Seeker

Active Member
The result is the mind slavery that profits a few, even making it that much harder for the mind slaves to make the proper efforts if they wanted to.
Yes, we have "entitlement" now, just as 2000 years ago, in 19 AD instead of our 2019, the common mass of Romans had bread and circuses provided for them without effort, before the hypothetical First Millennial Apocalyptic Jewish War from 66-70 AD, and the triumph of the Flavians. If we have your projected Third Millennium Apocalypse in 2066-2070, is it possible by that time that a Postflavian point of view could triumph, or will history repeat itself once more? Of course, it may be a moot point for us, as Ellis noticed in "Cleopatra and Christ" that Jesus eventually triumphed and became the "Emperor/God" of the Roman Catholic Empire/Church, but it was a hollow victory, as it was in his name only and not in his actual person, as may be the case with us by 2070, unless we start engaging in some serious tantric practices with our newfound knowledge and become immortal!;)
By the way, to add to the synchronization, it looks to me as though Ellis has Jesus born in 14 AD* by his latest estimation, and that Postflaviana was "born" in 2014, stay tuned!

* Ellis may have nailed it this time, as it is recorded in "The Deeds of the Divine Augustus" that Augustus conducted three lustrums (censuses), in 28 BC, 8 BC, and 14 AD, this last year being the year of his decease on August 19, and the last year that Jesus could have been born in his reign. "The Deeds of the Divine Augustus"(8) http://classics.mit.edu/Augustus/deeds.html Yes, Luke 2:2 (KJV) states in parentheses that "And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria", indicating to me that (1) Luke is indicating when he thought that this taxing was first imposed upon the area (in his own lifetime?) without specifically naming the birth of Jesus as occurring during it, or (2) the parentheses are showing that this was a later interpolation.
 
Last edited:

Seeker

Active Member
Also noticed in this Sept. 24, 2019 video that Ellis says Jesus died in the mid-90's AD, and the last Flavian Roman Emperor, Domitian, was assassinated about this time, on Sept. 18, 96, with Nerva succeeding him. According to Cassius Dio in http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/68*.html#1 "Roman History" Book LXVIII:1, Emperor Nerva released all those who were on trial for maiestas (treason), with no one permitted to accuse anyone of this, and also restored the exiles and prohibited castration, all of which may have applied to situations that had involved Jesus. If Jesus were released from his "life" in exile at Chester, could he then eventually have gone to India as it has been said, and that is actually his tomb there?
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Yes, we have "entitlement" now, just as 2000 years ago, in 19 AD instead of our 2019, the common mass of Romans had bread and circuses provided for them without effort, before the hypothetical First Millennial Apocalyptic Jewish War from 66-70 AD, and the triumph of the Flavians.
Well, people that are born with platinum spoons in their mouths usually don't consider this as an entitlement, but a divine right of 'ownership'. So, again, we are talking about a contextual reframing of what 'ownership' means.
If we have your projected Third Millennium Apocalypse in 2066-2070, is it possible by that time that a Postflavian point of view could triumph, or will history repeat itself once more?
When I soon join Vespasian at a seat with the gods, I shall make this happen. Otherwise, it is a lead pipe dream, as most are too intellectually lazy or fearful to adopt a better paradigm. Many hate their own innate intelligence, preferring the buffoonery of belligerence.
Of course, it may be a moot point for us, as Ellis noticed in "Cleopatra and Christ" that Jesus eventually triumphed and became the "Emperor/God" of the Roman Catholic Empire/Church, but it was a hollow victory, as it was in his name only and not in his actual person, as may be the case with us by 2070, unless we start engaging in some serious tantric practices with our newfound knowledge and become immortal!
It is not at all certain that the real Jesus was on the side of the peeps, but as we've discussed here, was either a controlled opposition actor or a 'mere' vain competitor for the emperor-ship. So mootness doesn't come into play if these are such.
By the way, to add to the synchronization, it looks to me as though Ellis has Jesus born in 14 AD* by his latest estimation, and that Postflaviana was "born" in 2014, stay tuned!
My father always said that "vanilla (ice cream) has no flavor", and so in honor of the immanent new Ice Age, the motto will be "Ice, Ice, Baby".
* Ellis may have nailed it this time, as it is recorded in "The Deeds of the Divine Augustus" that Augustus conducted three lustrums (censuses), in 28 BC, 8 BC, and 14 AD, this last year being the year of his decease on August 19, and the last year that Jesus could have been born in his reign. "The Deeds of the Divine Augustus"(8) http://classics.mit.edu/Augustus/deeds.html Yes, Luke 2:2 (KJV) states in parentheses that "And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria", indicating to me that (1) Luke is indicating when he thought that this taxing was first imposed upon the area (in his own lifetime?) without specifically naming the birth of Jesus as occurring during it, or (2) the parentheses are showing that this was a later interpolation.
Good catch.
If Jesus were released from his "life" in exile at Chester, could he then eventually have gone to India as it has been said, and that is actually his tomb there?
Legends in India/Kashmir have it that this Jesus had the scars of the crucifiction upon him, and if this person did, then it could just as easily be Shimon of Cyrene continuing to play his role as Jesus.
 

Seeker

Active Member
Well, people that are born with platinum spoons in their mouths usually don't consider this as an entitlement, but a divine right of 'ownership'.
This is true, I should have been more specific and stated that I meant the "mind slaves" think they have "entitlement" now, just as the mass of ancient Romans on the dole did.
When I soon join Vespasian at a seat with the gods, I shall make this happen. Otherwise, it is a lead pipe dream, as most are too intellectually lazy or fearful to adopt a better paradigm. Many hate their own innate intelligence, preferring the buffoonery of belligerence.
Perhaps we can start by making an offering to Vespasian on his upcoming Nov. 17 birthday, but as he was the down to earth type he would probably laugh at us anyway. As far as the future goes, I believe St. Paul/Josephus told us that there abideth three things, faith, hope, and charity, and the greatest of these is charity (how true today!).
It is not at all certain that the real Jesus was on the side of the peeps, but as we've discussed here, was either a controlled opposition actor or a 'mere' vain competitor for the emperor-ship. So mootness doesn't come into play if these are such.
Again, I may not have expressed myself properly, but I meant to say that whatever the motives of Jesus were, he did not physically survive to reap the benefits of his "Godhood", as certain people living in 2019 may not live the see the 2070 outcome.
My father always said that "vanilla (ice cream) has no flavor", and so in honor of the immanent new Ice Age, the motto will be "Ice, Ice, Baby".
No disrespect meant to your father, but I always liked vanilla ice cream, and as "Jesus" said about salt losing its savour, we can either be the salt of the earth, or be good for nothing, cast out and trodden underfoot by men (as he realized through personal experience with Rome?).
Legends in India/Kashmir have it that this Jesus had the scars of the crucifiction upon him, and if this person did, then it could just as easily be Shimon of Cyrene continuing to play his role as Jesus.
Yes, he had to go somewhere also, didn't he, and I shall have to add "crucifiction' to my vocabulary, very clever, Thank You!
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
No disrespect meant to your father, but I always liked vanilla ice cream, and as "Jesus" said about salt losing its savour, we can either be the salt of the earth, or be good for nothing, cast out and trodden underfoot by men (as he realized through personal experience with Rome?).
Maybe, back then, before ice cream factories that is, being the 'savior' originally meant keeping the savor of the salt out of the churning ice cream, vanilla or otherwise? o_O

My father merely said this as a means to rib a certain in-law who would eat no ice cream but vanilla.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Derek and Valliant discuss Carotta. Pretty good way to characterize Carotta's place in the field, except, as I found out recently, no one needs to tell Carotta about the Flavians, as he explicitely pointed to the Flavians in his later chapter, which most everyone seems to have glossed over. Also, Valliant misses that Julius Caesar's populism had an ulterior, Trumpian motive.

 

Seeker

Active Member
Also, Valliant misses that Julius Caesar's populism had an ulterior, Trumpian motive.
It looks like he refers to this obliquely, however, around 9:50, when he refers to the Senatorial aristocrats who did not want an Emperor or a single man to disrupt the Senate's control of the Roman world, which is of course exactly what Julius Caesar did ( Establishment "Swamp" Congress vs "Populist" President Trump?).
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Well, I was referring to that Valliant seems to frame Julius (like the orthodox Jesus) as merely acting in the public good, against the aristocratic senators. In my analysis framework, they were just shifting to the imperial paradigm, and needed a justifying pageant as a cover story.
 

Seeker

Active Member
Yes, I agree that was Valliant's intent, and Julius Caesar was certainly an imperial agent of change. After all, he was born an aristocrat, one of them to begin with, and with his appointment as Flamen Dialis was entitled to a seat in the Senate also at the age of 13! As they say, blood is thicker than water, and, as Will Durant stated in his "Caesar and Christ", Julius Caesar began as a god (his family supposedly descended from the goddess Venus, daughter of Jupiter), and ended as a god (deified).
 

Seeker

Active Member
it is a lead pipe dream, as most are too intellectually lazy or fearful to adopt a better paradigm. Many hate their own innate intelligence, preferring the buffoonery of belligerence.
I have discussed Tupper Saussy with you in the past, and it looks to me that, although certainly acknowledging the existence of the "New World Order" and the "Rulers of Evil", he chose to accommodate himself to them by being available as a "Christian reconciliator". If I am understanding your worldview correctly, you sound like an "agnostic pessimist", no put down intended, and I was wondering, since you do obviously try to carry on with this site, do you have some personal creed or belief that keeps you going, such as the philosophy of Plato (the true meaning) that I have noticed that you are interested in? I do agree with what you have stated about people in the above quote, except for one thing; I honestly cannot say that I ever met anyone who hated their own innate intelligence, on the contrary, I have met many people who loved to show off how "intelligent" they thought that they were, even when no one else thought the same about them!
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I was referring specifically to those today (but there have been earlier manifestations) of the so-called anti-intellectual movement. They will do such as claim that their gut instincts are superior to rational thinking. That there are plenty of instances that otherwise smart intellectuals can go astray, unwittingly or otherwise, is besides the point.

There is one supreme virtue and that is the pursuit of the truth. I watched a Grimes' video last night on the personal attainment of Buddhahood where the ultimate sin is 'Belief'.

Regarding humanity, I am a pessimist for the short term, at least. The higher the evolution of the organism, the more deceit is ingrained into its development, and with humans the more so amongst the elites, who seem sociopathic and/or psychopathic. Deceit is properly understood (in the Science of Mind) as an aspect of intelligence, and it will take some long period of time for humanity, as a whole, to come to grips with recognizing and mitigating this. For example, in rejecting belief systems that prey upon the adherents who falsely believe they are being helped.
 

Seeker

Active Member
as claim that their gut instincts are superior to rational thinking
Such as the old saying "always go by your first impression", that was my first impression upon reading the above sentence! Intuition over intelligence.
the ultimate sin is 'Belief'.
I agree, that is a VERY great obstacle to overcome, no wonder it takes years to become a "Master" or whatever, and how many people have the dedication, introspection, and patience for that journey to true Enlightenment?
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I started skimming through Bushby's The Bible Fraud and I had not considered trying to reconcile it with the others discussed here, but If we can con include from Julius to the Flavians, why not whatever happened in between, with Tiberius?

The tombstone in Germany, of Tiberius Panthera's, seems hard to reconcile with the emperor Tiberius's, but who knows? By the time of Tiberius's death he was not in the best regard, or so we are told.

Bushby notes that there were accounts that Judas -Thomas (Krestus) died in ... Edessa of all places. Also, the play with Kristus versus Krestus in interesting in light of my analysis of Chrest and Chrest. Bushby has the twins closely linked with the Essenes, as does Ellis, but most likely we'd be looking at two successive generations of twins in this case.

While Ellis has Mary the mother as Queen Helena, Bushby has her as Mariamne Herod, sister of Herodias. Maybe this is once again reflecting differnt generations being mashed up?
 

Seeker

Active Member
Well now, "Jesus" did start his ministry during the reign of Tiberius in the Bible, and if he was born in AD 14, as Ellis thinks, he literally started his life also when Tiberius began his rule. Roman Piso thinks that the original Imperial writing team (sans Josephus, who wasn't even born yet) started work on the Gospels during this time also, but this was interrupted with the accession of Caligula, who may have been the natural father of Josephus, who portrayed himself as "Jesus" in the Bible! However, we have the Tiberius "Panthera" of Bushby and the Ptolemy "Pantera" of Ellis as possible fathers of Jesus, can this be reconciled (since he was a Christian reconciliator, I ought to describe this as "doing a Tupper":rolleyes:). Just to add to this royal mishmash, Charles N. Pope has Jesus as the son of Caesarion (stepbrother and cousin of Augustus, who was the adopted father/legal father-in-law of Tiberius and the biological great-grandfather of Caligula).
Could the possible conflation with a previous generation have something to do with the Ellis proposal of a John the Baptist/Jesus chronological mix up?
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Could the possible conflation with a previous generation have something to do with the Ellis proposal of a John the Baptist/Jesus chronological mix up?
Well, Ellis has to allow for a generational separation here that the official story doesn't allow. So, we're already into this 3 generation span situation.

I should have read further into Bushby's explanation of the headstone dating, which I had forgotten the details. The 'cryptic' headstone must be very late origin, while indicating that its maker understood certain matters stemming from the Pantera naming, and of which Bushby discusses a great deal to link Tiberius to that name.

(From page 38) One of which is a party that Augustus held to honor Julius (as Zeus-Jupiter). Augustus plays the role of Apollo, and Tiberius as Pan, the son of Hermes (also a son of Zeus). On page 40, Bushby brings up the Divine Twins, Castor and Pollux, the Heavenly Twins, of which Pollux was a son of Zeus, via the mortal Leda. Twin bother Castor was fathered by the mortal Spartan king Tyndareus.

It would seem that in following the syncretistic synthesis of a new religions, and in the vein of "as above, so below", that there must be such twins in the production. Albeit that the official and unoffical Xian stories don't have Mary having two fathers for the twins. But the Nativity only tells us about one son in any case.
 

Seeker

Active Member
But the Nativity only tells us about one son in any case.
Ah, but in two different books, with two different Nativity stories. What I mean is that we have the "royal" (divine) birth and the "common" (mortal) birth, in these two different scenarios, does this not fit the pattern? One son will inherit, the other will be disinherited, as with Isaac/Ishmael, Jacob/Esau, Pharez/Zerah, and perhaps Jesus/Judas. Of course, Ishmael and Isaac are not twins, so can this be extended to mean opposing natures of two brothers, which would also include Cain and Abel (with Seth as the spare?), Ham and Shem (with Japheth dwelling in his tents), and even extending to the Good and Bad Thief for Castor and Pollux? We would even have Romulus and Remus, down to Octavian and Caesarion, in the Roman versions of this motif, if it is feasible.
 
Last edited:

Seeker

Active Member
One of which is a party that Augustus held to honor Julius (as Zeus-Jupiter). Augustus plays the role of Apollo,
Suetonius writes that Atia, the mother of Augustus, was impregnated by Apollo when she fell asleep in his temple, and so Augustus was really the son of Apollo. Julius Caesar was born on July 13, the Ludi Apollinares (solemn games of Apollo), and so could this "Apollo" impregnation of Atia be an allegory for Julius Caesar being the hidden divine father of Augustus, the prototype of the hidden divine father scenario for Jesus later in the Gospels?
 
Top