Breakthrough!

Josephson

Member
Good news everyone!
Joseph Atwill was only barely scratching the surface. The reason is because he interpreted the Gospels as "Flavian vanity", but seems to have missed the joke. The ancient Greeks are most famous for satire and the New Testament is clearly a satire of the works of Josephus, which satires can sound flattering if they are about someone who flatters the Romans incessantly. The main punchline of that satire is that Jesus says he came to save the Jews, because he didn't. They all died and the entire nation was destroyed exactly forty years (one generation) after Jesus came (see Matthew 24). Josephus also claimed to be sent by God to warn the Jews of the impending apocalypse and says "I got all those that I remembered as among my own friends and acquaintances to be set free, being in number about one hundred and ninety; and so I delivered them without their paying any price of redemption, and restored them to their former fortune.

Whereas Joseph Atwill got around forty associations between the Gospels and Josephus, I have 450 covering almost the entirety of the Gospels and the book of Revelation. Here are some treats:
- Josephus is called the "only son begotten of the Father" or "the son of man" because he was be-gotten in the siege of Jotapata, unlike Vespasian's other two sons who were begotten of the mother.
- The reason Jesus prays three times in the Garden of Gethsemane is because there were three walls around Jerusalem and each time before Titus attacks a wall, he sends Josephus to beg the Jews to surrender, so Josephus prays to them but says he doesn't want to destroy the city and the temple "never the less, not my will, but thine be done".
- That is also the reason that Simon (representing Simon the rebel) denies Jesus three times saying that he will never destroy the temple, then the cock crows (representing the trumpets as the Romans get over the wall).
- Doubting Thomas represents the Germans because they were not there when the blood of the lamb was spilt and didn't believe that the Flavians were raised up to the throne of God, so the Germans rebelled and Vespasian sent his son and as soon as they saw him the believed and said "my Lord, my God".

This satire was done very beautifully and is sometimes hilarious, I could give a lot more examples, but it's best to see it in its entirety. So I leave you with a link for the book "The Man of Sin", so that it will finally be given to you to understand the mysteries of the kingdom of God ;}.
https://www.amazon.com/Man-Sin-Biblical-prophecies-concerning-ebook/dp/B01M1NVLVJ
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Hello Josephson, welcome to our forum. And thanks so much for posting here.

I'm sorry that this, your first post, got caught in the forum spam filter. This is quite a lot to take in!

Do you believe your 450 parallels are also in sequence like Joe's, or is the relationship more complex in that regard?

I've bought your book at Amazon, and I'm looking forward to studying in more detail.
 

Josephson

Member
Hi Jerry, no problem.
It is a lot to take in, for me also. About following in sequence, it seems sometimes yes and sometimes no. I will admit I do not understand necessarily how the order comes about. I feel like I have understood the rhyme but not the rhythm, understanding the jokes but not the time-line, if that makes sense. Anyway, what I have is I think adding a new dimension to what Atwill started. With this new paradigm/weltanschauen I am able to see many more parallels, 450 covering almost the entirety of the four Gospels and the book of Revelation.

I am still working on fixing up the book, I don't have a digital designer or editor and when I originally collected these I used very complex underlining but the kindle converter turned them all into simple underlining, so I am switching to a color based coding system. It will take some time, but I hope the book will start to look better and be a bit more readable soon, so expect updates.
Cheers,
Matthew
 

Josephson

Member
Hi Gilius,
to be honest, I didn't really try to go through Acts. I did get a couple by accident, but I felt like decoding the Gospels and the book of Revelation would be sufficient to end Christianity. And what I have in my book is sufficient to show that about 80% of the passages in the Gospels and the book of Revelation are satires of a genocide, and I think I think that is sufficient. Now I have to concentrate on spreading the word. I'm tired of being the only person who knows about this horrific secret.
Cheers,
Matthew
 

gilius

Active Member
Do you also agree that the Flavians invented Christianity?

I think you'll have a hard time trying to spread the word due to cognitive dissonance.
 

Josephson

Member
I don't see any evidence of Vespasian or Titus being involved in this, they were generals not satirists. I have no idea specifically who it could have been, but it would appear to have been a loose collection of Greek satirists who originally were just mocking Josephus and his writings, something you would only have understood if it had been given to you to understand. The authors seem to think Josephus was a stupid asshole (see Jesus Heals Bartimaeus). Probably at some later date people realised that if you forgot that this was a satire then it really put the Romans in a good light (because Josephus did; ) and made for a rather nice form of both ancestor worship and reconciliation for their crimes against Israel, and so the Flavian dynasty beginning with Constantine seems to have adopted it for that reason, probably sanitising the final version somewhat. I imagine it would have happened something like that, although I don't know if it will ever be possible to identify the original authors, they were careful to use fake names, because that is what you have to do when you are mocking the adopted son of the living God and you don't want to get sent to the Egyptian mines.
 

gilius

Active Member
Do you not see evidence that it was a government project under the Flavians - even if they hadn't put stylus to paper? Do you see that all the parallels that Joe found mostly involve "bigging up" Titus, and later, Domitian?
 

Josephson

Member
And yes, it will definitely be a hard sell. This is why I came here first, because I hoped to find open ears from people who were already seeing half of the story and already working and reading the subject and so close to finishing it.
 

Josephson

Member
Do you not see evidence that it was a government project under the Flavians - even if they hadn't put stylus to paper? Do you see that all the parallels that Joe found mostly involve "bigging up" Titus, and later, Domitian?
I do see passages that are praising Titus and Vespasian, but I also see the where Josephus is doing the same thing. I think whoever was doing that praising in the New Testament was doing it in satirical style, not because they really wanted to praise them. Josephus says all the time how it was "divine providence" which brought the righteous judgement of the Romans upon the Jews. The New Testament does the same thing, but in a pretty funny way. I will try to post a good example of one which is praising Titus and/or Vespasian in a mocking way soon to illustrate that.
 

Josephson

Member
OK, check out "Samaritans Reject Jesus". In this one, Jesus represents Vespasian who has his face set to go to Jerusalem. This passage is definitely not praising Vespasian, but mocking the way that Josephus says Vespasian arose "in appearance, as though he was going to besiege Jerusalem, but in reality to deliver them". I don't think there is any way you could interpret that as being written by someone whose primary goal was to praise the Romans. It is satirical, because they are all about to die.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
This is why I came here first, because I hoped to find open ears from people who were already seeing half of the story and already working and reading the subject and so close to finishing it.
Hi Josephson, it is ironic that sometimes the people closest to a subject are the most skeptical of new findings. You would think that atheist / mythicists like Robert Price and Richard Carrier would be willing to consider Joe's ideas, but it turns out they're the harshest critics.

I think Price and Carrier are both being honest about the reason for their skepticism, and it's going to effect you perhaps even more than it effects us. The problem is that evaluation of these parallels that both you & Joe (we) are relying on, is in the eye of the beholder.

Just by random statistics, any pair of passages that you choose from Josephus or the Gospels are going to share some similar words. If you make an effort to find a similarity of thematic material, it almost always is possible to come up with something. And furthermore, if you take a hundred random pairs of paragraphs, some pairs are going to seem closer than others, again because of random statistics. The same is true of any pair of documents that you could select, even completely unconnected ones. A failure to account for the amount of similarity that you would see by random chance, is known as "multiple comparisons fallacy".

The scholarly standard for judging parallels is that similarities need to be dense, sequential, and distinctive, as well as interpretable. I think some of the parallels we've been working with here are up to that standard, while others are much less so. But they occur in a grand sequence, so I'm hopeful that the set of them is statistically significant, even if each individual parallel is a bit thin.

My first impression is that by the standards of density, order, distinctiveness, and interpretability, some of your parallels are stronger than others. Rick is pretty excited about the seven seals parallels, and they seem consistent with the Flavian origins theory.

But please don't be discouraged or upset if some of your other findings inspire questioning, or spirited debate. I'm always wanting to find common ground between various people's opinions, but I'm not sure I can see how you and Joe can both be right about the Gospel authors.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
This passage is definitely not praising Vespasian, but mocking the way that Josephus says Vespasian arose "in appearance, as though he was going to besiege Jerusalem, but in reality to deliver them". I don't think there is any way you could interpret that as being written by someone whose primary goal was to praise the Romans. It is satirical, because they are all about to die.
Here is another example, similar to what we argued about with Marcilla, and that is the notion of "double agents". First in regards to Josephus himself and possibly even the to Flavians themselves via Bartram's notion of them as Chrestian [sic] occultists.

Josephus was descended from the Maccabees, or at least he claims to be. As was discussed here, were the Maccabees really Jewish nationalist heroes, or were they more quietly part of something much larger, and thus intimately connected to the Hellenizing globalism of the day? The modern day example is the role that Trump is playing as a faux nationalist, leading the emotional chimpigs over the cliff like a Pied Piper. But, as I have been saying elsewhere, he is besties with the Clintons.

And, as I am strongly suggesting in my work, that everything involved in the creation of Christianity was part of a bigger globalizing project (still ongoing today), whose sponsors veiled themselves under layers of obfuscation, including vanity.

This is why there is millenialism built into such as the Book of Revelation, and why things are happening at 1,000 year intervals. Christ was assigned a manifested DOB of 1AD (not 0 AD), and thus 2001 became the marker for the transitions of the ages, just as Jesus wrought in the age of Pisces (the cutting edge science of the day). And both times are followed by war along the Euphrates.

And this is likely why the year 1066 CE was significant marking the beginning of the tribulation period for Domesday (and 1070 being similar to 70).
 

gilius

Active Member
I do see passages that are praising Titus and Vespasian, but I also see the where Josephus is doing the same thing. I think whoever was doing that praising in the New Testament was doing it in satirical style, not because they really wanted to praise them. Josephus says all the time how it was "divine providence" which brought the righteous judgement of the Romans upon the Jews. The New Testament does the same thing, but in a pretty funny way. I will try to post a good example of one which is praising Titus and/or Vespasian in a mocking way soon to illustrate that.
The flattery may seem rather cheesy or pompous, but that's what people with ego problems enjoy the most. It doesn't matter how ridiculous it might seem to call a psychopath "God", but it nevertheless relieves their feelings of emptiness and boredom, and some even believe they literally are God, hence the "God complex" - they enjoy any kind of attention and flattery. You could look back at all types of history/culture, such as Ching dynasty China. Officials of lesser power really did have to throw themselves down onto the floor till being prompted to stand once again.

It has been shown that a lot of Joe's sequential parallels are bi-directional, hence Josephus and the NT were both part of the same project. And there are other ways of reaching the same conclusion (for example: see book of Daniel chapter in CM). What's more: I found that many parallels are in fact tri-directional, including Jesus asking us to look up verses in the Old Testament that further adds to the pro-Roman perspective. So besides satire the main purpose of the parallels is antisemitism, genuine flattery of the Flavians and Roman propaganda. What else could such a sophisticated undertaking represent other than a Roman government project in the same vein as modern psychological warfare?
 
Matthew, thank you for sharing these discoveries you have made. It is a very exciting time, indeed, for those willing to consider that there is more to the New Testament than popular opinion has heretofore allowed!

I need to check out your book, but could I ask you to say more about the identity you suspect of the authors? Let me not be coy, the reason I ask is because it seems to me that however clever a work may be, it is unlikely to outcompete one which has the endorsement and backing of the Empire and its infrastructure to provide the logistical support for its dissemination.

Also, I can't help but notice that you talk about the key to entering the Kingdom of Heaven being that one see things as the inverse of how they are presented. On a completely unrelated subject, I see that you call yourself Matthew Josephson, which might also be written Mathias bar Josephus, not that it has any significance, of course...
 

Josephson

Member
Matthew, thank you for sharing these discoveries you have made. It is a very exciting time, indeed, for those willing to consider that there is more to the New Testament than popular opinion has heretofore allowed!

I need to check out your book, but could I ask you to say more about the identity you suspect of the authors? Let me not be coy, the reason I ask is because it seems to me that however clever a work may be, it is unlikely to outcompete one which has the endorsement and backing of the Empire and its infrastructure to provide the logistical support for its dissemination.

Also, I can't help but notice that you talk about the key to entering the Kingdom of Heaven being that one see things as the inverse of how they are presented. On a completely unrelated subject, I see that you call yourself Matthew Josephson, which might also be written Mathias bar Josephus, not that it has any significance, of course...
Hi Marcilla,
I have no idea who could have written them, but I can see that it is clearly satirical and very dark humor, more crass than even South Park and sometimes antisemitic. It is really bad humor mocking a genocide as described in the works of Josephus, literally every single verse. It was written in Greek and Greeks at that time were the only people at that time who were well known for this kind of satire. But the kingdom of God is like a treasure which a man had in his field but didn't know and he died and his son died and his grandson found the treasure and started lending money at interest. I think soneone found this horrific satire and realized that if you forgot about the satire then it sounds like it is praising the Romans and putting blame for the genocide of the Jews on themselves because those are both things which Josephus did incessantly, so obviously a satire would do that even more. I would guess it was later Flavians around the time of Constantine that realized they could use this satire for national propaganda once the details of the war had fadded from peoples minds. But I really don't know about that, all I know is that the New Testament is the most horrifying piece of satire I have ever seen, since it hides one of the bloodiest and most thorough genocides in recoreded history behind the imagined greatest miracle of all time.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Every time the Knights Templar lost a battle against the Saracens they would blame themselves for not having praised God properly, or followed his ordinances. We can't expect that the Saracens wrote these accounts in the Templar's name can we?

Perhaps Josephus, like the Maccabees were really following a hidden agenda all along. Namely that they were all part of the wider globalization project, sometimes known as Hellenization. And so were the Flavians, who gave us practically the only archaeological evidence that the Jewish War existed as recounted in the works of Josephus, that being the Arch of Titus.

As Shlomo Sand detailed in his The Invention of the Jewish People and as James Carroll recounted in Constantine's Sword, the Jewish people survived and (in Europe) were put under the Pope's protective (so to speak) wing (as useful living exemplars of evil -- human scarecrows) for the sake of herding the Christian chimpigs. Similarly, Jerry and I are developing the theory that Judaism was always a synthetic construct from its inception, for the exact same reasons.

In your mentions of gematria, '666' for instance, and that it must refer to Nero (maybe so), it also refers to much more at a deeper level. And that connects to a much wider and longer project than just that of satisfying short term (even if centuries long) Flavian vanity.

I have noted in your book that you mention Preterist End Times Theology, but do you also take into account the Futurist school, both established at the same time by the Jesuits? There is only one logical way to comprehend that two otherwise mutually exclusive End Times schools can exist and have been simultaneously authorized by the mother Church.

However, I should also note that the Jesuit's Preterist school focused upon the period of Constantine's making Xianity the official religion as being the End time in question. I am not aware of any contemporary Xian sect that still (openly) views the fall of the Temple as the fulfillment of the Matthew 24 prophecy.
 
Top