Atwill, Carotta and other scholars

[Claude Badley]

Well there you are Richard, Jerry, donning his Wikipedia-legion centurion uniform and brandishing its standard boar-standard, attacks and falls into the Wikipedia trap when I still hadn't yet set it up properly!

Publius Quictilius Varus generally gets the blame for the fiasco at Teutoberg Forest. Before that, he had been the governor of Syria from 7 BC until 4 BC, where he was notorious for his cruelty. So that's the answer... but what was the question again?

No answer is possible if one does not get the facts straight first - as with the "arrogant presumption" of uncritically accepting and believing Einstein's relativity, or in this case, Wikipedia!

But Jerry continues:

Somehow, even though the Romans "never again attempted to conquer the Germanic territories east of the Rhine River" after the great defeat at Teutoberg, nevertheless those Germanic tribes wound up becoming Christian. How did that happen? Is that part of the question... or the answer...?

The Christianization of Germany is a later question; the question at issue is the creation and acceptance of Christianity in the Roman Empire.

Hence as I wrote above: Julius "Caesar's assassination provoked massive civil war, hence Augustus' need to divinize JC." Jerry misses his target here because of Wikipedia's misrepresentation of the situation.

There is a common Christian prejudice that Publius Quinctilius Varus was governor of Syria for only 4 years - and Wikipedia is glad to peddle it too. Why?

Because Herod the Great died in 4 BC - hence JC was born before he died in order to "prove" Herod's massacre of the innocents (Matthew Gospel). But in Luke we find Joseph and Mary having to be census-registered in Syria under Quirinius (Cyrenius), about the time Baby Jesus was born. The problem is: Cyrenius was only appointed in 6AD. If however, one could pretend his governorship extends back to 4BC (like the Wikipedia oligarchs do), then one can have Herod the Great killing the innocents while Quirinius has just begun his reign - which is what the Wikipedia BS slyly hints at, after revealing Varus' original governorship of Africa.

Later he [Varus] went to govern Syria from 7/6 BC until 4 BC with four legions under his command, where he was known for his harsh rule and high taxes. The Jewish historian Josephus mentions the swift action of Varus against a messianic revolt in Judaea after the death of the Roman client king, Herod the Great, in 4 BC. After occupying Jerusalem, he crucified 2000 Jewish rebels and may have thus been one of the prime objects of popular anti-Roman sentiment in Judaea (Josephus, who made every effort to reconcile the Jewish people to Roman rule, felt it necessary to point out how lenient this judicial massacre had been). Indeed, at precisely this moment the Jews, nearly en masse, began a full-scale boycott of Roman pottery (Red Slip Ware). Thus, the archaeological record seems to verify mass popular protest against Rome because of Varus' cruelty.
Following the governorship of Syria, Varus returned to Rome and remained there for the next few years.

So if you believe Junkipedia, you presume that he retired the Syria governorship in 4BC, twiddled his thumbs in Rome for 10 years, then was appointed governor of Germany in 6 AD (officially confirmed in 7 AD). This bogus procedure - used to defend "JC the younger" by disguising His birth date - ignores the fact that Varus, while spending some time in Rome as such governors were allowed to do if their rule was stable, spent most of his time in Syria dealing with troubles e.g. those in the Judaean province. But all this trouble does NOT merely date to 4 BC - and nor was there another governor appointed to replace Varus in 4 BC; Sabinus appears to have been his deputy in Syria. (The appointment of Modius Aequiculus as related in Josephus Life was as a deputy-governor or military leader with specific aims).

However, when you read Josephus it is clear that before the appointment of Quirinius (Cyrenaeus) in 6AD (Antiquities 18:1 - references below are to this work), Varus had to deal with the extended Jewish uprisings for the 10 years following the death of Herod the Great, and the appointment of the latter's son as successor, Archelaus ben Herod, who was unable to control them. There was no "gap without a governor" between 4BC and 6AD, only a gap filled with Christian-Wikipedian deceit, all ready for the unwary to topple into! See Josephus 17:8 but especially 17:9:1 to 17:13:5 where the extended battle against Judas ben Hezekiah (head of the bandits), Simon the ex-slave (prototype of Peter) and Athronges takes place and where Varus is present during the invasion of Samaria to put these rebels down (17:10:9)!

IOW this obscurantism by standard Wikipedophilic-Christianity (or Christolatric Wikipediism) has obscured the intimate connection between the increased Roman desire for a great transcendent leader in the shoes of Julius Ceasar due to Rome's utter failure, primarily from Varus' incompetence, at the Battle of Teutoberg, since it was that battle that secured German freedom from invasion by Rome and the end of Julius Caesar's dream of conquering Europe and thus the barbarians once and for all. What has not been seen until now is the intimate connection between the Varian disaster (9 AD) and the initiation of the Jesus Christ cult, particularly after Augustus' death some years later!

Yours faithfully
Claude

 

[Jerry Russell]

If however, one could pretend his governorship extends back to 4BC (like the Wikipedia oligarchs do), then one can have Herod the Great killing the innocents while Quirinius has just begun his reign - which is what the Wikipedia BS slyly hints at, after revealing Varus' original governorship of Africa.

This is not what Wikipedia says, not at all. Wikipedia says that Varus was succeeded in 4BC by an unknown person, probably Lucius Calpurnius Piso; then by Gaius Julius Caesar Vipsanianus in 1BC, and than by Lucius Volusius Saturninus in 4 AD, before Quirinius took over in 6 AD. And you can't blame Wikipedia for any of this, because they are just quoting various sources including Cassius Dio, John Hazel, and Ronald Symes. The succession of the governorship of Syria is also discussed in this essay "The Date of the Nativity in Luke" by Richard Carrier, who gives a very thorough analysis of the evidence that Quirinius didn't hold the office of Syrian governor before 6 AD.

So if you believe Junkipedia, you presume that he retired the Syria governorship in 4BC, twiddled his thumbs in Rome for 10 years, then was appointed governor of Germany in 6 AD (officially confirmed in 7 AD).

The part about Varus "twiddling his thumbs" in Rome for 10 years, does indeed seem to be unsourced conjecture. Livius.org says the same thing, while admitting that they have no information about what Varus might have done in Rome. The Jewish Encyclopedia says that after suppressing the rebellion in Palestine led by Judas ben Hezekiah, Varus returned to Antioch. Which is exactly the same thing as Josephus says in Ant. 17:11:1. At the time, Antioch was considered "an eastern Rome", although it was also part of Syria, and the former capital of the western Seleucid Empire.

See Josephus 17:8 but especially 17:9:1 to 17:13:5 where the extended battle against Judas ben Hezekiah (head of the bandits), Simon the ex-slave (prototype of Peter) and Athronges takes place and where Varus is present during the invasion of Samaria to put these rebels down (17:10:9)!

The conventional wisdom seems to be that these events were concluded by 4 BC, although I don't see anything in Josephus that would establish that end date.

What has not been seen until now is the intimate connection between the Varian disaster (9 AD) and the initiation of the Jesus Christ cult, particularly after Augustus' death some years later!

So the connection is that Varus was responsible both for the Teutoberg fiasco as well as the ongoing revolt of the Jews, which was by no means truly suppressed by Varus's cruelty? I don't see how that connection depends on exactly how long it took for Varus to suppress Judas ben Hezekiah's rebellion (crucifying 2,000 Jews in the process) or what he was doing in the meanwhile.

I agree that this analysis provides a motive for the deification of Julius Caesar, as well as the syncretism of Divus Julius with the Jewish messianic prophecies, all under Octavian's leadership. This became a long-term project of the Roman imperial cult, and Paul was merely a loyal servant of the emperors. (See "Operation Messiah" by Voskuilin & Sheldon.) According to this view, the canonical Gospels were a Flavian elaboration on a pre-existing religion, whose promotion and growth was already well under way.

Hopefully this analysis is sufficient to overcome Tony Bird's chronological objection to the Roman Origins thesis?

 

[Jerry Russell]

The part about Varus "twiddling his thumbs" in Rome for 10 years, does indeed seem to be unsourced conjecture.

The unsourced conjecture at WishyWashyPedia has been replaced by a citation to Josephus and Jewish Encyclopedia. Check it out. It may not be the same tomorrow.

 

[Claude Badley]

Jerry, I'm flabbergasted!

The unsourced conjecture at WishyWashyPedia has been replaced by a citation to Josephus and Jewish Encyclopedia. Check it out. It may not be the same tomorrow.

Someone had changed it overnight, within 24 hours of me writing the quote here in the first place, removing the red-highlighted BS from the Wikipedia text I quoted in posting #21!

We're being watched, indeed scrutinized from above - showing that Postflaviana really matters to the elites!

Yours creepily,
Claude very Badley

PS for Richard only: I must admit though, Richard, that I was hoping Jerry would be rash enough to say that Jesus was such a powerful heavy figure in history that His mere gravitational pull bent time and space around Him - erasing 10 years of history from 4BC to 6AD (time dilation) and bringing Rome and Syria into walking-distance juxtaposition (length contraction of the Mediterranean). Applying Einstein's principles is so versatile a way indeed of modifying history towards whatever prejudice one wants to believe in!!!!

 

[Richard Stanley]

Jerry, I'm flabbergasted!Someone had changed it overnight, within 24 hours of me writing the quote here in the first place, removing the red-highlighted BS from the Wikipedia text I quoted in posting #21!

We're being watched, indeed scrutinized from above - showing that Postflaviana really matters to the elites!

Yours creepily,
Claude very Badley

PS for Richard only: I must admit though, Richard, that I was hoping Jerry would be rash enough to say that Jesus was such a powerful heavy figure in history that His mere gravitational pull bent time and space around him - erasing 10 years of history from 4BC to 6AD (time dilation) and bringing Rome and Syria into walking-distance juxtaposition (length contraction of the Mediterranean). Applying Einstein's principles is so versatile a way indeed of modifying history towards whatever prejudice one wants to believe in!!!!

I'm not sure why this is aimed at me, I have other beliefs, but I don't have enough time or energy left to spare. I was hoping to finish off my issues with JC and the millennial End Times, past, present and future, but it is certain (thanks to you and Jerry bringing my attention to it) that MMGW alarmism is part of the present apocalypse construct. In terms of real-time computer programing I have entered my terminal race condition.

Thanks to your and Jerry's nonsense I ran across a physical explanation for sun cycle cycles [sic] via the impact of the planets, which of course, Plato would appreciate. And, the next cycle predict will end in .... 2070. No doubt a...nother coincidence. But, what a great application for the Antikythera Mechanism eh?

 

[Claude Badley]

Dear Jerry,

All quite OK, but I need to clarify some issues.

This is not what Wikipedia says, not at all. … The succession of the governorship of Syria is also discussed in this essay "The Date of the Nativity in Luke" by Richard Carrier, who gives a very thorough analysis of the evidence that Quirinius didn't hold the office of Syrian governor before 6 AD.

I have that essay somewhere at home in a book but I can't find it yet!

There is Christian questioning as to whether Varus had an interrupted governorship. See:

http://www.askelm.com/star/star013.htm

The conventional wisdom seems to be that these events [in Josephus] were concluded by 4 BC, although I don't see anything in Josephus that would establish that end date.

Quite right, but these events would have occurred earlier in Varus' rule (if we presume it continued, even vicariously, from 4BC to 6AD) since the latter part of his rule was peaceful, according to those authors who use this presumed FACT to emphasize his overconfidence in dealing with the Germans. This implies that once he had pacified Syria's Jews he went on to have a peaceful rulership, deputizing his governorship to others (as shown in Wikipedia's governorship list) - as they could share the tax take - while angling in Rome for a still higher paying appointment, being favoured because he was a relative of Julius Caesar.

So the connection is that Varus was responsible both for the Teutoberg fiasco as well as the ongoing revolt of the Jews, which was by no means truly suppressed by Varus's cruelty? I don't see how that connection depends on exactly how long it took for Varus to suppress Judas ben Hezekiah's rebellion (crucifying 2,000 Jews in the process) or what he was doing in the meanwhile.

The Jewish opposition was just getting underway after Herod's death, but this does NOT imply that Varus caused the Jews to revolt - rather, this was due to the death of Herod the Great and his son's accession. What I am saying is that Varus was confronted BOTH with the beginning of the Jewish revolt and then with the effective German revolt which ultimately killed him, that outcome due to his complacency and contempt towards the Germans (as Tacitus implies).

It was the successful German revolt, however, which led to Roman demoralization, the end of JC's "civilizing mission to Europe" and thus the increasing need for a "divinized JC", since the Jewish revolt at that time (4BC<6AD) was alone nowhere near enough to trigger Roman collapse - though knowledgeable Jews will have heard of the Varian Disaster (9 AD) soon enough!

I agree that this analysis provides a motive for the deification of Julius Caesar, as well as the syncretism of Divus Julius with the Jewish messianic prophecies, all under Octavian's leadership. This became a long-term project of the Roman imperial cult, and Paul was merely a loyal servant of the emperors. (See "Operation Messiah" by Voskuilin & Sheldon.) According to this view, the canonical Gospels were a Flavian elaboration on a pre-existing religion, whose promotion and growth was already well under way.

Hopefully this analysis is sufficient to overcome Tony Bird's chronological objection to the Roman Origins thesis?

I don't have "Operation Messiah" yet but hope to get to it in the next month or so! I rather suspect it will confirm our suspicions here since Joe, Bruno Bauer and others have pointed to the otherwise obvious connections between Paul and the Caesarian families.

Yours faithfully
Claude

 

[Jerry Russell]

Someone had changed it overnight, within 24 hours of me writing the quote here in the first place, removing the red-highlighted BS from the Wikipedia text I quoted in posting #21!

We're being watched, indeed scrutinized from above - showing that Postflaviana really matters to the elites!

A most remarkable speculation! But who made the edit? Would this be the Soros funded elites, or the Christian Zionist elites?

Of course, it would also be possible to infer that Richard was responsible for the edit. But, any such inference would be plausibly deniable.

There is Christian questioning as to whether Varus had an interrupted governorship.

This Christian speculation seems to be based on the idea that Herod lived until 1 BCE, thus dating "The War of Varus" in Judaea three years later than the conventional wisdom. The author also accepts coin evidence dating Varus's rule to the years 6 thru 4 BCE, and by this means infers the dual governorship periods. But presumably the dating of Herod's death to 1 BCE is Christian motivated apologetics, in contradiction to whatever evidence exists to the contrary.

...once he had pacified Syria's Jews he went on to have a peaceful rulership, deputizing his governorship to others (as shown in Wikipedia's governorship list) - as they could share the tax take - while angling in Rome for a still higher paying appointment, being favoured because he was a relative of Julius Caesar.

Now I'm confused. Are you still disputing that Varus went to Rome, "twiddling his thumbs", or are you agreeing that's what probably happened? The bottom line is, we don't know what Varus was doing between 4 BC and 6 AD, so this is all speculation. Or do you know of any evidence at all?

 

[Claude Badley]

A most remarkable speculation! But who made the edit? Would this be the Soros funded elites, or the Christian Zionist elites?

Of course, it would also be possible to infer that Richard was responsible for the edit. But, any such inference would be plausibly deniable.

Ha! Ha! Not an apocalyptic hope on your part I guess!

This Christian speculation seems to be based on the idea that Herod lived until 1 BCE, thus dating "The War of Varus" in Judaea three years later than the conventional wisdom. The author also accepts coin evidence dating Varus's rule to the years 6 thru 4 BCE, and by this means infers the dual governorship periods. But presumably the dating of Herod's death to 1 BCE is Christian motivated apologetics, in contradiction to whatever evidence exists to the contrary.

As Herod supposedly died in March 4 BCE this implies a helluva lot of activity in the next nine months, according to Josephus.

I wrote that ...once he had pacified Syria's Jews he went on to have a peaceful rulership, deputizing his governorship to others (as shown in Wikipedia's governorship list) - as they could share the tax take - while angling in Rome for a still higher paying appointment, being favoured because he was a relative of Julius Caesar.

Now I'm confused. Are you still disputing that Varus went to Rome, "twiddling his thumbs", or are you agreeing that's what probably happened? The bottom line is, we don't know what Varus was doing between 4 BC and 6 AD, so this is all speculation. Or do you know of any evidence at all?

All I agree to is that Varus could go to Rome for considerable periods while still governor - but ONLY AFTER he had crushed the Jewish and any other major revolts in his territory - and he had to rely on suitably militaristic subordinates to achieve this. Additionally he could easily find trustworthy substitutes to deputize since a governorship was a lucrative position much sought-after by Roman political elites.

There is good evidence - albeit indirect. According to the descriptions of his activity in Germany, he had become complacent towards those whom he ruled, since his experience with Syria OVERALL was that they were pacific (unlike the story in Josephus which of course gives us only the exciting bits), the Syrians not prone to repeated revolts like the newly-conquered Germans (a situation the exact opposite to Germans and Syrians today!!!!!) - something NOT YET evident in 4 BCE!!!!

This means that he ruled over a prolonged peaceful period in Syria, during the later period of his governance, perhaps from 2 BCE to even 6AD, utilizing deputized substitutes; this helped make him too serene and complacent to be an effective governor of newly-conquered barbarians! Clearly, even though he was a Caesar he had to show some evidence of ability here - otherwise the Romans would NOT have chosen him to be governor of trans-Rhine Germany - and this evidence would best be shown by a need not to be personally there all the time, particularly if the providence was peaceful and thus prosperous for the majority! Varus was not merely "twiddling his thumbs in Rome" - i.e. idling his time away in irrelevant pursuits - but would have remained involved in some way in governance in the period before 6 AD.

And this is irrespective of whether he was primarily an "absentee" governor or whether he spent most of his governorship in the assigned province - the more peaceful the situation the less need for his personal presence! This was not the case in Germany of course!

Yours faithfully
Claude

 

[Seeker]

Paul's writings preceded all subsequent Jesus-Christian literature--gospels, apocrypha, Acts, Revelation, etc.--and Paul is likely to have died at the time of Nero and was perhaps executed by him.

Does all of this also hinge upon whether Paul was Josephus or not? If Josephus/Paul was born in 37 AD, I can see problems with this concerning Point Number One, as Josephus/Paul would have been "just a kid" when his first Epistles were written late 40's/early 50's AD, although Josephus, if we take his word for it, describes himself as a sort of child prodigy, who by the age of 14 was sought out by the "high priests and principal men of the city" (Life 2) for his legal opinions (!!!). As far as Point Number Two is concerned, the stories that Paul was beheaded by order of Nero are not eyewitness accounts and were written long after his supposed execution, so if he was also Josephus he could have survived past 100 AD, in my opinion.

 

[Seeker]

Because Herod the Great died in 4 BC - hence JC was born before he died in order to "prove" Herod's massacre of the innocents (Matthew Gospel). But in Luke we find Joseph and Mary having to be census-registered in Syria under Quirinius (Cyrenius), about the time Baby Jesus was born. The problem is: Cyrenius was only appointed in 6AD. If however, one could pretend his governorship extends back to 4BC (like the Wikipedia oligarchs do), then one can have Herod the Great killing the innocents while Quirinius has just begun his reign

Not to worry, in "Jesus, King of Edessa", Ralph Ellis has him born in 14 AD, which happens to be the year that Augustus passed away on August 19 and Tiberius succeeded him.

 

[Richard Stanley]

Such discussion is why we need the comprehensive spreadsheet analysis, and a timeline chart.

I think Ellis makes some good arguments for why the young Josephus was indeed Paul, for one in comparing Paul/Saul and his travelling companion (who Ellis argues is Josephus's older brother) to contemporary young Mormon missionaries, who travel in pairs, as did the Cathars, and to a lesser extent the Jehovah's Witnesses. Ellis makes a nice point, as well, that the reference to being the son of tentmakers is an allusion to the tabernacle and the construction of the first strata of Judaism, and a variant manner of saying someone is a (speculative) mason or tekton.

 

[Seeker]

Yes, I was thinking about the Mormons also, some of whom are teenagers who do missionary work around the world for 2 years after high school, so I can picture Jewish "men" of 13 doing that with an older companion, but does Ellis say anything about the dating of the Epistles of Paul, I didn't get to read that part on the Amazon Preview of "Jesus, King of Edessa". Maybe if young Josephus/Paul was such a prodigy, with adults asking him his opinion about the law, he could write to them about it also.

 

[Richard Stanley]

Ellis accepts the dating for the 'authentic' Paulene letters, and why not? They don't mention much of Jesus of Nazareth. But, in Acts he does know some guy named Abgar, remarkably like King Abgarus, and similar parallel narratives as well.

 

[Seeker]

Ellis accepts the dating for the 'authentic' Paulene letters, and why not?

I see what I was fixed on now, I was thinking of "books", like the Gospels and the Histories, but these Epistles are actually meant to be read as "letters", which of course a teenage Paul/Josephus could have written before composing his major works later on.

 

[Seeker]

Julius Caesar, Octavaian Augustus Caesar, and Titus Flavius could all simultaneously be informing the character of the Biblical Jesus

The "original" Biblical Jesus? I wasn't sure where to put this, but this lifelike model of Julius Caesar is based on the image of him that Francesco Carotta used on the cover of his book, "Jesus was Caesar". From the description: "This is Julius Caesar -- or at least a stunningly believable sculpture based on a silicone cast of a Roman marble bust. See https://cesaresderoma.com/ for similar busts of Nero, Caligula, and Octavian, and the sculptures they're based on."

 

[Seeker]

Of course we can't forget the Flavians, and by someone who creates photoreal depictions of Roman Emperors, we have Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian:

 

[Claude Badley]

Francesco Carotta is the researcher who made the JC connection to Julius Caesar. As for Carlotta, isn't that some character in an Australian desert movie? If you were an Australian, I could understand the slip since in the Jenolan Caves near Sydney there is a Carlotta Arch above the limestone caves. Nevertheless, very realistic reconstructions, based on the very realistic sculptures!

Yours faithfully
Claude

 

[Richard Stanley]

Vespasian looks like LBJ, or vice-versa.

 

[Seeker]

Vespasian looks like LBJ, or vice-versa.

Yes, they were both homely, too much Elite inbreeding, I guess. Seriously, as Vespasian was not considered "elite", in comparison to the Julio-Claudians, so also LBJ was not considered "elite" by the "royal" Kennedys.