temple, was the very same person with "Zacharias, the son of Barachias," whom our Savior says the Jews "slew between the temple and the altar," Matthew 23:35. This is a somewhat strange exposition; since Zechariah the prophet was really "the son of Barachiah," and "grandson of Iddo," Zechariah 1:1; and how he died, we have no other account than that before us in St. Matthew: while this "Zacharias" was "the son of Baruch." Since the slaughter was past when our Savior spake these words, the Jews had then already slain him; whereas this slaughter of "Zacharias, the son of Baruch," in Josephus, was then about thirty-four years future. And since the slaughter was "between the temple and the altar," in the court of the priests, one of the most sacred and remote parts of the whole temple; while this was, in Josephus' own words, in the middle of the temple, and much the most probably in the court of Israel only (for we have had no intimation that the zealots had at this time profaned the court of the priests. See B. V. ch. 1. sect. 2). Nor do I believe that our Until All Is Fulfilled 195 Josephus, who always insists on the peculiar sacredness of the inmost court, and of the holy house that was in it, would have omitted so material an aggravation of this barbarous murder, as perpetrated in a place so very holy, had that 133 been the true place of it. Thus, Whiston attempts to explain away the troubling parallel by arguing that the slaying of Zacharias in Josephus could not be the incident that Jesus prophesied because 1) Zacharias the prophet died before Jesus' birth. 2) Barachiah and Baruch are different words. 3) The "middle of the temple" is not "between the temple and the altar" Whiston's first point is irrelevant. His second ignores the many slight changes in spelling between the same words in Josephus and the New Testament. For example, a type of fish from the Sea of Galilee is spelled "Coracin" in Josephus and "Chora'zin" in the New Testament. His third point, regarding the possible differences in the location of the slayings, is contradictory of his acceptance of the other parallels between the same passages in the New Testament and Josephus as evidence of Christ's divinity. Further, it is obvious that Jesus' prophecy regarding, "Zechar- i'ah the son of Barachi'ah, whom you murdered between the sanctu- ary and the altar,"134 would have been understood by an uneducated first-century convert to Christianity as having come to pass by the passage in Josephus that states, "so two of the boldest of them fell upon Zacharias (the son of Baruch) in the middle of the temple, and slew him." Josephus and the New Testament consistently avoid verbatim parallels by one degree. In the chapter ahead on the Book of Daniel, Jesus speaks of the "abomination of desolation," while Josephus refers to the "end of the daily sacrifice." In fact, both expressions refer the same thing. Someone to whom the two works would be read would then make the connection between the "different" terms and thereby come to the conclusion that Jesus had been able to see into the future. By means of this name-switching technique, the authors of the New Testament and Josephus playfully hide the fact 196 CAESAR'S MESSIAH from the uneducated masses for which Christianity was invented that the same source created both works. As I have shown above, Simon becomes Peter, John becomes "the disciple Jesus loved," etc. The two passages above regarding Zacharias use this technique. Jesus uses the expression "between the sanctuary and the altar," while Josephus uses the expression "middle of the temple." Jesus speaks of "Zechari'ah the son of Barachi'ah." Josephus refers to "Zacharias the son of Baruch." Different words again express the same concept. Since Jesus' eschatological prophecies all came to pass in the same chapter from War of the Jews, is it not more logical to presume that the Zacharias stories are another example of this set of fulfilled prophecies? However, pursuing this line of thought was impossible for Whiston.135 To do so, he would have had to accept that both Jesus and Josephus were in error because they each "saw" something that could not have happened in 70 C.E. To Whiston, Jesus could not err, by definition, because he was God. Likewise, to Whiston, as to so many Christian scholars, Josephus could not be mistaken because his history records God's handiwork. This is a demonstration of the power of the combination of the two works. The belief that they came from two distinct sources cre- ates the effect that they demonstrate the supernatural, which is to say, Jesus' power of prophecy. The New Testament reveals the true "Son of God" because Christ's predictions come true. A "historian" records them. Josephus' histories must be accurate because they record the works of God. Jesus predicts the events that Josephus sees. Whiston's intellect is powerless to analyze what is right in front of him because of the divinity that the two works "demonstrate." If someone had suggested to Whiston that the Zacharias story in Jose- phus and Christ's prediction regarding Zacharias in the New Testa- ment combine to form a joke, he would not and could not have understood such humor. Of course, the passages would have been wickedly funny to an intellectual at the Flavian court—one who was familiar with the Old Testament and therefore understood the humor in the passages. Jesus, in the midst of a series of predictions, describes something Until All Is Fulfilled 197 that has already occurred. Josephus then "records" it coming to pass, a second time, in the future. An absurd comic romp comparable with the woe-saying Jesus being struck dead by a stone. Imagine someone today who, claiming to be able to see the future, gives a list of events that will happen in the coming century. At the end of the list, he pre- dicts that Germany will lose World War II. The comedy is vaudevillian. There are several points. First, the most straightforward, non- supernatural explanation is that the same source produced both the Zechari'ah, son of Barachi'ah, passage in the New Testament and the Zacharias, son of Baruch, passage in Josephus. This is because it is unlikely that two distinct authors would have made the same mis- take. Further, the passages work together to create a humorous piece, another example of the New Testament and War of the Jews produc- ing a comic effect when read together. The New Testament passage regarding Zacharias is also notable in that it gives a point in time when "these things shall come upon this generation." In other words, Jesus is predicting exactly when the tribulation of the "wicked generation" shall occur—that is, directly following their killing of Zacharias. David Brown wrote in 1858: Does not this tell us plainly as words could do it, that the whole prophecy was meant to apply to the destruction of Jerusalem? There is but one way of setting this aside, but how forced it is, must, I think, appear to every unbiased mind. It is by translating, not "this generation,". . . but "this nation shall not pass away": in other words, the Jewish nation shall survive all the things here predicted! Nothing but some fancied necessity, arising out of their view of the prophecy, could have led so many sensible men to put this gloss upon our Lord's words. Only try the effect of it upon the perfectly parallel announcement in the previous chap- ter: "Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers . . . Where- fore, behold, I send you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city . . . that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of 198 CAESAR'S MESSIAH righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation" . . . (Matt. xxiii. 32, 34-36). Does not the Lord here mean the then existing generation of the Israelites? Beyond all question he does; and if so, what can be plainer than that this is his 136 meaning in the passage before us? Brown is arguing that the context of Jesus' use of the word gen- eration in the Zacharias passage proves that Jesus is referring to the events of 70 C.E. I could not agree more. When Jesus states that the Jews have been wicked "from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias" and that this generation will "fill up" on the measure of their fathers, a first-century convert to Christianity would have understood that he was "predicting" the Jews' destruction in 70 C.E. Indeed, what other interpretation of Jesus' words is possible? In addition, by giving "the blood of Zacharias" as the end point of the Jews' wickedness Jesus is also clearly stating it that will be an event immediately before the "wicked generation" will "fill up" on their "tribulation." Jesus is clearly predicting that Zacharias' blood will be spilled immediately before the Jews' destruction by the Romans. This temporal parallel, that both Jesus and Josephus "saw" Zacharias as being killed by the "wicked generation" immediately before the destruction of the temple, is of great importance. By each placing the destruction of Zachariah immediately before the destruction of the temple, the authors of the New Testament and War of the Jews create another of their "milestones," conceptually parallel events that occur in the same sequence. |
January 27th, 2011 | #2 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 169
|
The Parallels
The relationship between Jesus and Titus begins on Mount Ger- izzim, where Jesus calls himself "living water" on the same spot where Jews would later die of thirst during the war. Because Titus has not received control over the army when that battle occurs, the authors of the Gospels have Jesus announce that "my time has not yet come"—in other words, that his ministry had not yet begun—to maintain the parallelism between his ministry and Titus' campaign. Jesus then begins his ministry at the Sea of Galilee, where he gathers in his disciples, who he calls "fishers of men." Titus also has the "onset" of his campaign at the same location, where his "disci- ples" become "fishers of men" by spearing Jews as they attempt to swim for safety after the Romans sink their boats. Jesus next encounters a possessed man at Gadara who unleashes a "legion" of demons that possess a herd of swine and rush wildly into the Jordan river. Titus has a strangely parallel experience at Gadara, where one "demonically possessed" man unleashed a legion of "demons"—that is, the Sicarii—who infect a herd of "swine"— that is, Jewish youth. The combined group is then chased by the Romans and rushes "like the wildest of beasts" into the Jordan river. Following the Gadara encounter, the "son of Mary" travels to Jerusalem where he informs his disciples that they will one day "eat of his flesh." This prophecy comes to pass when a "son of Mary" is eaten by his mother during Titus' siege of Jerusalem. The Gospels next describe two assaults on the Mount of Olives, one in which a naked man escapes and another in which the Mes- siah is captured. These episodes parallel events on the Mount of Olives during Titus' siege of Jerusalem, where a "naked" man— Titus—escapes, and a Messiah is captured. The pair of Mount of Olives assaults is followed in both the Gospels and Titus' campaign by a description of three crucified men, one of whom miraculously survives. In each version, an individual named "Joseph of Arimathea" (Joseph Bar Matthias) takes the sur- vivor down from the cross. |
January 27th, 2011 | #3 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 8,506
|
Check out this thread: http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=121609
|
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|