Was Julius Caesar the real Jesus Christ?

[Diane]

Thanks Laura. Seems I just don't know who's credible and who isn't. The book is on it's way, so I'll read it and keep it mind it's mostly horse doodles and just enjoy it for what it is. Seems it has a good re-sale value, and the story was fascinating.

I poked around looking into Horseheads NY. It's in Elmira NY. My husband and I were up there a few years ago poking around graveyards trying to trace his family history. My Grandfather had a farm there many years ago. It was his summer place. Looked into Horsecave, KY too. Thought that maybe we were looking for a cave complex, but the nearest one to Horseheads NY is Howe Caverns, and that's about a 2 hours drive from Horseheads. I checked out both towns locations but that doesn't look like anything to me.

Horsecave Kentucky Horse Cave is located at 37°10′34″N 85°54′22″W (37.176230, -85.906143)
Mammouth Cave kentucky 37°11′N 86°6′W
Horseheads NY 42°09′59″N 76°49′39″W

I looked into the population of the two places and found this.

Elmira NY, Horsehead NY
Ancestries: Irish (17.5%), German (14.7%), Italian (9.2%), United States (8.1%), English (7.6%), Polish (4.8%)
Cave City KY-

Ancestries: Irish (14.4%), United States (12.7%), English (12.1%), German (10.0%), Scotch-Irish (6.1%), Subsaharan African (3.4%)

So both have a slightly higher amount of Irish than the other groups, but I'll bet you could find that in a lot of towns in the USA.

Then there was the mention of the "White House". I thought of White Lodge, and my husband informed me that was the Templars. But I don't know if that's the case or not. Link about White Lodge.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/moq/moq06.htm

I read about Tritium.

"What is Tritium?
Tritium is a radioactive isotope of Hydrogen. Tritium light sources are radioluminescent and can be best described as a strong glow. They are self-powered and do
not need to be charged via exposure to light, such as our standard glow pellet. Tritium does not in itself emit light but excites phosphors, thereby generating light. It is therefore most often encountered in glass capsules with an internal phosphor coating of various colors.

Green is usually the brightest based on the phosphors and the sensitivity of the human eye. The half
life of tritium is 12.32 years which means that a tritium based light source will be half as bright after 12.32 years. "

Phosphorus The first form of elemental phosphorus to be produced (white phosphorus, in 1669) emits a faint glow upon exposure to oxygen – hence its name given from Greek mythology, Φωσφόρος meaning "light-bearer" (Latin Lucifer), referring to the "Morning Star", the planet Venus. The term "phosphorescence", meaning glow after illumination, originally derives from this property of phosphorus, although this word has since been used for a different physical process that produces a glow. The glow of phosphorus itself originates from oxidation of the white (but not red) phosphorus— a process now termed chemiluminescence.

It glows in the dark (when exposed to oxygen) with a very faint tinge of green and blue.

Checked into Alfalfa-Alfalfa needs phosphorus in the soil to grow well. Phosphorus also had something to do with tritium.

Alfalfa-But in the UK,[3] Australia, South Africa and New Zealand, the more commonly used name is lucerne. It superficially resembles clover, with clusters of small purple flowers followed by fruits spiralled in 2 to 3 turns containing 10-20 seeds. Alfalfa is native to a warmer temperate climate such as that of Iran (where it is thought to have originated). It has been cultivated as livestock fodder since at least the era of the ancient Greeks and Romans.

Alfalfa can be sown in spring or fall, and does best on well-drained soils with a neutral pH of 6.8 – 7.5.[20][21] Alfalfa requires sustained levels of potassium and phosphorus to grow well.

Alfalfa is called Lucerne. So I went and looked into Lucerne.

Looking at lucerne-[French luzerne, from Provençal luzerno, glowworm (perhaps from its shiny seeds), from Latin lucerna, lamp, from lcre, to shine; see lucid.]

Lu·cerne (l-sûrn, lü-srn)
A city of central Switzerland on the northern shore of the Lake of Lucerne, an irregularly shaped lake surrounded by mountains. The city developed around a monastery founded in the eighth century and is a major resort. Population: 57,900.

lucerne - important European leguminous forage plant with trifoliate leaves and blue-violet flowers grown widely as a pasture and hay crop.

I searched around about Rhineland.

"At the earliest historical period, the territories between the Ardennes and the Rhine were occupied by the Treveri, the Eburones and other Celtic tribes."

Book- The Seven Gates Persephone

The Sanctuary At Avebury-3,000 years old, complex circular arangment of timbers, later to be repllaced by stones.15 miles from Stonehenge. A fragment of a quern once used for grinding grain into flour, made of Neidermendig lava placed in a post hole close to the burial. Neidermendig lava is a course, green stone that only comes from Rhineland. and then there was the bone from a horse.
http://3hadow3un.blogspot.com/2012/09/tuesday-24th-april-2012.html

I don't know what all of this means or how it relates to Caesar. But I gave it a shot.

 

[Mike]

Just saw this article linked on Facebook _http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/story-of-jesus-christ-was-fabricated-to-pacify-the-poor-claims-controversial-biblical-scholar-8870879.html

It's getting plenty of attention alright. There's even a mention of our beloved Richard Dawkins who, it seems, continues to miss the point.
Well something interesting may come of it. I keep remembering the C's comment about Josephus being the "father" of Jesus...

And this one on the Front page of yahoo:

http://news.yahoo.com/self-professed-bible-scholar-makes-explosive-allegation-jesus-133026476.html

 

[Laura]

And this one on the Front page of yahoo:

http://news.yahoo.com/self-professed-bible-scholar-makes-explosive-allegation-jesus-133026476.html

Now they are moving toward the ad hominem stuff: "self-professed".

I think that he may have dug a pit for himself by not utilizing and acknowledging the work of others and by not acknowledging some of the other reasonable explanations. Yes, he's onto something, but it isn't the whole banana. There was something there long before the Flavians that was then transformed into Christianity.

 

[JGeropoulas]

I haven't been able to read this thread as thoroughly as I'd like, but I have read enough to appreciate the central idea and see the depth of supporting documentation. Because such "heretical" ideas about Jesus threaten the Matrix control system, it's predictable that system will seek to neutralize these ideas. (That is, unless the PTB are seeking to undermine major religions so they can impose some "anti-christ" religion for global control.)

That said, I thought the timing and content of a new book published a few weeks ago was noteworthy: "Killing Jesus" by Bill O'Reilly, published September 24, 2013.

For those fortunate enough to be unfamiliar with Bill O'Reilly, he's the anchor of The O'Reilly Factor, the highest-rated cable news show in America. He also writes a syndicated newspaper column and is the author of several number-one bestselling books.

I'm sure most objective observers would agree with me that Bill O'Reilly--a Harvard graduate--is one of the leading propagandists in America. With unbearable smugness, preachy moralism, fanatical patriotism and feigned religiosity, O'Reilly craftily misinforms, inflames and polarizes a huge segment of America with his twisted spin on the news, while psychopathically boasting, "the spin stops here" because he's "fair and balanced".

I haven't read his book, but from the review, I suspect it's classic disinformation which quibbles about various details of the grand lie, thus reinforcing it, because that grand lie is treated as a "given" (and never questioned in its entirety). Here's some blurbs to consider:

Amazon Description:
Millions of readers have thrilled by bestselling authors Bill O’Reilly and historian Martin Dugard's Killing Kennedy and Killing Lincoln, page-turning works of nonfiction that have changed the way we read history.

Now the anchor of The O’Reilly Factor details the events leading up to the murder of the most influential man in history: Jesus of Nazareth. Nearly two thousand years after this beloved and controversial young revolutionary was brutally killed by Roman soldiers, more than 2.2 billion human beings attempt to follow his teachings and believe he is God. Killing Jesus will take readers inside Jesus’s life, recounting the seismic political and historical events that made his death inevitable – and changed the world forever.

Is Killing Jesus the Bible According to Bill O'Reilly?
Using the four Gospels of the Bible as source material for his new historical thriller “Killing Jesus,” Bill O'Reilly has managed to stir up controversy once again. Instead of utilizing the source materials in an “as-is” fashion, O'Reilly decided to leave parts of the Gospel story out that he believes didn't happen the way the Bible documents it.

Amazon Book Club Review:
In order to reach a certain level of popularity today, you've got to be controversial or unique in some way. For Bill O'Reilly, he accomplishes this by taking a truth that everyone is familiar with or has faith in, whether politically or religiously, and then puts his own spin on what has happened to offer his own perspective.

As an example of this in his new book, O'Reilly talks about how the crucifixion, in his opinion, would have made it impossible to speak. “People died on a cross because of suffocation,” O'Reilly said in a recent interview about his book. “Even if Jesus had said 'Father, please forgive them for they don't know what they do,' nobody would have been able to hear him speak.”That's what readers are in store for when they pick up O'Reilly's new book. One thing is for certain: if you love Bill O'Reilly and his unique perspective, then you'll likely love this book. If you don't enjoy what O'Reilly has to say, “Killing Jesus” will give you more fuel for your dissatisfaction.This essay contains further analysis of the Bill O'Reilly book.

 

[Laura]

For those fortunate enough to be unfamiliar with Bill O'Reilly, he's the anchor of The O'Reilly Factor, the highest-rated cable news show in America. He also writes a syndicated newspaper column and is the author of several number-one bestselling books.

I'm sure most objective observers would agree with me that Bill O'Reilly--a Harvard graduate--is one of the leading propagandists in America. With unbearable smugness, preachy moralism, fanatical patriotism and feigned religiosity, O'Reilly craftily misinforms, inflames and polarizes a huge segment of America with his twisted spin on the news, while psychopathically boasting, "the spin stops here" because he's "fair and balanced".

How about posting the above on your FB page so I can snag it and re-post? Great distillation!

 

[JGeropoulas]

For those fortunate enough to be unfamiliar with Bill O'Reilly, he's the anchor of The O'Reilly Factor, the highest-rated cable news show in America. He also writes a syndicated newspaper column and is the author of several number-one bestselling books.

I'm sure most objective observers would agree with me that Bill O'Reilly--a Harvard graduate--is one of the leading propagandists in America. With unbearable smugness, preachy moralism, fanatical patriotism and feigned religiosity, O'Reilly craftily misinforms, inflames and polarizes a huge segment of America with his twisted spin on the news, while psychopathically boasting, "the spin stops here" because he's "fair and balanced".

How about posting the above on your FB page so I can snag it and re-post? Great distillation!

Thanks. Will do as soon as I can with my fledgling FB skills :)

 

[Palinurus]

There was something there long before the Flavians that was then transformed into Christianity.

All things considered, I think this is exactly the crux of the matter at hand.

All appreciation of what 'really' happened hinges on the qualifications attributed to this 'something' that was already there IMO.

And that's where most of the attacks, the misleading and the emerging disinfo of cointelpro artists will focus on, regardless. OSIT.

I'm very curious and eager to read what you eventually will come up with in the definitive version of your next volume regarding specifically this part of the historical process.

Right now, I'm only getting the contours of a mental image around this highly explosive subject matter -- but not more than that yet. fwiw.

 

[SeekinTruth]

There was something there long before the Flavians that was then transformed into Christianity.

All things considered, I think this is exactly the crux of the matter at hand.

All appreciation of what 'really' happened hinges on the qualifications attributed to this 'something' that was already there IMO.

And that's where most of the attacks, the misleading and the emerging disinfo of cointelpro artists will focus on, regardless. OSIT.

I'm very curious and eager to read what you eventually will come up with in the definitive version of your next volume regarding specifically this part of the historical process.

Yeah, I think that's exactly the crux of the matter. This subject has been highly fascinating to dig into and I'm also looking forward to Laura's final distillation.

 

[Laura]

Keep an eye on the "portents of ancient Rome" thread for some clues to what was going on back then that made it such a prime time for religious inclinations to be high and susceptible to manipulation.

I would say that Augustus laid the ground-work for the cover up though I don't think he quite intended it that way. It was important for Julius Caesar to be The God since he was the Son of the God, the human representative. That framework was later used by the Flavians. Augustus adopted Tiberius, the son of his wife by a former marriage, so he became, more or less, the son of the son of God.

Tiberius adopted Caligula, AKA Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, his great-nephew and adopted grandson thus great-grandson of Augustus.

Then came Claudius AKA Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, nephew of Tiberius, brother of Germanicus and uncle of Caligula. He was proclaimed emperor by the Praetorian Guard.

Next, Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, AKA Nero, Grandson of Germanicus, nephew of Caligula, grandnephew, step- and adopted son of Claudius thus great-great-grandson of Augustus.

However, we notice that NONE of these individuals was related to Julius Caesar or Augustus by blood. The whole line was "grandfathered in" by adoption. The claim to being the "son of god" was valid only for Augustus, in a sense. So, what was actually going on with the Caesar cult at the time may have been that these emperors, who were certainly not of the caliber of Caesar or Augustus, were excluded by the people as "sons of the god" and the "son" became more mythicized during this period.

Next was a period of serious unrest - the "Year of the Four Emperors": Galba, Otho Vitellius, and finally Vespasian, the first of the Flavians.

Galba seized power after Nero's suicide, with support of the Spanish legions; Otho was appointed by Praetorian Guard; Vitellius seized power with support of German Legions in opposition to Galba and Otho. Then Vespasian seized power with the support of the eastern Legions in opposition to Vitellius.

Otho belonged to an ancient and noble Etruscan family, descended from the princes of Etruria and settled at Ferentinum (modern Ferento, near Viterbo) in Etruria.

Vitellius was the son of Lucius Vitellius Veteris and his wife Sextilia, and had one brother, Lucius Vitellius the Younger. Suetonius recorded two different accounts of the origins of the Vitellius (gens), one making them descendants of past rulers of Latium, the other describing them as of lowly origins.

Vespasian was born in a village north-east of Rome called Falacrinae. His family was relatively undistinguished and lacking in pedigree and his grandfather and father were "tax collectors". (As was the alleged disciple, Matthew.)

So, as you see, the claim to being "son of God", i.e. son of Caesar was totally lost so the worship of Caesar was not useful to them at all in terms of affirming their own power. The Caesar cult had probably morphed during this time, pretty much as Carotta describes it in his analysis of the Book of Mark. (113 years had passed since the death of Caesar.) So, the Flavians - along with Josephus - probably were responsible for the creation and development of the "Jewish Messiah" and the writing and doctoring of the gospels though they did not have an entirely free hand in the creation due to entrenched and wide-spread ideas. It just became a matter of persuading grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the original Caesar worshippers that this was the REAL story by promulgating their redacted/enhanced gospels.

 

[Diane]

So, the Flavians - along with Josephus - probably were responsible for the creation and development of the "Jewish Messiah" and the writing and doctoring of the gospels though they did not have an entirely free hand in the creation due to entrenched and wide-spread ideas. It just became a matter of persuading grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the original Caesar worshippers that this was the REAL story by promulgating their redacted/enhanced gospels.

I don't think they "probably were responsible". I think they were responsible. I've read how we can't always can't trust dates and times. Carbon dating can be off, and people can re-write history by changing dates. Happens a lot, and it makes sifting through history difficult. Hard to figure out just when things happened. They rewrite things in such a way sometimes that it ends up making no sense at all.

Has anyone ever tried changing Josephus birthday to 15 CE? Things just make so much more sense that way. If he was born then, things line up better with a few other key figures in early Christianity. Including Paul of Tarsus and The Pharisee teacher Gamaliel the Elder. Josephus says he studied with the Pharisees. If Josephus had been born say in 15 CE, there were two Pharisee schools around 36 CE. That would make Josephus about 16 yrs old in 36 CE. Perfect age for schools of higher learning. Josephus could have been talking about the "Hillel School" run by Gamaliel the Elder, the leading Pharisee at the time. Gamaliel's school was thought to be the best school for higher Jewish teachings by the Sadducees for their children.

Then we have St. Paul. In the gospels and acts of the Apostles there's a reference to Gamaliel and that Paul of Tarsus studied under him.

Act 22:3 " I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. I studied under Gamaliel and was thoroughly trained in the law of our ancestors. I was just as zealous for God as any of you are today."

So Paul studied under Gamaliel. Could Josephus and Paul been school mates? Both bright students. Or could they have known one another? That "zealous" word always interests me. If we do ever find a Jesus besides Caesar, I'll bet ya he falls into that "zealot" category. Josephus in his works makes no mention of Paul. Odd?

Josephus in AD 64 said he traveled to Rome to free some Jewish priests he knew who were held as prisoners. That same year 64AD, Paul and St Luke, (born in Syria), were taken to Rome to face trial as Roman citizens. There's no record of Luke being on trial or being beheaded. He disappears after this and we don't hear about him again. Maybe Paul was beheaded at that time. They have Paul dying in Rome around 67 Ad. St. Luke disappears never to be heard from again. Haven't found a good date on St. Lukes death, although they give 84 CE. Can't find a good date on Josephus date of death other than around 100 CE.

I'm still digging, it's not easy proving things beyond a reasonable doubt 2,000 years ago. Especially since so much has been destroyed. But miraculously Josephus writings have survived. hmmm. frustrating to say the least, but I enjoy it.

 

[MK Scarlett]

Josephus in his works makes no mention of Paul. Odd?

It could make sense if Carotta is right.
I do not find the exact English original paper, but an article has been published on the Sott.fr which says: From Carotta, Josephus Flavius was Paul of Tarsus.
http://fr.sott.net/article/16446-Selon-Francesco-Carotta-Flavius-Josephe-etait-Paul-de-Tarse

Hereafter a quick Google translation:

"What is striking in the structural comparison of the second part of the Acts with the autobiography of Josephus, it is their similarity. The main characters of the two works persecute their opponents at the start (in the case of Josephus those loyal to Rome, in the case of Paul Christian) and the two later joined the camp of their opponents. Both are torn between having to live with God and die with merit. Both "emergency departure ", that is to say suicide, yet both decided" to remain in the flesh ": Josephus with Vespasiens waiting supreme glory, namely the fact that Vespasian became emperor, and Paul" to be with Christ "," for thy glory be great. "(1)

Both fall from horse on the road to Damascus. The two are in conflict with the central authorities of Jerusalem. Both vigorously debated due to circumcise non-Jewish disciples (in Paul's case with the chief of the apostles, Simon Bar-Jonah, in the case of Josephus with the rebel leader Simon bar Joras). Both have a top whose name is Titus (son of Vespasian who load Josephus was given, and also the bishop of Paul, the Greek word for bishop and above is the same: episkopos).

Both take the same trip to Rome, which is interrupted by the same storm on the sea Both are supported by a ship from Alexandria via Cyrene and the two come to Puteoli. Josephus then goes to the palace of Nero, and it is at this point that Acts ends abruptly and so uncomprehending, as if damnatio memoriae (damnation of memory) which was imposed after his murder Nero forbade the author to tell us that Josephus / Paul was received friendly, especially the "fearful of God" Poppea, Nero's wife. He had to be thought that Paul had suffered martyrdom under Nero. [...]

Josephus was the friendly departure to Rome (his trip to Rome and visit the house of Nero). He later became one of the rebel leaders of the Jewish War (he had a command of Galilee). After cunning to encourage their peers to commit suicide, he was held prisoner and changed to camp Vespasian, the general Nero regular line that claimed to be the expected Messiah. Josephus was imprisoned by Vespasian in the first instance, before being called to serve in the Jewish War as a double traitor. After Nero's death, he was glorified as a prophet of the accession to power of Vespasian. So after the end of the war he was not chained, forced to participate in triumph or executed in Mamertinum as Simon. Instead, he had his quarters in the palace of Vespasian, where all the instruments of the temple had been moved to a private chapel.

From there he sought by all possible means of propaganda, that convert the Jews and Romans - as we now suspect, because if Jesus was Caesar, Flavius ​​Josephus was Paul - that the Jews of the diaspora following the new messiah. "p. 331-332

(1) Josephus, cf. 3.8.I BJ-9, particularly 3.8.5 and 3.8.9, and SUET. Vesp. 4 and 5, see note 296.
To see Phil Paul. I :21-24.

I hope it helps, but someone has surely something in English about it...

 

[shijing]

There's one forum I'll quote from below where someone posted some more parallels between Paul and Josephus -- they don't provide any references, but it at least provides a few more things that might be checked for accuracy:

Flavious [sic] Josephus And the Apostle Paul Were the Same Person?

1. Both of them were Pharisees.
(Phil3:5 (Paul writing) Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee

2. Both were Roman citizens

3. Both are known for their literary works, and both produced their works with upper-class Koine greek.

4. Josephus tells that he knows many ancient dramas. In acts, there's an episode that narrates Paul's conversion, and the saying "hard to kick against the goad" which has its origin in a drama (written by Jospehus himself?), is used.

5. Paul (paulos) means "small". Josephus mentions Mathhias Curtus as his forefather. Curtus means "small".

6. Paul was in his famous shipwreck when he was on his way to Rome. Josephus also mentions that he was shipwrecked when on his way to Rome.

7. Both were in Rome during the well-known fire in 64CE

8. Paul spent 2 years in inprisonment in Caesarea when waiting for his trip to Rome. Josephus was inprisoned for 2 years during the Jewish war in 67-69CE and he was apparently kept in Caesarea. He too ended up in Rome.

9. Paul disappears into desert for three years after the Damascus incident. Josephus mentions that he had been in the desert with a hermit named Banus for a period of three years when he was young.

10. After the Jewish war, Josephus became a traitor in the eyes of the Jews, and he lived in Rome, apparently for reasons of safety, and wrote his apologies. Paul became a traitor and a 'renegade of the law' in the eyes of the Jews, and there were many attempts to kill him.

_http://www.true2ourselves.com/forum/bible-chat/5893-flavious-josephus-apostle-paul-were-same-person.html

 

[Leòmhann]

... also, fellow forum member, Be, over in the Session 7 September 2013 thread, likewise discussed author Ralph Ellis' hypothesis of Saul/Paul = Josephus:

[...]

Back in the rapids of the thread, someone mentioned Ralph Ellis. This author provides a model of Jesus based on a rebel who seems to have had a basis in historical fact.

[...]

Partially relevant here is another of Ellis's historical potshots, the idea that Josephus was also Saul of Tarsus, the apostle St Paul. According to Ellis this same individual was also, for good measure, that shadowy, crucial figure of Jewish legend, Johanan Ben Zakkai, who founded the academy at Jamnia and retrieved the ancient traditions of Judaism from the wreckage of Jewish life at a time when they might have been lost. [Insert counterfactual here.] These reforms shaped the foundations of the rabbinical Judaism we enjoy today...

So it is, that Ellis has the mercurial, ubiquitous Josephus as the founder of not one major world religion, but two!

Ellis's Josephus-Paul is depicted as an inspired, unscrupulous huckster who founded Christianity as an out-and-out business enterprise. (Twenty centuries later, Ron Hubbard: 'If you want to get really rich, invent a religion.') According to Josef Kastein (Reed's literary 'adversary') Paul is as near to being the founder of a religion as any man who has ever lived. 'With rare power and a phenomenally sure instinct he recognised and used those elements in Judaism and paganism which were either capable of fusion or refractory to it.' Importantly, the apostasising, proselytising Jew from Tarsus burnt his boats to his native religion by abolishing the requirement for the 'ceremony' of circumcision in order to open the floodgates to a vast new marketing opportunity: the world of the gentiles. (Judaism had always found converts around the world of the Middle East.) His new-look, quasi-Judaic faith (Ellis: 'Simple Judaism') was turbo-boosted and streamlined with attractive elements to establish divine provenance for the new religion's apocryphal leader. The rebel from Galilee was deified: auspicious virgin birth, fulfilment of ancient prophesy, supernatural miracles, culminating in three days of triumphant stomping around after the event of medical death! Roll up! Whatever floats your boat!

In the story according to Ellis, Josephus-Paul devoted years (missing in the official Josephus biographies) to building his new fledgling religion. A human dynamo criss-crossing the Mediterranean, tossing off letters, and harvesting the contributions of those flocking away from an outmoded and out-of-touch paganism.

Now, whether or not Josephus actually was Paul (I don't buy it myself, although the reconstruction is plenty flamboyant, and the parallelisms between the two are striking*) we have from Ellis the model of a Josephus who consciously forges the Christian religion from a few available materials to successfully catch the sweet spot of the age. As for Jesus himself, the star of the new faith, Ellis argues that the real historical Jesus IS mentioned by Josephus in his histories, repeatedly, and is used by Josephus in the constructed Jesus that he creates in his new faith: overlooked by scholars through the centuries because of the title in his name, he resides in the form of a major rebel to Rome, Jesus of Gamala, or Jesus of Tiberias.

Josephus' first action was to ride to Tiberias and ... destroy the former palace of Herod Antipas. The 'bandit' who stopped him was a man called 'Jesus,' the 'leader of a seditious tumult of mariners and poor people' ... 'and fishermen.'

Josephus goes on to clash with Jesus (of Gamala), who goes on to become Paul-Josephus' great adversary. Taking life under Ellis's inspired pen an alternative Jesus emerges. Supported by a cross-referencing welter of textual detail from Josephus's works, following a mazy trail the paths of Josephus and Jesus of Gamala cross down through the years, even after Jesus' non-fatal crucifixion in AD 72.

(Ellis would not be Ellis if he didn't have this Jesus living in Chester until 101 AD. King Arthur and the 12 Knights of the Round Table.)

Jesus the rebel of the Cs' transcript - the Jesus of Gamala mentioned in Josephus's work?

Josephus the '"father' of Jesus'?

The answer might depend what the Cs mean by 'clues' given by Josephus. Clues given by words, sentences, paragraphs, or winks to the wise?

[...]

* SAUL/PAUL AS JOSEPHUS: PARALLELISMS:
Both identify strongly as Jews raised in Jerusalem; both raised as a Pharisee; both become rabbis; both cooperated with the Romans against their countrymen, persecuting and imprisoning them (needs qualifying); both have important visions, telling them the error of their ways; the two speak both Greek and Hebrew (to different extents; very unclear); Jews want to kill both; both captured, saved and protected by Roman custody ('It is thought that Saul's third trial and subsequent shipment to Rome occurred in about AD 62. Josephus says he did the same in his 26th year, or AD 63. Note how even the official dates of the two different protagonists tally.' The purpose of the visit tallies: the meeting with Poppaea.); both were associated by the Romans with riots in Caesarea; both know about Bernice; both sail to Rome; both shipwrecked, have to swim for their lives, are saved, taken on another ship to Puteoli; both write many letters to communities around Europe; Acts end (just before start of Jewish rebellion) where Josephus begins; (RE has Josephus /Saul trying to grab the vacant disciple's slot after Judas's suicide; post-conversion Paul would have been an obvious candidate?)

According to Ellis, Josephus wrote Acts: Saul boasting in Acts (as Josephus is also wont to do):
I was flogged three times;
I was stoned once;
I was shipwrecked three times;
I have spent a night and a day in the deep.
I have been in travels often, in dangers of rivers, in dangers of robbers, dangers from my race, in dangers from the nations, in dangers on the sea, in dangers among false brothers, in hardship and toil, often in watchings, in hunger and thirst, often in fastings, in cold and nakedness.

RE advances the dates of Paul by 30 years or so, to match those more commonly ascribed to Josephus (c. 35 - c. 100).

'The Acts of the Apostles are important as the texts that detail the life and times of Saul-Paul. Josephus' accounts of the historical record usually have an accuracy of plus or minus a few years. The Acts of the Apostles, on the other hand, contains no indisputable time-line pegs at all.'

ELLIS' JESUS
(I see from Amazon that he has a newly published book on Jesus. He may have rethought some of these positions.)

RE identifies a problem with early Christian writers like Ignatius, Origen, Clement, Irenaeus and Eusebius: 'These theologians wrote copiously about the early Church and its followers and martyrs, but there is generally one character who is missing from their exhaustive accounts - Jesus himself. Why?'

Because: his true life differed greatly from the one that Saul had manufactured and sold to the world. They could find him in the historical record but there was no way that they could reveal it to the general public. Crazily, might fit the Cs tantalising teaser in this transcript: part of the original for the composite model of Jesus was a rebel against Rome, not identified in the public record, but clues are given by Josephus?

Jesus (of Gamala) not a poor man of the people, but rich aristocrat, like Mary Magdalene. Jesus not Gandhi, but Che Guevara. 'Sell your cloak to buy a sword.' Portrayed as a lowly and persecuted hero figure, modest and browbeaten. But was rich, powerful, with castles and a private army. Of royal Egyptian lineage. An ultranationalist and racist. Gluttonous and a wine-bibber.

RE always looking for Egyptian derivations: Jesus practiced incest for consanguinity purposes: Mary Magdalene his sister, Martha possibly another. Egyptian practice, surprisingly common in both the New Testament and The Jewish War.

RE unable to resist a big new story: Jesus and his Galilean sect sought to bring war to the east, in order that he might take the throne of Syria-Judaea and thence the throne of Rome itself. Emperor Jesus.

THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS ADDUCED IN SUPPORT
The historical players of the Jewish War linked to the main players of the Dead Sea Scrolls (RE controversially dates the Qumran scrolls to the first century).

Josephus confronted en route to Damascus by Jesus. Saul's expedition was mounted against certain members of the Essene sect, not the city of Damascus in Syria. Acts: Saul was looking to arrest people from The Way (not the road to Damascus).

Jesus was the Essenes' Teacher of Righteousness, Josephus was the Spouter of Lies: the 'Windbag' who provided a 'service of vanity' and a 'worthless service' that 'poured out wind.'

Cites Eisenman as in no doubt of a first century heritage for the scrolls. Eisenman gives page after page of doctrinal, epigraphic and historical reasons. 'It should be appreciated that an allusion to "the last priests of Jerusalem" makes no sense anytime before the destruction of the Temple in AD 70.' The Kittim must refer to a post-Julius Caesar era, (ie imperial) when the Romans were the rulers of the world. The Habbakuk pesher and others are definitely describing events from the Jewish War of AD 68-70. RE excoriates Eisenman for not going the whole hog, deeming James the safer bet for Teacher of Righteousness, when James died in 62 or 66! To choose Jesus would be to prove that Jesus was alive in AD 70!

RE claims Josephus was the hidden hand removing real historical or social information from the Nag Hammadi gospels, to the point where this is almost entirely missing. He is the original compiler of many of these texts.

Missing history, missing characters.

In addition, we have this from the transcript of SoTT Talk Radio Show #24 ("Who Was Jesus?):

Laura:

[...]

...and I would say that it was this activity [this combination of Mithraic mysteries; Stoic things; a militant Judaism, itself (that turned into the Jewish resistance movement against Rome)], this came about during the Flavian period (the Flavians then probably...or after the time of the Flavians), then there were additional gospels that were created and re-worked, using material from Josephus, twisting and distorting things, adding stuff, adding some philosophy, adding this, adding the other thing. Names were changed, and even the names of the rebel leaders that are mentioned in Josephus' Wars of the Jews, become disciples of this Jesus of Nazareth. So, the Flavians put the whole set of events back to 30 AD, gave the individual a name, 'Jesus', 'Jesus Christ', and it's probable that Julius Caesar, himself, was called 'Christ' in all of these passion plays up to this time, anyway...so, they were able to slide this in without anybody really noticing anything...

[...]

...the Flavians, of course, turned it around on them, because they had this big problem: they had these Judean rebels; they had Zealots and Zacharias, etc, etc...these individuals...they had to control them because they went in there, (and they destroyed Jerusalem to stop this)...because these absolutely...they were being trained by the example of Caesar (Caesar was absolutely, utterly, inflexible in his will; he cared nothing for his body; he exposed himself to danger continually; he never submitted himself to evil authorities)... I think they were using the example of Julius Caesar in their Christology, in their passion plays, and that this was the cohesiveness that gave these Judean rebels their "oomph," that made them able to launch their rebellion, and to stand against the Romans (the later Roman emperors that came after Caesar, and after the Julio-Claudian line ceased to exist)...

So, the Flavians had to (or somebody after them had to) edit these texts to use them to pacify people, because they could see that if they allowed this worship of Julius Caesar to continue, this was dangerous. This had to be fixed--it had to be edited (this Julius Caesar, this passion play, everything): he had to be killed on a cross, and he had to be killed by Jews (because, of course, they needed to turn the hatred of the empire against the Jews, also) because they didn't want them setting an example for other people to rise up against the controlling rulers of the time...

Joe: ...absolutely--an example is a dangerous thing...

Pierre: ...and they knew almost nothing about Jesus, but something that was sure...is that he was a descendent of David...his Jewish identity was one of the only things that was certain in this new narrative...so, basically, you had a very inspiring Julius Caesar cult. It's testified. It's shown in Ephesus, in Antioch, Alexandria, and Phillippi, you have what was called the 'Caesarea' (temples dedicated to Caesar), but actually it was more than that: Caesar was not one more god. Caesar, unlike all the other gods, had his statues in every single temple; Jupiter's temple, Diana's temple, Venus' temple. He delivered charisma of integrity, of honor, of mercy. He showed this in life and every instant, in spite of people. Caesar instilled...created monotheism...and from his death...44 BC to around 80 AD, you have the development of this new Caesar cult. It's growing big...and you have nothing about Christianity....and around 80 AD, during the Flavians (Titus, Vespasian, Domitian), you suddenly have...a sudden end of this huge Julius Caesar cult...and the emergence, from nothing...and of the Christian movement, the first mention of Christianity, of Jesus Christ, Nazarea and all.....

Laura: ...that's authentic...

Pierre: ...goes back to authentic, goes back to the historian of the Flavians, i.e., Josephus, Flavius Josephus. He's the first one to mention it. This historian, Josephus, was the official historian of the Flavians. He started to write [and] all his work is about legitimizing the Jewish population. He started writing about this Jesus Christ right after the Jewish Wars.

Laura: Yeah.

Jason: ...that's because the Jews were demonized...and....

Laura: ...yeah, then the first pope, the very first pope, supposedly, after Peter, who, by the way...as this other guy....I really don't like this guy....what's his.....where is that book?

Pierre: Atkins?

Laura: Atwill! Where did Atwill go? We didn't bring it in?

Niall: Here it is.

Laura: ...oh, here's Atwill. Atwill writes a book called Caesar's Messiah - The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus ...well, he's got some points. The guy is real sick puppy, because...you know, he says some things that are absolutely outrageous, but he does notice some things that are very, very damn peculiar, which is [to say]: correspondences between the gospel stories, particularly between the Gospel of Matthew and the works of Josephus. So, it's almost as though, either somebody was writing this gospel based on Josephus, or Josephus, himself, was editing an already existing gospel, to make it say what the Flavians wanted it to say. The whole thing was, of course, you know, [just this]: you've got to get rid of Julius Caesar; you've gotta change the name; you gotta change the location; you've gotta change these battles, these miraculous battles that Caesar won by sheer, freaking force of will; you've gotta change them to miracles--I mean, you know, miracles...

Jason: ...they're really weak-sauce miracles....

Laura: ...and they're really weak-sauce miracles, because if you map Caesar's battles and you map Jesus' miracles--along with the travels--you will see that his miracles exactly correspond to Caesar's battles, and, in some cases, even the word-play is identical...

Jason: ...like 'obsesses' for 'possessed', versus siege...

Pierre: ...and there were two major changes I noticed between the Caesar cult, and the gospels:
A) the identity of the 'Messiah' (who became Jewish); and B) the paradigm (the way of seeing life). Caesar was promising and implementing a paradise on earth for people (He was serving people. He was doing really....and he was achieving major success...that's why he got killed.)

On the other side, the gospel side, you have the creation of this paradise in heaven, that pushed people to accept anything on earth, to finally, actually accept hell on earth, domination, extortion, despotism, [in order] to access, even possibly, this hypothetical paradise in heaven...so...

Laura: In other words, accept the rule of your dominating oligarchy, and you'll get to go to heaven if you believe in Jesus. But for god's sakes, do not believe in Julius Caesar and the things that he did, because that will inspire you to rebel!

Joe: I don't really think they would have wanted... Caesar wouldn't necessarily have wanted anybody to believe in him, in terms of god. I would have thought that he...any lasting testament....

Laura: Well, of course he wouldn't!

Joe: ...testimony he would have said...would have been, "Don't deify me. Follow what I'm trying to say."

Jason: ...yeah, he was...

Laura: ...yeah, "Follow my example". But, I'm just saying....that if people believed in the example of Julius Caesar....

Joe: Exactly.

Laura: ...that a man could, by his will and his righteousness, because Caesar was an extremely righteous man...when he was ordered to divorce his wife for political reasons, he refused. He went on the run. He was a young man. He was - what?--he was eighteen year old? He went on the run. Sulla's army was chasing him, hunting him down. He finally got sick, and he was so sick he couldn't get out of bed, and they found him...and he had to pay them a bribe so they wouldn't kill him...

Joe: Yeah.

Pierre: ...and that's the final treason, actually. Because the main meaning, the main message in Caesar's legacy is standing for higher values (the importance of mercy, of honour, of the word you give, of talking the talk/walking the walk). This example, this highly inspiring example, was expunged from all those values, and replaced with Jesus Christ as we know [him], as Christians...

Laura: Yeah. [sarcastically] Just go meekly to your crucifixion, then you'll rise again and go to heaven!

 

[davros of skaro]

Plenty of great info to study on this thread.Great work people. :D

The original "Gospel of Caesar" film was taken down,because the uploader changed to a
gaming only channel.



New link for Gospel of Caesar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvga-98x6Nk

 

[dia6olo]

This might be of interest, 5 youtube videos on how the flavian family wrote a lot of the historical books under different names.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t46PHMN2c9Y&list=PL2079C5936358C51F&index=10