The Flavian Signature - Galilee - The city that recognized the saviour

gilius

Active Member
Previous Parallel: The demoniac at Capernaum who was the first to name the Christ and Fever at the fishing town of Migdal/Taricheae - the true identity of Mary Magdalene

Chronology

Josephus married his first wife from among the captives of the district at Vespasian's command (Life 414). Vespasian at Ptolemais on 04-Jul (JW 3.409). From Ptolemais, Vespasian proceeded to Caesarea - welcomed by the locals who were clamouring against Josephus - he put two of his legions in winter-quarters there, but so as not to burden them with the entire army, he put the tenth and the fifth at Scythopolis.

Meanwhile those of the rebels who had fled from the enemy got together and repaired Joppa. However, the region was so ravaged and not capable of supporting them that they decided to go off to the sea and build many ships in the seas near Syria and Phoenicia and Egypt, for piracy. When Vespasian learned of this gang, he sent infantry and cavalry to Joppa - unguarded at night. They fled to the seas, but were caught up in a storm. The Romans came upon those who drifted to shore and killed them. The number of the bodies so thrown up from the sea was four thousand, two hundred. Then the Romans took the city without opposition and demolished it. So in a short period Joppa was twice taken by the Romans. To prevent any pirates from returning to it, Vespasian built a camp where the citadel of Joppa had been, leaving a troop of cavalry and a few infantry there, to guard the camp and ravage the country round about and destroy the villages and smaller cities near Joppa (JW 3.410-431).

News reached Jerusalem that Jotapata had been taken with such great loss and rumours that Josephus had died, but the truth finally emerged and the Jews hated the fact that he had seemingly defected to the Romans, and wanted revenge (JW 3.432-442).

Vespasian was invited by Agrippa to see his kingdom, so he travelled from Caesarea on sea to Caesarea Philippi. There he rested his army for 20 days and was treated to a festival. News reached them that Tiberias was ready to revolt and that Tarichea had already rebelled - both parts of Agrippa's kingdom - so Vespasian sent his son Titus to Caesarea, to bring the army to Scythopolis (not far from Tiberias). He himself went there and waited for his son, who arrived with three legions and encamped thirty furlongs from Tiberias, at a place called Sennabris, within sight of the rebels. He sent Valerian, a decurion, to offer peace to those in the city, but he fled after a surprised attack instigated by Jesus, son of Shaphat, the ringleader of a gang of brigands. The elders and influential people fled to the Roman camp, bringing their king with them, and fell down before Vespasian not to judge the whole city for the madness of a few. Vespasian accepted and Jesus and his party thought it unsafe for them to remain in Tiberias, so fled to Tarichea. The next day Vespasian sent Trajan ahead with some cavalry to the citadel, to test people's readiness for peace. He and his army were welcomed as their saviour, and their city was restored to a peaceful state. (JW 3.443-461)

The city that recognized the saviour
Location:
? / Tarichea
Code:
[table][tr][td]When evening came, after the sun had set, they began bringing to Him all who were ill and those who were demon-possessed. And [color=green][b]the whole [size=18]city[/size][/b][/color] had gathered at the door. And [color=green][b]He [size=18]healed[/size][/b][/color] many who were ill with various diseases, and cast out many demons; and He was [color=orange][b]not permitting the demons to [size=18]speak[/size][/b][/color], because they knew who He was. [b](Mark 1:32-34)[/b][/td][td]The next day [color=green][b][size=18]Vespasian[/size][/b][/color] sent Trajan ahead with some cavalry to the citadel, to test the people's readiness for peace. When he saw that the people were of the same mind as the petitioners, he brought his army into the city, whose people opened the gates to him and met him with shouts of joy, calling him their [color=green][b][size=18]saviour[/size][/b][/color] and benefactor… To gratify the king, he told them to abstain from looting and injustice, and so spared the rest of the wall. On their behalf the king undertook fidelity in future, and so he [color=green][b][size=18]restored[/size] this [size=18]city[/size][/b][/color] to a [color=orange][b]peaceful[/b][/color] (Whiston: [color=orange][b]“[size=18]quiet[/size]”) state[/b][/color], after it had been grievously threatened by the revolt. [b](Jewish War 3, 9, 457-461)[/b][/td][/tr][/table]
When evening came, after the sun had set, they began bringing to Him all who were ill and those who were demon-possessed. And the whole city had gathered at the door. And He healed many who were ill with various diseases, and cast out many demons; and He was not permitting the demons to speak, because they knew who He was. (Mark 1:32-34)The next day Vespasian sent Trajan ahead with some cavalry to the citadel, to test the people's readiness for peace. When he saw that the people were of the same mind as the petitioners, he brought his army into the city, whose people opened the gates to him and met him with shouts of joy, calling him their saviour and benefactor… To gratify the king, he told them to abstain from looting and injustice, and so spared the rest of the wall. On their behalf the king undertook fidelity in future, and so he restored this city to a peaceful (Whiston: quiet”) state, after it had been grievously threatened by the revolt. (Jewish War 3, 9, 457-461)
Verbatim: city, healed/saved/healed, quite/not speaking
Typology: moving onto the very next event in Jesus’ ministry and continuing with the theme established last parallel regarding Vespasian’s divinity, here he restores a city to a quiet state and is called a “Saviour”.
Satire: the anti-Semitic “demon” theme also continues here in describing the hot-headed Jews who are said to now be peaceful or quiet following Vespasian’s restoration of the city.

Next Parallel: The Christ that preached the gospel (euaggelion)
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Luke 4:40-41 doesn't mention 'the city' but has all the other elements.

40Now when the sun was setting, all they that had any sick with divers diseases brought them unto him; and he laid his hands on every one of them, and healed them. 41And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ.​
 

gilius

Active Member
So you can see how the synoptic Gospels were designed to be read together? If you just take Luke, like what Joe did, then you miss out on many parallels. It's about knowing when to jump from one Gospel to another or use different details from each - providing you are moving forward sequentially in at least one of the Gospels.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
I'm sure that as you jump from one source to another, you gather more information. But on the other hand, the statistical analysis gets more difficult.
 

gilius

Active Member
Yeah - applying stats to this is very difficult, but by the time one goes through the first 13 parallels, analysing the concepts and then understanding the typology and satire, we begin to leave the realm of stats and enter the psychopathic world of the Flavians! With so many parallels now to make sense of Jesus' mysterious sayings and predictions I no longer feel the need to justify through statistical merit. It's no longer a case of: "the parallels are all in sequence" as it's more a case of "there is a gap here before we resume the dual story". The future challenge as I see it is not proving the theory to be true - but getting enough people to read it with an open-mind AND be brave enough to respond to the evidence based on their own reasoning (not repeating somebody else's out of date criticism).
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
The two approaches aren't necessarily incompatible:

1) Richard Carrier, and to a lesser extent Robert Price, Bart Ehrman, and even Acharya S, say they don't believe the Roman Origins theory for a variety of reasons. They say it's parallelomania, that it ignores the multiple-comparison issue, ignores possible common sources like the OT and Homer, is based on misunderstandings about Greek, and so forth. Their challenge is that we should do the work to answer these criticisms, and get the material into a peer reviewed journal.

Authors such as these are widely read and respected, at least among atheists, "freethinkers" and other critics of mainstream Christianity. And as such, they serve as gatekeepers and opinion-makers -- their criticism causes many potential readers to turn away. So, one approach to gaining more widespread acceptance, is to take their challenges seriously.

2) The other approach is to bypass the "gatekeepers" and take the material straight to the Internet. This also seems very promising, considering that the material seems very compelling, at least to me, on its own merits.
 

gilius

Active Member
I don't think those guys are genuinely interested in finding out the truth or looking at new evidence, but are more concerned about maintaining their jobs and reputation. I think they are trying to make excuses more than challenges for rejecting it, and even if their challenges were taken up and delivered, they would still be ignored. Perhaps a peer review might work - but then the peer reviewer has to be prepared to lose his/her reputation since any new radical theories are instantly subject to ridicule. The gatekeepers are the ones controlling the masses, but they have an agenda to keep their jobs and livelihoods. I don't know about Price or Bart - whether they've seen enough evidence - but Acharya and Carrier are definitely not genuine. Religion is simply a weapon for them like it is for the government.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Regardless of what you think of Carrier, it would take a lot of wind out of his sails if our material appeared in a reputable journal. At most journals, the identities of the peer reviewers are confidential, known only to the editor. So, the journal editors are the ones whose reputations are on the line. But, there are many journals competing for readers, and this would be an interesting article.

The process of looking for a publisher starts by sending letters of inquiry to the editors; I think it's considered OK to inquire of several journals simultaneously. We wouldn't necessarily need to work with a biblical studies journal; history journals, or even linguistics journals or statistics journals, might be interested. An editor of a statistics journal should not have much at stake professionally, it would look really strange if an editor of such a journal got fired for publishing a statistical theory about mutual information in Josephus and the New Testament.

I'm curious, Giles, where you get the impression that Acharya is "definitely not genuine." I get the sense that she honestly disagrees with at least some of Joe's conclusions, while generally treating him respectfully. In any case, she's now very ill, and I wish her success in her ongoing battle with cancer.

https://www.giveforward.com/fundraiser/lsn9/d-m-murdock-acharya-s-s-breast-cancer-fundraiser?utm_source=giveforward&utm_medium=widget
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Hi again Giles, I just went to Acharya's site and read your discussion there, from 2013.

http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3988&start=15

The problem is not so much Acharya, as it is "freethinkaluva22" and he's not objecting to the entire Roman Origins thesis, or to Joe's book, so much as the specific thesis that Josephus wrote the Gospels. As a debater, he's rude and underhanded, and Acharya has to take some of the responsibility for permitting him to act as an administrator on her forum; but her views are not identical to his.

Furthermore, we don't necessarily know if Josephus wrote the Gospels, either! He might have been part of a team. Even Caesar's Messiah states that the Gospel team probably included various members of the Flavian, Herod and Alexander families. And, the final redaction & editing of the Gospels into our existing set of four, might well have happened late in the 2nd century.

Acharya's view on Joe's work is here -- I think what she has to say is generally very astute, though I do think she's understating the importance of the Flavian role, and overstating the importance of other aspects.

http://freethoughtnation.com/a-conversation-on-the-caesars-messiah-thesis/
 

gilius

Active Member
The peer reviewing process sounds most favourable then based on what you describe, so might be worth a shot given available time and resources.

Sorry to hear Acharya has cancer - my mother recently passed away from brain cancer - so I know how difficult it must be for her and her family.

To answer the question about Acharya's view of Joe's work would require a deep psychological discussion about what drives these gatekeepers in general. She's very careful how she appears in public re: a conversation on the Caesar's messiah thesis - perhaps through forums too - but in private on Facebook it was a different story.

However, people can change for the better.... only when they are about to lose everything, unfortunately.

For the Gospels we don't need to know the details of the Flavian court historians involved per se - but Joe has found a confession about that. Moreover, we know it was a government project and we can understand their kind of dark humour, symbolism, and how ancient peoples are really not too dissimilar from today's people in terms of power and vanity.
 
Top