Seeker

Well-Known Member
http://www.domainofman.com/cgi-bin/bbs62x/webbbs_config.pl?md=read;id=13440 You will need at least a couple of aspirin (or something stronger) after trying to figure this out, but then again, you have much more experience at this sort of thing than I do. Charles N. Pope on his "Domain of Man" site has equated his "Jesus" with both the Izates of Ellis and the inner core of the Piso family (per the M. Crassus Frugi link) like Roman Piso, along with several other names that are unrelated to Postflaviana research, and also has Barnabas as the possible brother of Paul (if Paul does connect to the Josephus of Ellis). As I mentioned before (if you have enough stamina and patience to follow this through), Pope has his Jesus eventually becoming the Great King of the World, with Josephus as one of his sons who starts a line of Roman Emperors, therefore the "historical" Jesus line eventually merges with the "Imperial" Jesus line, what an incredibly optimistic fantasy (?)! Although Pope does not mention it, perhaps Deva Victrix at the end of the Roman world does become the headquarters of the Imperial Cult of the Messiah and his Twelve, was it not written by the Josephus/Piso family in "Matthew" 28:20 that "and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world", and if you follow one of his tortuous links, Pope also connects "Jesus" or one of his sons with "Bran the Blessed" in England. Oh, I do love happy endings!
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
It might be fun to revisit this episode of Jacobovici's: https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/romes-secret-christians.1650/#post-4470

http://tubitv.com/video?id=285700&title=The_Roman_Armys_Secret_Christians

This may be the best of Jacobovici's episodes. It begins with symbolic evidence of proto-Christianity found within a cave used by Roman troops before their assault on Jerusalem. There are several cross symbols, a solar representation of Sol Invictus, and a definitively Roman military symbol for a legion standard.

The crude 'stick figure' crosses are interesting because they are not of the type normally depicted for a crucifixion, ignoring here that more typically the actual crucifixion crosses were 'capital T' shaped. Instead they were equilateral and most interestingly all four arms had angled flares at the tips. This is highly evocative of the flared Templar Cross commonly seen today, including worn by Catholic functionaries.

Next they moved to Megiddo where an early 2nd century 'house church' had been discovered with an esoteric mosaic on the floor. In the center of an octangle were two fishes which were then surrounded by 8 symbols, of which I cannot identify or associate easily with the 12 zodiac signs. The mosaic, at least, was funded by a Roman centurion and the house was part of the permanent Roman encampment, which immediately abutted a Jewish village. The writing embedded in the mosaic mentions "our god, Jesus Christ". This is clearly a usage which the early Christians as depicted by normative conventions does not allow for, thus this is a form of otherwise aberrant Christianity, at a very early stage, placing it in a status with such as gnostic forms. All of which indicate esoteric beliefs predating the Roman imposition of normative Christianity for the hoi polloi.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
This may sound silly, but my first impression was to think of "The Parable of the Sower", which describes the results of planting the "seed" on the four classifications of humans, coming from the New Testament by Arepo (Arripiso?), perhaps code for Arrius Calpurnius Piso/Josephus, who is telling us that most people will never understand the true meaning of the "word" that he wrote.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Now for more comments on Carotta's Final Observations. Here he has laid out why Pollio's history of Julius' Civil War and subsequent addendums to it would have been used in Roman encampments just as Christians have used the Bible for ~2,000 years, cultural cohesiveness. And that this is done in the context where Julius is being discussed as a divine, a literal god. Furthermore, Carotta goes on to add that we might then also see that our Book of Revelation may originally have been an account of Octavian's war with Antony and Cleo. Here the character equations are interesting. Is Cleo no longer Isis, but the Magdelene?

We have learned elsewhere that Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius have caused damage variously to the imperial cult.

Then at pp. 332-333 he goes on:

Vespasianus, for his part, wanted to reanimate and reorganize the cult of Divus Iulius. He had to legitimize his dynasty by pointing to the divine founder of the Empire to whom he was not related, and he had a direct reason for this gratitude. In the aftermath of the war that founder had chosen his party against that of Vitellius when his cult statue at the alter in front of the temple of Divus Iulius swung around of its own accord and oriented itself towards the East.
This might have been the hour of Jesus' birth. On the day of the battle at Pharsalos, the statue of Victoria in the temple of Minerva of Elis had turned from the goddess to face towards the entrance and threshold., and by doing so it heralded, not only Caesar's victory, but his divine elevation as well. In like fashion, the statue of Divus Iulius, now directed to the Orient, not only announced the victory of Vespasianus and the reinvigoration of the Orient, but also the epiphany of the other, Eastern face of the God of the Empire: Divus Iulius could now become Jesus, the figure of Jesus could take over the form of the statua Divii Iulii ad orientum sponte conversa: 'turned toward the Orient' or, metaphorically, 'converted'. In this sense the statue of the Divus Iulius was the first conversa, the first 'convert'.
When passing this omen down to us, Suetonius in the same breath mentions the prophecy made by the enchained Josephus to Vespasianus--that Vespasianus would soon become emperor and would set him free. This indeed came to pass, and as Vespasianus's minister of propaganda he soon took on the name of Flavius. Flavius Josephus' writings--the Jewish War, the Jewish Antiquities, as well as his Autobiography and his Apology--are preserved in scholarly form, and through them he sought to incline the Romans towards the Jews, their history and their scriptures. But where are to be found those other writings his principal had surely expected from him, namely those with the aim of convincing the Jews of the diaspora of his new Messiah in order to integrate them religiously into the Empire? They must have existed, we may suspect, in light of the fact that he mentions his correspondence with Herodes Agrippa and his ongoing verbal and written debates. Has the correspondence of Flavius Josephus in the service of Vespasianus been preserved as Paul's letters? Were the cult and history of Divus Iulius, under Flavius' supervision, gradually adapted ad usum iudaeorum? Were the citations from the classics, which were spread throughout the whole text, replaced with citations from the books of the Jews, in order to convince and convert them? Did the Gospels originate in this fashion? Did Flavius Josephus' followers, after his death, add his vita to those of the formerly great men of the cult of Divus Iulius, so that they could be blended together? Is this how our book of Acts came into being?

Yes, and this is fully compatible with the thesis of Caesar's Messiah. But then, what need of Jesus of Gamala, aka Abgarus, aka Izates / Monobazus?

Well, if Josephus writes that there was a contemporary war, then there had better be a war, or something that looked to most like one. Else, someone might suspect that he was trying to mask a previous war.

This is pretty brilliant actually. The precursor texts, those of Pollio's accounts, are sitting in every caesaarium and garrision throughout the empire, just waiting to be swapped out under some pretext with Josephus' handiwork. The imperial resources can be fully employed without making a big fuss about it.
 
Last edited:

Seeker

Well-Known Member
On page 214 of "Rulers of Evil", the Tupper Saussy version of this is that Caesarian Rome officially began in Alexandria, Egypt, at the temple of Jupiter, on the winter solstice, December 25, 48 BC, when Julius Caesar, Priest of Jupiter, was declared to be Jupiter's incarnation, thus "Son of God". The Battle of Pharsalus had occurred 4 months earlier, on August 9. 116 years after this, almost to the day, on December 21, 69 AD, on the winter solstice, Vespasian was declared Emperor by the Senate, while he also was at Alexandria. Today we celebrate "the hour of Jesus' birth" also at the winter solstice, December 25, followed by his "Flight into Egypt", which, going strictly by the observance of "the Feast of the Holy Innocents" of the Roman Catholic Church, would have occurred before December 28. A most auspicious, amazing, and awesome time!
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
http://www.domainofman.com/cgi-bin/bbs62x/webbbs_config.pl?md=read;id=13440 You will need at least a couple of aspirin (or something stronger) after trying to figure this out, but then again, you have much more experience at this sort of thing than I do. Charles N. Pope on his "Domain of Man" site has equated his "Jesus" with both the Izates of Ellis and the inner core of the Piso family (per the M. Crassus Frugi link) like Roman Piso, along with several other names that are unrelated to Postflaviana research, and also has Barnabas as the possible brother of Paul (if Paul does connect to the Josephus of Ellis). As I mentioned before (if you have enough stamina and patience to follow this through), Pope has his Jesus eventually becoming the Great King of the World, with Josephus as one of his sons who starts a line of Roman Emperors, therefore the "historical" Jesus line eventually merges with the "Imperial" Jesus line, what an incredibly optimistic fantasy (?)! Although Pope does not mention it, perhaps Deva Victrix at the end of the Roman world does become the headquarters of the Imperial Cult of the Messiah and his Twelve, was it not written by the Josephus/Piso family in "Matthew" 28:20 that "and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world", and if you follow one of his tortuous links, Pope also connects "Jesus" or one of his sons with "Bran the Blessed" in England. Oh, I do love happy endings!
It looks as though "The Great Kingship" of the World in this Uber-Elite family, through various pseudonyms and "afterlife" locations (The Hidden Resort on an epic scale) passes from Julius Caesar (reminding me of Carotta having him as that in a symbolic religious sense) through Caesarion and eventually to "Jesus", with "John the Baptist" as his elder half-brother becoming the Roman Emperor Claudius, and "Josephus" eventually becoming Roman Emperor Nerva. Becoming a Roman Emperor appears to be a consolation prize for some of this family, the top position of "Great King" is an Eastern honor, because this family goes back to the Pharaohs, sound familiar? Ruling Britain will become an "apprenticeship" for becoming the Great King, with Constantine the Great as the most illustrious example of that. Pope explains this through "St. Paul" writing that he became "all things to all men", with this certainly applying to Jesus, and that to this Uber-Elite family "all the world's a stage". Yes, apparently "Shakespeare" was a member of this family also, and the "Josephus" of his day, incredible story (?)
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
I wonder if "ordinary" people also have past "lives" in this "Time Machine", or only the movers and shakers of the world?
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
It looks as though "The Great Kingship" of the World in this Uber-Elite family, through various pseudonyms and "afterlife" locations (The Hidden Resort on an epic scale) passes from Julius Caesar (reminding me of Carotta having him as that in a symbolic religious sense) through Caesarion and eventually to "Jesus", with "John the Baptist" as his elder half-brother becoming the Roman Emperor Claudius, and "Josephus" eventually becoming Roman Emperor Nerva. Becoming a Roman Emperor appears to be a consolation prize for some of this family, the top position of "Great King" is an Eastern honor, because this family goes back to the Pharaohs, sound familiar? Ruling Britain will become an "apprenticeship" for becoming the Great King, with Constantine the Great as the most illustrious example of that. Pope explains this through "St. Paul" writing that he became "all things to all men", with this certainly applying to Jesus, and that to this Uber-Elite family "all the world's a stage". Yes, apparently "Shakespeare" was a member of this family also, and the "Josephus" of his day, incredible story (?)
[/Q
As well as correlating with Ralph Ellis in identifying "Jesus" as possibly Izates, in identifying the ancestors of Julius Caesar as going many centuries back to the Pharoahs, Charles N. Pope strikes another similarity to Ellis, who on pages 21-26 of his book "Scota" proposes an ultimately Egyptian origin for the name "Caesar".
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
It looks as though Ralph Ellis has many videos on YouTube, and on one of them, "King Jesus with Ralph Ellis", posted on Nov. 24, 2018, at about 47 minutes into this presentation, he has a family tree of King Izates, with KIng Ptolemy of Mauretania as his father, and Julia Helena Ourania of Adiabene as his mother. King Ptolemy did marry a Julia "Urania", but was she also Helena of Adiabene, who is supposed to have married her brother Monobaz I and fathered Izates, besides also marrying Abgar V ("the Black") of Edessa, just as Ellis speculates that Julia Urania may have married her brother Phraates V and also Ptolemy of Mauretania?. In the Bible, Joseph was supposed to be the father of Jesus but he really wasn't, could Monobaz/Phraates have been the supposed father of Izates when his real father was Abgar/ Ptolemy? The mother of Ptolemy, Cleopatra Selene, could have been the aunt of Julia Ourania, making her his cousin/wife, if this were true. All of these people were also Roman clients, and the stepmother of Ptolemy, Glaphyra, was the widow of Alexander, the son of Herod the Great, who left Juba II, the father of Ptolemy, for another son of Herod, Herod Archelaus. I have only read "Cleopatra to Christ" in the Jesus trilogy of Ellis, so perhaps he explained how "Ptolemy" could be the father of Izates in the other books, and perhaps some Postflavianan has read them and can show how this could be.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I'm new here, but I've read most of the articles and books being discussed. It was the Ellis material that drew me in, so I've particularly enjoyed this thread. I'll probably have some thoughts and questions down the line, but now I wanted to ask about another book with an interesting perspective on the Christ question: THE REAL MESSIAH: MARCUS AGRIPPA AND THE GOSPEL OF ST MARK by Stephen Huller. It seems that Agrippa was an important part of the Alexandria scene, along with Philo and Alexander. Have you had chance to read it?
In regards to the wider role of the Herodians, and thus reflecting some possible light on the issue of Marcus Agrippa being Christ, or 'a Christ' lets see what Carotta says in the same chapter that you pointed me to, his Final Observations.

Starting on page 337 he mentions that just as the statue of Divii Iulius had 'turned itself' towards the East, that the POV of the East must find its way into the Flavian redactions. And that the logistical base for doing so was the Roman colonies established throughout the Levant, and especially those with Herod the Great. Carotta then discusses the subsequent neglect of the imperial cult by Tiberius through Claudius helping to set the stage for a need for a more welcoming re-invigoration of the cult. I suggest that this may also be one argument for convincing the most influential cult members of the need to have an avatar that could better withstand the ravages of time.

Beyond Tiberius and Claudius' neglect of the cult, starting with Tiberius they had kicked the Jews out of Rome, while committing Jewish males to military service. Thus, these Jewish troops, integrated with the goyim, were exposed regularly to the religio castrensis, the religion of the fortess or camp, which canon would have been the 'gospels of Julius Caesar' according to Pollio. As Carotta suggests, the uniform language of the official texts were too formal and unfamiliar for the various ethnic troops and their various respective primary languages. Thus, various notes and complete re-writings would have been made, with the natural driftings made via errors and cultural biases taken into account. In this environment, these efforts were likely approved as being more beneficial than not.

And whn one figures that the expelled Jews likely settling in Roman colonies and nearer to fortresses and such, the retired veterans had Roman civil rights including the ius connubii, to take a wife from among their people. Now, with Julius Caesar being remembered by these Jews as 'good', as chrestos, for his good treatment towards them, contrasted by Tiberius' and Claudius' treatment, the Way had been Prepared for a theological mutation to be possible:

From pp. 339-340:

The center for this mutation, which was to be expected and was laid out well in advance, was the former regions of Herodes the Great and his successors, the tetrarchs, with Palestine as the heartland.
From the beginning there was also a differnt view, indeed a double one, among the veterans. Herodes the Great had received at least five legions successively, still more after Actium. They belonged to the best of the Caesarian mould: most of them were Gauls, then there were Thracians, and the cavalry were Germans. Their elite formed Herodes' bodyguard. But they were, and considered themselves to be , Romans, just as they considered Herodes to be a Roman. Iulius by name, he belonged to the Caesarean gens, if not to the family, thanks to the adoption of his father by Caesar. He had been invested in Rome with the title of King of Judea. Together with Antonius and Octavianus, in fact between them, he ascended the stairs to the Capitol, to the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, where stood the statues of the ancient kings and the more recently added statue of the invincible Caesar. The fact that he was not a Roman functionary, but socius et amicus populi Romani, a king 'allied to and a friend of the Roman people', in no way made him nor his undertakings any less Roman. It was well known that this status could not be bequeathed, and one need not have been a prophet to suspect that this was the first step towards the tetrarchy becoming a Roman province. It had been no different in Bithynia and Pontus.

Carotta goes on to discuss the complicated regional politics, including that this Roman association didn't do Herodes any favors with the local Jewish nationalists. Then continuing on:

On the one hand Herodes was more Roman than the Romans themselves, giving his children Julio-Claudian names--Gaius, Iulius, Marcus, Agrippa, Drusus, Drusilla. We even find an Antonius in his house. In true Roman fashion, he settled the veterans in colonies, especially in Galilaea, Samaria, Gaulantis, the Decapolis and Paraea. He named the towns in their midst after the gods and divinities of the Julio-Claudian dynasty: Caesarea, Ceasarea Philippi, Sebaste, Agrippias, Iulius, Livias, Tiberius... In all these places he himself, as a named Iulius, organized the cult of Divus Iulius (doing the same later for the cult of the Divi Filius and even of the the divine women of the dynasty), whose temple he built and whose archierus, high priest, he himself was. At the same time he was the new David, the Messiah, i.e., in the Greek language which he himself used and which alone was authorized in his region, the Christ. And he was regarded as such for a long time by his followers as was known to Hieronymus who stated that the Herodians were those who believed that Herodes had been the Christ. 737

Carotta then goes on to discuss the resulting dual minded 'schizophrenia' induced into the followers mindsets as time went on, that thus helped facilitate the final Flavian redaction. Under such a scheme, it is thus easy to see that such as Marcus Agrippa might be so identified for a time. But, alas, such would only be transitional once the final changes were uniformly imposed empire wide, centuries on. It takes generations to make such huge cultural changes to such a grand extent.

Paraea?

Simon of Peraea or Simon son of Joseph was a former slave of Herod the Great who rebelled and was killed by the Romans in between 4 BC and 15 AD.[1] Some have identified him as possibly being the messiah of Gabriel's Revelation, but this is disputed. He is mentioned by Flavius Josephus.[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_of_Peraea

See also: https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/the-messiah-before-jesus.1649/post-4469
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Ever since "Jesus Last of the Pharaohs" (first published 1998), Ellis has been claiming that most or all of these Jesus characters are one and the same, and that they collectively can be identified as "Biblical Jesus". And I can see that each of the four has some shared typology with Biblical Jesus, but I have trouble conflating them together as the same person. Gamala is not the same place as Tiberius home of Jesus ben Sapphias, and neither of them is in Idumea. Jesus ben Ananias is a peasant farmer, not a priest or local governor like the others. There's nothing to connect them together, other than their disparate typological connections to Biblical Jesus.

Furthermore, none of these Jesus characters is identified as Josephus's arch rival and predominant leader of the rebels. The most dominant rebel leader, according to Josephus, is John of Gischala. I'm wondering if Ellis is conflating this John of Gischala as yet another identity of Jesus of Gamala / Jesus of Sapphias? I think so, but I can't find where Ellis says so outright, or justifies the connection.
Following up on this item, I found this old thread:

https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/sept-22-talk-about-ralph-ellis.2158/

In which I provided an outline of Josephus's life, and an analysis of the various Jesus characters mentioned by Josephus both in his Life and Jewish War. I argued that Jesus of Gamala seems to be a very distinct figure from Jesus ben Sapphias of Tiberius. Jesus of Gamala is a politically moderate, priestly individual, while Jesus ben Sapphias is a very zealous revolutionary leader.

Now, one can always argue that this was a fraud, and that the two characters were actually a single person playing two different parts in a play, under two different disguises. But without some sort of pattern of evidence connecting the two, such a claim is pure conjecture. And one could make the same claim about any two random individuals, and almost always be wrong. So the statistical Bayesian priors are strongly against it.

The "Jesus ben Sapphias" character has some typological links to Biblical Jesus. Jesus of Gamala, not so much that I can see.

I agree that Ellis doesn't make any connection between John of Gischala, and any of the Jesus characters.

I understand why Ellis draws the connection that Abgar Manu V seems to be the same person as Izates. And that their entire royal dynastic genealogies match pretty well. But I'm still drawing a blank as to how Ellis builds a bridge from Izates/Manu to any of the Jesus characters in Josephus, or to Biblical Jesus.

Sorry to be following the conversation here, but three days late.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I argued that Jesus of Gamala seems to be a very distinct figure from Jesus ben Sapphias of Tiberius. Jesus of Gamala is a politically moderate, priestly individual, while Jesus ben Sapphias is a very zealous revolutionary leader.

Now, one can always argue that this was a fraud, and that the two characters were actually a single person playing two different parts in a play, under two different disguises. But without some sort of pattern of evidence connecting the two, such a claim is pure conjecture. And one could make the same claim about any two random individuals, and almost always be wrong. So the statistical Bayesian priors are strongly against it.

The "Jesus ben Sapphias" character has some typological links to Biblical Jesus. Jesus of Gamala, not so much that I can see.
What, do you want Josephus to just come out and say it for you?

Well, Josephus said that JoG was the leader of 600 rebel 'fishermen' around Tiberius. Tiberius is all the way across that yuuge sea, Jerry, from Gamala. That puts ol' JoG a lot closer to Cana, where he would appear to turn water into wine, using one of Hero of Alexander's parlor trick devices. That wedding at Cana was likely the estate of Jesus ben Sapphias, meaning son of the woman who always wears sapphire blue, the Virgin Mary, who was no virgin.

Like the number 600 was meant as a linking clue, not a literal number. In this case, it is a link back to the claim that Phraates V, Zamaris, had 600 dudes, as well.

And JoG was a high priest, just like the Catholic Church says with its ephod. If nothing else, for you doubters, JoN was the high priest of the Nazarenes.

This, and much more, is why we need to have a spreadsheet comparison done of all the typological aspects found in Ellis' three Jesus books. Such as Jesus of Gamala being the sone of the famous rabbi, Gamaliel. Unfortunately, Ellis did not provide a summary of all these details (except for a subset list starting on pg. 314) salted throughout King Jesus at least.

Added 8/14/19
 
Last edited:

Charles Watkins

Active Member
Richard, let me pick up on the material concerning the Imperial cult among the legions settled in the east. Most likely, participation was mandatory at some level as part of regimental routine.

But what is the relationship between these foreign legion cults and the Sol Invictus cult which flourished in those same locations? Was Sol Invictus coming from Rome or from Barbiero's Jewish elites?

Mithraism would not represent progress toward a stronger state religion for the Empire, being steeped in 'pagan' icons and revolving around a bizarre 'tauroctony' ritual. How could this serve the purpose of the Imperial cult?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Richard, let me pick up on the material concerning the Imperial cult among the legions settled in the east. Most likely, participation was mandatory at some level as part of regimental routine.
Yes, just like it used to be mandatory for church attendance in the US military.
But what is the relationship between these foreign legion cults and the Sol Invictus cult which flourished in those same locations? Was Sol Invictus coming from Rome or from Barbiero's Jewish elites?

Mithraism would not represent progress toward a stronger state religion for the Empire, being steeped in 'pagan' icons and revolving around a bizarre 'tauroctony' ritual. How could this serve the purpose of the Imperial cult?
Mithraism, if viewed like later Freemasonry, can be seen as an inner, esoteric church to the outer, exoteric church of Christianity. As such, Mithraism was for the officers and equivalent higher ranking civilians. The tauroctony is just a Zodiacal restatement of prior precessional cosmology. The bull being killed by Perseus is a reflection back to a prior age, and its end (leading to the age of the ram - and thus to the Omega sacrifice of the Lamb of God, Jesus). Thus, the officers (as 'elders' so to speak) received the higher knowledge that their troops do not.

People like to portray Mithraism as a competitor to Christianity, but this is malarky of the highest order, because of the different demographics and focus. Of course, Christianity strongly hints that there is indeed such an inner church.

I don't think it is possible to say exactly who instigated the cult, but I don't believe Barbiero's claim that the Josephusian Jews did all of that without the imprimatur of the imperial court. Besides, Jewish iconography is but a minor element of Mithraic symbology, and this is similar to Freemasonry as well. This is consistent with our analysis of Judaism as a synthetic false dialectic, and thus any high level Jew would understand the place of Judaism within the hierarchy .. as witnessed by the org chart of the family of Abraham, and the related collusive relationship of Joseph to Pharaoh.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Richard and Jerry, please forgive me, but I do enjoy (and learn a lot from, as a tyro) so much the interplay between you both, that I must quote "Commodus" from the film "The Fall of the Roman Empire": "Livius, if you listen very carefully, you can hear the gods laughing!".
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The bull being killed by Perseus is a reflection back to a prior age, and its end (leading to the age of the ram - and thus to the Omega sacrifice of the Lamb of God, Jesus). Thus, the officers (as 'elders' so to speak) received the higher knowledge that their troops do not.
Amazingly, I just REALLY realized, in writing that out, that the symbology of the Mithraic killing of the bull is indeed the exact symbolic equivalent of the sacrifice of the Lamb, Julius Caesar, later veiled by Jesus.

Is this a bad omen for Trump's Prince of Whales (as the dolphin was once the king of the fishes, friend of mariners and Castor and Pollux)?

In this regard, I have also speculated elsewhere about the name Longinus, and the reason why that was chosen for the name of a Swiss watch company. That 'somebody' understood the metaphorical relationship to precessional Time.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Richard and Jerry, please forgive me, but I do enjoy (and learn a lot from, as a tyro) so much the interplay between you both, that I must quote "Commodus" from the film "The Fall of the Roman Empire": "Livius, if you listen very carefully, you can hear the gods laughing!".
Thank you! Some day when we've gotten it all figured out, we'll write it up in a more coherent form. That is, if the gods allow us enough time.

Well, Josephus said that JoG was the leader of 600 rebel 'fishermen' around Tiberius.
Josephus Life (section 12 verse 66) says that Jesus the son of Sapphias was "leader of a seditious tumult of mariners and poor people." At Section 40, verse 200, we are told about "a certain Galilean that then sojourned at Jerusalem, whose name was Jesus, who had about him a band of six hundred armed men". This is within the context of a story about Jesus son of Gamala, but it seems that Jesus son of Gamala and his cohorts have hired that Jesus the Galilean to do their dirty work.

Now, that Galilean with the six hundred armed men, might very well be the same person as the Jesus with the seditious tumult of mariners. At Section 27, verse 134, Jesus son of Sapphias is also named as the ruler (or, chief magistrate) of Tiberias. And, Josephus says that this Jesus "exceeded all others in the fomenting of sedition and revolution".

It's not clear whether Jesus son of Gamala has anything to do with the town of Gamala. In Josephus War book 4 verse 232, as well as Life section 38-40, Jesus son of Gamala is depicted as a high priest who lives in Jerusalem. Gamala is credibly close to Galilee, but Jerusalem is far to the south.

Josephus is clearly depicting two different people. And since he knew both of them personally, he would be aware if they were the same individual playing two different roles. And for whatever it's worth: remember that Josephus told us himself, he would never lie to us. (War, book 7, chapter 11, verse 5: "And here we shall put an end to this our history... as for its agreement with the facts, I shall not scruple to say, and that boldly, that truth hath been what I have alone aimed at through its entire composition.")
 
Last edited:

Charles Watkins

Active Member
The tauroctony as a precessional ritual may point us to an astrological cult embedded in Judaism. I recall the Zodiac on the floor in Chester and Ellis' speculation on its presence and all his Arthur ties. It could well be a remnant of the Egyptian solar cult of Akhenaten, which would make sense if he became Moses as several scholars have proposed. This could lead us to look again to Egypt, rather than the ruins of Shiloh, for the heirs to Barbiero's proposed 'Moses' bloodline. Most of his theory works equally well without the conspiracy of Judean elites running the show. He just needs someone to ignite the revolt.

However, I'm still having a hard time seeing how the precession of the equinox could become the viable basis for a martial religion. 'Sol Invictus' sounds like something a warrior would go for, but killing a bull so a ram can take over seems less inspiring, especially as Pisces is arriving. Why does precession matter so much anyway? At most, it suggests some unseen force behind the natural order, which might point to a cosmic god. But why would this be kept as a big secret? It would be hard to demonstrate to followers. How is this useful information for anyone other than calendar makers and astronomers?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The tauroctony as a precessional ritual may point us to an astrological cult embedded in Judaism. I recall the Zodiac on the floor in Chester and Ellis' speculation on its presence and all his Arthur ties. It could well be a remnant of the Egyptian solar cult of Akhenaten, which would make sense if he became Moses as several scholars have proposed. This could lead us to look again to Egypt, rather than the ruins of Shiloh, for the heirs to Barbiero's proposed 'Moses' bloodline. Most of his theory works equally well without the conspiracy of Judean elites running the show. He just needs someone to ignite the revolt.
As for the tauroctony, I direct you to David Ulansey's The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries which discusses the zodiacal nature, albeit that he views Mithraism as a competitor. The Zodiac can be seen in the Zodiac of Denderah, and traces also found in Mesopotamia.

If memory serves me, I think Barbiero hints at just such Egyptian origins, and if you read the Sabbah brothers' (French rabbis) Secrets of the Exodus, of which we have a link to here (otherwise it is expensive to buy - if you can find it), then they trace the Jewish heritage variously back to Amenhotep III, the father of Akhenaton. They were the Yehud priesthood, specifically serving Amenhotep III. Robert Feather, in his Copper Scroll, links Amarna to the Essenes and the Temple Mount, as does Ellis in his pharaoh books, I believe.

These Yehud were not the common people of the land, who might well have been a tribe of Canaanites with the convenient name of Judeans for all we know. There is a constant modus operandi of name and identity cuckolding that goes on throughout Western history.

The road to Rome, from Thebes, runs necessarily through Canaan, and we discuss this starting in our Old Testament series with The Genesis of the False Dialectic of Western Civilization as well as in various threads on this forum. When Jacob has his all night wrestling contest with 'God' ('Pharaoh' or his agent), the symbolic fallout is that Jacob becomes 'Israel'. This is a cryptic allusion to the underlying geopolitics, where the pagan Canaanite 'weeds' have been cleared from the garden of the Promised Land, i.e. both ethnic cleansing and cultural re-programming. The Yehud priesthood arrive during the so-called Conquest and are transformed into the Levitic priesthood that control the 48 largest cities of Israel, irrespective of the assigned lands of the other 10 'tribes' and two half-tribes. This is pretty much the game plan of the Norman Conquest ~2,000 years later.

Jacob has his wrestling contest with God at Shiloh / Bethel (in Ephraim), because this place was the transitional colonial capital, before the transition to Jerusalem to launch the new age of 'kings', thanks to King Saul. Of course, David and Solomon are pseudonyms for historical people just like Jesus of Nazareth (more name games, as it was 'the Nazarene' ---> of the Egyptian 'prince' NZR).

However, I'm still having a hard time seeing how the precession of the equinox could become the viable basis for a martial religion. 'Sol Invictus' sounds like something a warrior would go for, but killing a bull so a ram can take over seems less inspiring, especially as Pisces is arriving. Why does precession matter so much anyway?
All kinds of people today say that they need to feel a connection to something greater than themselves. We only last for a short time, so doesn't looking back over 2,000 years and the implication of even more, generate some sense of that? Especially given that most such people did not have the contemporary Rationalist, Cause and Effect POV of us moderns. As such, maybe providing such privileged access to the officer class might seem to them to grant a higher purpose than that their lives are merely a series of crass land and wealth grabs, but that they are participating in something that transcends that?

And then, one might comprehend that such as Harran and Edessa (Ur - Saniliurfa) is the homeland of the Sabian star watchers, and that these cities were only miles from Göbekli Tepe, the oldest temple complex in the world, by far, which all is aligned to the stars. And that it also hints at a relatively recent memory of a massive comet impact that knocked 'modern' humans (now dated to over 300K years) worldwide back to the stone age.

How useful is such?

Imagine if you could 'predict' that on a certain day that the Sun would go dark, or some other similar event. Would such give you some respect and power over your uneducated peers? Religion, in general, is about entraining as many people in a society to a common manner of thinking and thus behaving. One wants the imprimatur to come from the seeming gods, especially the heavenly gods (like the planets and zodiacal constellations) rather from some guy that you or your friends grew up with, and lit each others' farts on fire.

And, as I have hopelessly tried to explain many times, the subtexts for the Abrahamic religions is global Conquest, which is also common with the pagan Roman context, such as Victory standing astride a 'globe'. As such, one has to expand globally in bite sized chunks. Why then not tie these real (royal) estate expansions and consolidation phases to a cosmic clock?

So, where was (father) Jupiter on 9/11/2001? He was right in the middle of his sons, Castor and Pollux, right above the drama in NYC. https://postflaviana.org/911-a-malapropic-myth-raic-mass/
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Josephus Life (section 12 verse 66) says that Jesus the son of Sapphias was "leader of a seditious tumult of mariners and poor people." At Section 40, verse 200, we are told about "a certain Galilean that then sojourned at Jerusalem, whose name was Jesus, who had about him a band of six hundred armed men". This is within the context of a story about Jesus son of Gamala, but it seems that Jesus son of Gamala and his cohorts have hired that Jesus the Galilean to do their dirty work.
The use of "a certain" person is a direct tell that Josephus is being cryptic, and therefore that the "certain Galilean" has an identity that Josephus and his Flavian sponsors do not want exposed, except via "plausible deniability" (as most people wont catch on).
It's not clear whether Jesus son of Gamala has anything to do with the town of Gamala. In Josephus War book 4 verse 232, as well as Life section 38-40, Jesus son of Gamala is depicted as a high priest who lives in Jerusalem.
Jesus of Gamala has nothing to do with Gamala? Aren't you Jerry of Los Angeles, high priest of Postflaviana that lives in Oregon?
Gamala is credibly close to Galilee, but Jerusalem is far to the south.
Huh? So, your saying that we can also ignore Nazareth, and any other mention of Galilee in the Bible as being too far away?

Mohamed rode his horsey overnight from Mecca to Jerusalem, but Mecca, at the time, was really Becca, aka Petra.
Josephus is clearly depicting two different people. And since he knew both of them personally, he would be aware if they were the same individual playing two different roles. And for whatever it's worth: remember that Josephus told us himself, he would never lie to us. (War, book 7, chapter 11, verse 5: "And here we shall put an end to this our history... as for its agreement with the facts, I shall not scruple to say, and that boldly, that truth hath been what I have alone aimed at through its entire composition.")
So then he is lying, right? Who has to protest so much that he is not lying? A liar, .... like Donald Trump.

Nice setup.
 
Top