In this post, we will briefly revisit one of the pillars for our support of the Egyptian vector into Judaism, and thus also into Chreistianity (the now authorized Postflavian spelling for the Holy Amalgamation.
), besides the Ellis/Osman/Freud/Sabbah thesi, that is.
This being the metallurgist Robert Feather's book,
The Copper Scroll. In that book Feather analyses the Qumran scroll variously (Six Ways from Aten Day?) and concludes that the origin is from Akhenaten's city of Akhenaten (aka Amarna). And thus that the Essenes (aka Ebionites, The Way, or
Nazarites) were essentially distant remnants of the exiled court of Akhenaten. In other words, Jerusalem was essentially New Amarna (after pit stops in Petra (aka OG Mecca) and Bethel).
Feather's work is akin to the Sabbah brothers' in that they make hard linkages in time back to physical Egyptian history. Part of Feather's accomplishment came when he discovered that the scroll's 'treasure list' was not being interpreted through the proper units of measure, Egyptian units. And thus a cache of coins(?) that had been discovered at Amarna, in the correct location, also now matched the Egyptian units.
If the Sadducees were elite Hellenized Jews, and the original [sic] Pharisees were Persian Parsi influenced Jews, then might we consider that the Essenes were the oldest strata - retaining what they considered the original form - from Egypt and the Amenhotep III priesthood of the Yehud? If so, hence we see the Egyptian strata, the Persian strata, the Greek strata, and with the Roman intervention, the Roman strata. The Persian Pharisees are reformed into Roman Pharisees, the imperial/feudal buffer class and moral foils to the future exoteric universal Church per St. Augustine
et al...
Before going further, let's first look at what John Bartram says in relating the Essenes and their DSS to the canonic gospels:
The book I reference here - I could not possibly review it - has more holes than the proverbial Swiss cheese. The author actually imagines that the New Testament contains a history of Judaea in the first century, with a real, actual, living, divine man Jesus. Oh dear, but never mind; here we'll treat a part of the chapter The Herodians of the Gospel of Mark:
The glaring lacuna of the missing Essenes in the New Testament has removed them from centre field. It would be )hard to construct a notion of Essene marginality on the basis of Philo or Josephus, yet they are missing in the New Testament and thus - given the dominant conceptual paradigms created by biblical literature - it seems obvious. Why would the Gospel-writers have avoided mentioning the Essenes if they were powerful players, deeply involved in public debate? If the Pharisees and Sadducees were concerned about Jesus’ interpretations of the law and actions, surely the Essenes - if they played a public role - would also have been concerned? As we have seen, in Philo and Josephus the Essenes are presented as the most exemplary of all Jewish legal ‘societies’ in Judaea and a key paradigm for Judaism as a whole; in the New Testament they are absolutely nowhere. (The Essenes, the Scrolls and the Dead Sea by Joan Taylor, Oxford University Press, 2015)
The gospel writers did not avoid mentioning this sect: the New Testament is all about them, in parody. They are whole point of the New Testament.
The sect which wrote much of the Dead Sea Scrolls, almost certainly in Qumran, next door to the caves in which they buried them, never gave themselves a formal title - not even once. It is therefore unrealistic to expect to find this non-existent title in the New Testament. Instead, they describe themselves using various terms: The Poor (Ebionim, Ebionites), The Way and Nazarite; they also had leaders with titles such as Righteous Teacher and Messiah. We see clear parody with Christian usage of Nazareth, the way and messiah.
I'm saddened to see how even the most modern and prestigious scholarship n this field just tramps along the old textual tradition, with nothing new or important to say.
As I have asserted beforer, the NZR in Nazarite is originally from the Egyptian for 'prince', and so the original and pure faith would really be followers of the royal prince, originally such as Akhy himself, or one of the other proposed pharaohs or a brother (depending on whose hypothesis). Like 'good' messianic Jews, Futurist Christians, or Muslims today, the apocalyptic Essenes back in the day were awaiting their messiah, a prince cum 'annointed' king.
This is what Queen Helen was doing in Jerusalem, trying three times to complete the 7 year Nazarite qualification process, and spending a tone of moolah to save the famine stricken Jerusalem. This in helping to curry favor for her son to become ...
Well, according to Ellis, essentially to become the Egypto-Persian-Greek-Roman King of the Jews. And, at the same time, Emperor of Rome. Why not? But what happened?
Well, as I have discussed before, the 'Egyptian' rebel discovered that the fig tree of fortune was barren, and thus it was not his time, but rather that of his distant Sabine cousins, the Flavians, (metaphorically 'Esau'). These wild branches who were grafted onto the domestic olive tree and its Root of Jesse (Romans 11). Not Zion, but Zoan - Egypt that is.
Thus the Essenes become parodied, as well as their allies the Zealots and Sicarii, and their 'prince' as well, who was really no more than another fake populist colluding with his cousins. Fake News or Good News? Whatever, Cleopatra's Chi-Rho passed through, as well did the Flavian Fish and Anchor, till they both got crossed up.
Just another day, or two, at the Abraxis corporate office.
