Seeker

Active Member
Ellis discusses the Nazarene association with castration and bloody self-flagellation.
Ewwww!!!!! Please forgive me for publicly venting, but I cannot imagine anyone being stone cold sober and wanting to do this to themselves, were they on drugs? Seriously, I never really thought that Jesus asked his disciples to become eunuchs, he was just comparing the ways men became eunuchs, without commanding anyone that they had to be that way, so take it or leave it, thus:

Matthew 19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
It might be considered that the pro-Roman NT and such as Hippolytus are proclaiming a black propaganda against the Nazarenes in slyly asserting this association.

On the other hand, those Templar knights, who seem from the same traditions, were pretty extreme. Beyond their celibacy, they could not bath or change their underwear.

In any case, here's what pseudo-Lucian said about the Galli, of which the Shiites seem to be repeating except for the neutering:

On appointed days, the crowd assembles at the sanctuary while many Galli and the holy men whom I have mentioned perform the rites. They cut their arms and beat one another on the back. Many stand about them playing flutes, while many others beat drums. Still others sing inspired and sacred songs … On those days men become Galli. For while the rest are playing flutes and performing the rites, a frenzy comes upon many … (he) throws off his clothes, rushes to the center with a great shout and takes up a sword, which I believe has stood there for this purpose for many years. He grabs it and immediately castrates himself. Then he rushes through the city holding his testicles in his hands. He takes female clothing and women’s adornment from whatever house he throws these testicles into. (pseudo-Lucian, De Dea Syria 50-53.)

I'll bet this was just a way to dissuade women from showing off their expensive best gear in public. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
There does not appear to be clearcut evidence of eunuchs in the Egyptian courts. I found a good article about it here.

One suggestion is that castration may have been practiced by the cult of Seth. However, you can't miss that the various 'deformities' we see in representations of Akhenaton are the same as for eunuchs -- wide hips, feminine chest, large belly, small head, spindly legs, etc.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
From your just prior link:

"If they want to portray a male who commits the crime of mutilating himself, they draw a beaver: because the latter, when chased (by hunters), tears off its own testicles and leaves them behind as prey"5.

Now we know where the cryptic use of the term 'beaver' originates. Imagine if Trump had instead said: "You can just grab them by their beavers." The great white hunters, Don Jr. and Eric, would have understood bigly, while our shallow minds remain in the gutter just the same.

From a different page on that site:

The notion of gender complexity is deeply rooted in ancient Egyptian culture. In the Egyptian story of the creation of the gods, the first god is male and female, and its name is Atum. Through asexual reproduction, Atum creates two other gods, Shu and Tefnut. These two in turn produce another pair, Geb and Nut. Finally, Geb and Nut, the earth and the sky, combine and produce the two pairs of Isis and Osiris, and Seth and Nephthys. In the stories of these archetypal beings, Isis exemplifies the reproductive female, Osiris the reproductive male, Seth the nonreproductive eunuch, and Nephthys the unmarried virgin (lesbian).

Ellis had gone on from castration etc. to discuss that the Biblical Adam seems to be a restatement of the hermaphroditic Atum. Separately, in some traditions Jesus is one remanifestation on Earth of Adam.

One suggestion is that castration may have been practiced by the cult of Seth. However, you can't miss that the various 'deformities' we see in representations of Akhenaton are the same as for eunuchs -- wide hips, feminine chest, large belly, small head, spindly legs, etc.
Yes, there has been much speculation about the depictions of Akhenaton, one that he must have had Marfan's Syndrome. In any case, the depictions seem to accentuate such characteristics, as if to caricaturize them. And if so, he of course, approved of such depictions. Such, begs the question, id he was castrated at some point, was whether or not he fathered the children. There already are assertions that Tut was not his boy.

Incidentally, prior to reading Charles post, I had just finished watching a video discussing, among other things, the depiction of chopped off hands and tallywhackers at the temple of Ramesses III. I am going to post on this video on a different thread in the context of precessional Climate Change and the consequent end of Egyptian greatness (leading to the collapse of the Late Bronze Age and the elites' shift to the north in power).

Tallywhackers - This is how the tally of enemy whackers was kept. :eek:
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Speaking of somewhat related sexual practices, and the claimed relationship of such as Magdalene (or Mary?) to Orange, and then on through the House of Orange:

Thirty canons (or 'regulations') were agreed upon and subscribed to, dealing with extreme unction, the Permission of penance, the right of sanctuary; recommending caution to bishops in the ordination of foreign clergy, the consecration of churches outside of their own jurisdictions; imposing limitations on the administration of ecclesiastical rites to those who were in any way defective, either in body or mind; and emphasizing the duty of celibacy for those belonging to the clerical state, especially deacons and widows, with specific reference to canon viii. of the Synod of Turin (AD 401).
The exact interpretation of some of the canons (ii., iii., xvii.) is debated. Canon iv. is alleged to be in conflict with a decretal of Pope Siricius; and ii. and xviii. betray an inclination to resist the introduction of Roman customs. Canon XVI determines that a person who has been possessed by a demon cannot be ordained, and if they have been ordained, they must be deposed. Canon XXVI requires that married men must not be ordained deacons until they have sworn chastity. Canon XXVII requires that if an ordained deacon should have sex with his wife, then he should be deposed. These canons were confirmed at the Synods of Arles about 443.
Also:​
Some have drawn a link between Gaul and the region of Galilee, via such as settled colonies of Roman veterans. Orange, of course, is in Gaul. But now we have this business with the castrated Galli. Coincidence?

Roman priests would not become subject to celibacy for centuries after this.

A second council was held at Orange in 529, over important theological matters predating issues later raised during the Reformation. At this time Orange was part of the Ostrogoth empire, mostly Arian Xians who were on peaceful terms with the trinitarian Roman Church.

There is one school of thought, expressed by Saussy, that the post-collapse period of the Western Roman empire was a series of machinations designed to eliminate unitarian Arianism, where Jesus is generally considered just a man (like perhaps a particular king?).

I suppose the following might be one example (see red text):

It is in his foreign policy rather than domestic affairs that Theodoric appeared and acted as an independent ruler. By means of marriage alliances, he sought to establish a central position among the barbarian states of the West. As Jordanes states: "...there was no race left in the western realms which Theodoric had not befriended or brought into subjection during his lifetime."[20] This was in part meant as a defensive measure, and in part as a counterbalance to the influence of the Empire. His daughters were wedded to the Visigothic king Alaric II and the Burgundian prince Sigismund,[21] his sister Amalfrida married the Vandal king Thrasamund,[22] while he himself married Audofleda, sister of the Frankish king Clovis I.[23]
...​
The peace with the Vandals, secured in 500 with the marriage alliance with Thrasamund, and their common interests as Arian powers against Constantinople, collapsed after Thrasamund's death in 523. His successor Hilderic showed favour to the Nicaean Christians, and when Amalfrida protested, he had her and her entourage murdered. Theodoric was preparing an expedition against him when he died.[25]
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I have posted a different sourced version of this episode on another thread previously. I post this here because in re-watching it one can see that most of the symbology discussed is very nascent, in the context of developed normative Christianity. For instance, most of the crosses are equilateral solar crosses. I could also post this in the From Chrest to Christ thread.

In this regard the underground 'church' outside of Jericho might more likely be seen as a proto-Mithraeum, as otherwise typically utilize by Roman legions. The officer corps would conduct their business there separately from the rank and file. If memory serves me correct this area was where the Legio X Fretensis was encamped.

Note the discussion of how such symbology is embedded into the Roman army, such as the SATOR Square being found widespread. What did not register with my in the first viewing was the possibility that the PATERNOSTER derivation delivers the possibility of the Alphas and Omegas, which I regard as key to a zodiacal rendering in my End Times analyses. In the prior thread I suggested that the SATOR Square also suggests an evocation of precessional rotation, including the word ROTAS.

679
Pater Noster, in the form of an equilateral cross, derived from the SATOR Square.


Also see these episodes, and note closely Jacobovici's discussions of the Ebionites, the Nazarenes, and the Minum in relation to the Romans, northern Syria and such.


 
I really appreciate the Eisenman video. I think the most of him, having been introduced to Biblical criticism by JAMES: THE BROTHER OF JESUS. I'm currently reading the followup volume where he goes into the Dead Sea Scrolls. Getting those released was a lifetime achievement.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Yes, that was quite a drama getting access freed up to the manuscripts. And, no wonder the Church didn't want to provide it. I found it also interesting as to why Israel gave the Church so much control.

Separately, the following is a talk Ellis gave recently about megaliths and then finishes on sacred stones. At one point he presented a view of one of the Göbekli Tepe rings and it seemed to evoke the Elliptical building(s) of the Dewa Fortress. It was hard to tell whether that ring was elliptical or not.


Also, one of Jacobovici's episodes (Tracking the Tribe) covering the buildings at Capernaum made me wonder if the inner circular enclosure there was also elliptical, albeit it is very small. Maybe this is their baptismal font, or a sweat lodge where they smoked weed? It has a protective roof over the site that makes it hard to see, but maybe there is a site plan available for Seeker to find?

680
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Derek interviews Lena Einhorn (A Shift in Time), who asserts that Jesus was "the Egyptian" and Paul. I thing that late in the show Derek mispoke in asking here whether Saul and Paul were one, when he likely meant was Josephus Saul/Paul. At one point Einhorn admits that events from the 50's and the Jewish War are merged together into the 30's.

Could Josephus actually be Saul/Paul .... and Jesus? This makes the whole business with Joseph of Arimathea, and the temple inside of the Dewa Fortress, in Britain makes even more sense in my mind.

 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
This Naked Archaeology episode is about a supposed tomb of an early Maccabean king. In the 10th minute Simcha goes in search of pyramidal Maccabean tombs mentioned by Josephus:


This episode is about who wrote the DSS. He discusses that the Maccabeans are left out of the corpus, because, as we know, the Maccabeans were Hellenizers. They, like Josephus, were in on the new revelation along with the Romans. They were metaphorical tentmakers from ... metaphorical Tarsus (the real land of the Mithra cult), Barbiero's thesis being that this became the preoccupation of Josephus' extended family that went along to Rome and parts nearby. Bartram's esoteric Chrestians (such as the Flavians) along with the Mithra cult helped boostrap the new 'Paulene' Christianity as the new, approved exoteric imperial cult, once it was ready.

 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I could see there being a close collaboration between such as Josephan and Piso families in developing the foundations for what followed.

I know that work is progressing on reading the Piso library scrolls from Herculaneum. Besides the charred ink, hopefully there wont be another transparency issue as with the DSS.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Thanks to Seeker, I jumped into the middle of one of Pope's works and am intrigued by the notion that the Maccabees were really the Ptolemies.

...
The birth of Antigonus occurred about 128 BC, and can be linked to the elevation of Alexander “Zabinas” as king in Seleucia in that same year. This Alexander was either a representation of Alexander Balas (at the end of his life, see below) or his older royal son Alexander Jannaeus. The implication is that by virtue of siring Antigonus, Alexander Balas was allowed to renew his kingship in Seleucia or that his older son Alexander Jannaeus was appointed as a king in Seleucia. In retrospect, the birth of a second royal prince virtually guaranteed that the first son of Alexander Balas was going to gain the election as Great King. The story relating to the brotherly competition for the priesthood in Jerusalem (between Aristobulus, Antigonus and Alexander Jannaeus) was a compressed version of what played out in the greater empire over a much longer period. In other words, the scenario described at the Hasmonean court prefigured what was to take place in the larger empire over the following decades. Aristobulus and Antigonus were going to be eclipsed by Alexander Jannaeus, the oldest royal son of Alexander Balas, which signified the end of one dynasty and the renewal of an earlier one that was cut short, that of Ptolemy II.
Ptolemy IX Lathyros (Antigonus) succeeded Ptolemy VIII (Simon) as pharaoh in 116 BC, however it had less to do with the “death” of Ptolemy VIII than with the birth of a prince in that same year to Cleopatra-Selene, the future Ptolemy XII (Hyrcanus II). By 110 BC, Cleopatra III decided to elevate her favorite prince Ptolemy X (Alexander Jannaeus) to the status of pharaoh. Ptolemy X had yet to produce an heir, so his appointment may have initially allowed Ptolemy IX to prepare for greater kingship and other princes, particularly Ptolemy X, to mate with Selene. By 107 BC, Ptolemy IX had abandoned Egypt, but Cleopatra-Selene and her children Prince Ptolemy and Princess Berenice were left behind. The birth of the next prince occurred by 106 BC and it nipped the career of Antigonus in the bud, because Ptolemy X Alexander (Jannaeus) had become the father of his first royal son (Aristobulus II, future Ptolemy XI). After the death/retirement of the Great King (John Hyrcanus) in 103 BC, Ptolemy IX invaded Egypt and fought a mock succession battle with Ptolemy X. By 102 BC, Ptolemy X celebrated the (staged) defeat of Ptolemy IX, celebrated the birth of his second son either in this same year or by 100 BC, which further secured his succession to the Great Throne. (A final attempt by Cleopatra-Selene to produce an heir by Aristobulus under his Seleucid identity of Antiochus VIII Grypos had failed by 103 BC.) ...

No wonder (according to Josephus) the Ptolemies had pyramidal tombs (in Palestine). And Cleo VII, at least, was a big landlady there as well.
 

Seeker

Active Member
by the notion that the Maccabees were really the Ptolemies.
Both dynasties claimed relationships to Greece, the Maccabees to Sparta, and the Ptolemies all the way back to Argos and Hercules, via the royal Macedonian house. Hercules. through his mother Alcmene, descended from Queen Sparta in Greek mythology, whom Sparta was named for.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
The following Mythvision video is graphical, color coded presentation of Lena Einhorn's on her "shift in time. Very persuasive IMO.

I generally agree with her conclusion about the motive to create the shift, albeit that I see it executed by Josephus and/or his imperial team of gospel writers, not such as an independent 'Luke'. Her discussion about the "Egyptian" and his father are very interesting, and seem to me easy to fit into Ellis' thesis (who also discusses the Egyptian).

She also drills down on the imporatance of the 6CE census as being the starting point for Jewish rebellion, and mentions of the 'robbers'. The rebellion, as I have noted from reading Ellis interpretation is indeed a parallel to the American phenomenon of libertarianism, whose focus was on taxation, among other things. Of which, we have seen the great polarization fester and such 'rebels' speak openly of literal rebellion and bloodshed. This is not coincidence. A new order cannot come about without such - that eventually allows people to cave in by mental and/or physical exhaustion if nothing else.

 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
The following discussion with Dr. Price is about whether or not the Book of Acts is heavily cribbed from both Euripides' play, The Bacchae, and 2nd Maccabees. Such parallels the notion that much of the Gospels are taken from the works of Homer, as developed by Dennis MacDonald.

Note the mention of Apollonius in 2nd Maccabees 3, in regard to the pondering of some that Paul is short for Apollonius (just not the famous one from Tyana in Paul's case). However there are parallels between Apollonius of Tyana and Paul, besides those with Jesus.

If Paul is then completely fictional, then who created him? Josephus, who could have just as easily thrown the whole kitchen sink into the 'quiet decades' described by Einhorn. These quiet decades are known as such, because this is what Josephus left us in his accounts.

 
Last edited:
If Paul is then completely fictional, then who created him?
My thought is that Paul started out the legendary evangelist Apollonius whose exploits became an oral tradition. He was adopted by Marcion and fitted out with a collection of letters. After Marcion's defeat Paul was taken over by the Catholics and extensively retooled. I think Josephus was used as source material for Luke/Acts, but was not the author. He'd have done it better.
 
Top