To understand this text it is important that you read the article "Nazoreans" which contains all the verifying quotes and historical information
In recent years it has become common for authors to conclude that Jesus Christ was a mythological character conjured up out of the consciousness of wishful thinking Messianic Jews. What my research into this subject has uncovered, is that the gospel accounts are written about 2 distinctly different people. What makes the task of reconstructing events from this time frame so difficult are all of the innumerable edits done to the Christian scriptures as well as their having committed to the fire anything that they could find that contradicted the doctrine of the Church in Rome. However, even if you are able to navigate through all of these mine fields, you find yourself confronted by an even greater challenge, that being the inaccuracy of dating the events. Hence, the accepted dates for the gospel events can be off not by mere days or months or years, but according to the Italian savant Aloysius Lilius by centuries.
Christian Scholars and Apologists seeking affirmation for the existence of the religious icon of the Christian faith turned to the only reliable source of Israeli history of the period, that being the writings of Josephus. However, it soon became all too evident that when it came to Jesus Josephus was moot with the exception of one famous passage, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, in the final chapter of his final book "Antiquities of the Jews." However, here Josephus is seen affirming that Jesus was indeed the Christ something a pious Pharisaic Jew would never write. So, the debate started. Was it authentic or a latter day Christian forgery? Alas, I think that debate has been resolved since as far as I know there exist at least 4 versions of the famous quote. Therefore, at least 3 of them have to be forgeries. Hence, forgery played a role in its creation which makes its value dubious. He also mentions Jesus in an account of the death of James the brother of Jesus.
It has always been assumed that the four canonical gospels represented four independent accounts of the Passion of Jesus, however, with the publication of "Caesar's Messiah" by 'Dead Sea Scroll' archivist Joseph Atwill it becomes clear that they actually represent one continuous narrative which has been broken up into 4 separate parts. After studying the issue for some time I awoke one morning knowing exactly what the gospels represent. Each of these stories covers a different aspect of the events in the life of Jesus and are not attempts at giving independent accounts of the same story. The gospels have undergone some degree of manipulation to make it seem as if they are 4 complete stories, but originally they were not. The Gospel of Mark once lacked any reference to the resurrection of Jesus, but there are those who believe that the mystical end of the Gospel of John was actually the original ending of Mark. It was only in the late second century that Irenaeus assigned the names of authors to these anonymous works.
First, it is important to realize that the gospel stories are not entirely true. They often twist or hide the facts and expand and conflate personalities, much like they ignore most of Jesus' life. Much like the German theologian, philosopher, Bruno Bauer suspected the gospels are a Greco-Roman Romance. However, the story actually goes beyond what you find in your Bible. To fully understand the entire plot you also have to go to the source material; the Gnostic literature of the Nazoreans and the writings of Josephus. All I have done is follow the footsteps as few as there are still remaining.
The Plot Unfolds
The curtain rises with Jesus (Beni-Amin also known as Amin-il) working in the Temple with the priests when it is announced that a dream has foretold the birth of the prophet John (the Baptist). This is important for according to the gospel accounts John was older than Jesus, but only by a few months. This was altered in the scriptures so that John could be made to announce the coming of Jesus. The most accepted date for the birth of Jesus is usually that listed in Matthew 4 BCE. However, that date does not work. In order for Jesus to be the Messiah he must be the oldest member of the dynastic family and if he were born in that year, it is clear that both his brother James and his uncle Symeon ben Clopas would be older.
Zechariah who predicts that one day his son John would overthrow the false Torah is slain in the Temple by members of the Pharisee. "And Herod searched for John, and sent officers to Zacharias, saying: Where hast thou hid thy son? And he, answering, said to them: I am the servant of God in holy things, and I sit constantly in the temple of the Lord: I do not know where my son is. And the officers went away, and reported all these things to Herod. And Herod was enraged, and said: His son is destined to be king over Israel. And he sent to him again, saying: Tell the truth; where is thy son? for thou knowest that thy life is in my hand. And Zacharias said: I am God's martyr, if thou sheddest my blood; for the Lord will receive my spirit, because thou sheddest innocent blood at the vestibule of the temple of the Lord. And Zacharias was murdered about daybreak. And the sons of Israel did not know that he had been murdered."–Protoevangelium of James chap 23
The die has been cast there is no stopping the story now. Both the Romans and the Nazoreans believed in fate and this story is filled with fatalistic irony. We pick up the story in Slavonic Josephus, another work I believe written not by Josephus, but by the Nazoreans. John is born and when he grows up begins his ministry along the Jordan baptizing Nazoreans and Nazorean converts. After Herod dies he is replaced by his son Herod Archelaus, who hears of John and calls him in for a sit down. John tells him that he is of God. Now, Archelaus only serves as ethnarch through the year 6 CE and one has to assume that John who was supposedly, like Jesus, born in 4 BCE must have indeed been born much earlier than that or he would only be 9 or 10 years old. So, let us say that he was at least 18. This would put his birth date at 12 or 13 BCE at the latest. Since Jesus had to have been at least 13 to work in the Temple then that would place his birth date prior to 25 BCE. This would make him eligible to be the Jewish kingly Messiah.
The Silence of Josephus
Now, for Josephus. It has often been noted that Josephus doesn't mention anything about Jesus or his ministry except for the quote in the final chapter of "Antiquities." It is also notable that Josephus is fairly moot for the dozen or so years prior to and after the crucifixion. This lack of historical corroboration has led many to believe that Jesus was just some obscure itinerrant preacher which strongly contradicts the gospel accounts. Besides, one of Josephus' favorite topics is talking about the family of Jesus, but not Jesus.
Besides Matthew's claim that Jesus was born in 4 BCE, we have Luke's claim that Jesus was born during the census of Quirinius (Cyrenius) which ocurred in 6 CE. How could Jesus be a real person if the authors of the gospels are this far apart on his birth date. While doing my research I could not help, but be struck by the events of these 2 years. First, let us start with the events of 4 BCE. Here we have Judas ben Sepphoris and Matthias tearing down the golden eagle that Herod had erected over the great gate of the Jerusalem Temple. This is a clear violation of Jewish law. Both of them are arrested and Matthias and 40 of his followers are executed. It is not clear what happens to Judas, but he may have escaped. According to the Syriac or Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Jesus was indeed born during the census, not the census of Quirinius, but that of Augustus in 28 BCE.
The Birth Date of Jesus
To start with, the gospel of Mark, often considered the first written, is moot as to when Jesus was born. The gospel of John asserts that Jesus is the word and existed since the beginning of creation. Both of these gospels seem to represent an earlier Gnostic interpretation of Jesus Christ. This is the same position taken by Paul in the epistles. Neither of these gospels necessarily infer that Jesus was a real flesh and blood person, although John does state, probably an Orthodox addition, that the faithful must believe in a real living flesh and blood Jesus. Therefore, it is likely that both Matthew and Luke represent a later Orthodox interpretation of the Christ story. So, we will analyze the true meaning of the birthdates in both Matthew and Luke.
This brings us to the preamble of "The Book of Thomas the Contender" where it states: "The obscure sayings that the savior uttered to Jude Thomas and which I, Mathaias, also wrote down. I used to travel and listen to them as they were talking to one another." This statement clearly ties Jesus, Judas and Mathaias together. It is my belief that the Gospel of Thomas was the book reconstructed by the disgruntled Nazoreans mentioned in the 'Tathbit Dala'il Nubuwwat Sayyidina Mahammad'.
The "Book of Thomas the Contender" states: "The savior said. "Thomas, brother, while you have time in the world, listen to me and I shall make a disclosure to you concerning what you have thought about in your heart."
"Now since it is said that you are my double and my true companion," There you have it the Savior (not called Jesus) and Thomas are twins. "Then Thomas said to the lord. 'So, I beg you, then, before your ascension to tell me [about the] things I am asking you about.'" Now, most people assume that Jesus is a Christian. He is not! So, when they read this they assume that it is Jesus who is going to die, but to the Nazoreans much like in yoga or Buddhism one ascends in life and not in death. Since Jesus says to Judas "while you have time in this world" indicates that it is Judas whose days are numbered. In the scriptures, Thomas is also referred to as Judas and Didymus. All three of these names mean twin.
So, 4 BCE is not the year of Jesus' birth. It is the year of his rebirth. "Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?"—John 3:4 This is why the nativity scene in Matthew, with the gifts of the Magi, is not repeated in Luke or in any of the other gospels. Matthew is also a possible translation for Mathaias, who quite obviously was not the author of the gospel. The slaughter of the innocents is actually the killing of their followers many of whom were probably not much more than children. During this period there was no other slaughter of children.
It is also possible that this is where Jesus bar Abbas or Barrabas is set free. It is very unlikely that any such event could have happened during the time of Pilate as by then the Romans had had their fill of the Jews. Barrabas means 'Son of the Father' meaning Jesus Christ or 'Son of God.' This treatment parallels that of Josephus where he refers to Judas as the son of Sepphoris rather than using the name of his father. This whole episode explains the gift of the Magi the frankinsence, gold and myrrh which is equivalent to gold, bedellium and the onyx stone of Genesis 2.
The reference to Judas as the son of Sepphoris by Josephus is strange. He clearly states that Judas of Galilee is the son of Hezekias, but when it comes to Judas Zipporai (Jewish pronunciation) he gives the reader a puzzle. Is he hiding something or is there something different about this Judas' relation to Judas of Galilee? This brings us to the Safed scroll (there is also an almost identical copy known as the Alexandrian scroll) where it is stated that Mary had 2 illegitimate sons who were adopted by the Essene. They are referred to as Judas and Yeshai beth Halachmee. We are told that one became the leader of the Essene while the other studied philosophy with Hillel which would have been impossible if they were born in 4 BCE. This is why Josephus stops short of calling Judas Zipporai the son of Judas of Galilee. It also places Yeshai in the city of Gamala as that is where Hillel's academy was located.
"Nasoræans are pagan Gnostics who shortly before the rise of Christianity, formed a sect which flourished in Mesopotamia and Babylonia, and which was one of the foremost religions in Western Asia in the early years of Mohammedanism."—CE Hillel was a Babylonian Jew who came to Israel when he was about 40 and became the spiritual leader of the Jews from about 30 BCE to 10 CE. Bathyra was the academy built on the deserted estate of John Hyrcanus. Herod promised five hundred Babylonians tax-free status forever if they built a military academy there to protect his border. On their own they established a religious academy with such teachers as Hillel (110 BCE-10CE) and his grandson Gamaliel I. The Jewish Encyclopedia dates this c 20, but does not indicate BC or AD. Since both Hillel and Herod, which always means the Great, are mentioned in conjunction with this site it must have been BC. From topographic descriptions of the camel humps used to identify both Bathyra and Gamala, one can conclude that the fortress was a part of Gamala.
GAMALA/BATHYRA - "Alexander Jaunnæus captured the fort from a certain Demetrius who ruled in that vicinity (Josephus, ib. i. 4, § 8; "Ant." xiii. 15, § 3), and from that time Gamala became a possession of the Jews (ib., ed. Niese, § 4; earlier editions have "Gabala"; the same name occurs in "B. J." i. 8, §, 4)."—JE
When the Israelites returned home from the Babylonian captivity, they found the Samaritans, practicing a religion similar, but not identical, to their own. In time, hostility grew between the returning Jews and the Samaritans. The Bible says that the Samaritans were foreign people settled in the region by the kings of Assyria who had partially adopted the Israelite religion, however, it is possible that the Samaritans may simply have been Israelites who remained behind and had no part in the sweeping changes to the Israelite religion that occurred during the captivity. Keep in mind that the modern Torah does not date back to Moses, but was actually written by Ezra after the Jews returned from Babylonia.
To fully understand who Jesus was, one has to understand yoga and the esoteric meaning of the title used to describe Jesus. Jesus Christ is the esoteric equivalent of Sananda Kumara from the Indian myth which refers to the crown chakra and is the only way to the Father, while his twin, Sanat Kumara, refers to the other polarity or the base chakra. Jesus was considered Melchizedek among the Essene or the Archangel Michael incarnate as Michael Zadok, the Zadok referring to the Zadok family of the Zadokite priesthood. This explains why Jesus gives his name to Pilate as Jesus ben Onanias or Onias. Onias ben Simon is part of the lineage of Jesus and one of the last members of the Zadokite priesthood to serve as high priest. Also the last Onias, who was denied the office of high priest. He then built the Jewish Temple in Egypt where Jesus in all liklihood spent a part of his youth. According to Damis it was Apollonius who formed an order according to Gymnosophic ideas and practices whose initiation was taken from the scriptures where it said, 'Thou art a priest after the order of Melchisedec,' or 'A priest after the order of the Sun.'
After the 4 BCE episode with his twin Judas, Jesus continued to travel around, but now with his father figure Judas of Galilee. So, when Josephus says: "Yet was there one Judas, a Gaulonite, of a city whose name was Gamala, who, taking with him Sadduc, a Pharisee, became zealous to draw them to a revolt, who both said that this taxation was no better than an introduction to slavery,...Judas and Sadduc, who excited a fourth philosophic sect among us, and had a great many followers therein, filled our civil government with tumults at present, and laid the foundations of our future miseries, by this system of philosophy..."–Josephus, "Antiquities" 18:1:1, he is referring to Jesus Christ. Remember, the spelling translations vary. So, Zadok, Sadoc and Sadduc are all the same. Although Jesus was raised by the Essene it is likely that his studies with the former Jewish High Priest Hillel made it possible for him to become a member of the Pharisee. Why else would a member of the Pharisee who were diametrically opposed to the Zealots accompany their leader Judas of Galilee.
“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”—Matthew 22:21. This famous parable identifies the real Jesus as one of the antitaxation Zealots being made to mouth the words of his Roman puppet masters. There are many who attempt to put this parable into context and even discuss what may have been the actual coin in question, the problem is that the Roman authors of the gospels knew that the words were all that mattered and they speak for themselves. Christians are being told by their master to submit to temporal authority. Of course in context he is being forced to choose between either offending his Jewish supporters by submitting to the tax or risk being crucified by the Roman authorities by not submitting to the tax. This verse also identifies the Jewish struggle as one of political oppositon to the Roman occupation and not religious intolerance by the Pharisee as the latter day Roman redactors would claim. Keep in mind that we have already shown, in the article, that the original authors of the gospels and Josephus may actually have been in the same room sitting at the same bench penning their Roman propaganda for the emperor.
Now, in the testimony of Pilate it is stated that he only crucified one person named Jesus, that being Jesus ben Onanias, which is probably Onias. The Onias name goes back to the Zadokite priesthood just prior to the defiling of the Temple by Epiphanius, the Greek ruler of Syria. It is stated that Onias had two sons Chelkias ben Onias and Ananias ben Onias. As many have noted, it was common for Hasmonean families to use only a small group of names i.e. Simon, Judas and so on. Josephus goes on to state that during the Jewish war with Rome, two of the leaders named were: Joazar the son of Nomicus, and Ananias the son of Sadduk. It is also notable that Ananias is the person Paul claims to have helped him see the light. This would also indicate that either Jesus was no longer alive or that he was no longer living in that region, or else he would have written that it was Jesus, in flesh, who showed him the light. Now, unless Josephus is pulling a Raymond Chandler on us then this Sadduk is the same Sadduc, the Pharisee, who accompanied Judas of Galilee.
In 6 CE Judas is captured after the raid on Sepphoris and disappears from the narrative. In all probability, he was nailed to the cross at some point in time. This marks yet another traumatic year in the life of Jesus, but it also, in a sense, is his brithday. For it marks his ascension to the position of the Jewish Messiah. In the Lineage of Yeshu I explain why his father's real name may not have been Joseph nor was his grandfather Jacob. Remember, only with a birth date as early as we indicate would it be possible for Jesus to be the Jewish Messiah, for at no time during his life as created in the gospels is he older than either his brother James or his uncle Symeon ben Clopas. He then flees the Middle East and travels with his uncle Joseph of Arimathea to Cornwall on the southwest coast of England. It is here that he erects the Church at Glastonbury.
According to the Protoevangelium, Joseph was an old man who already had a family by a previous wife. The real Jesus, the brother of James the Just and Judas, were a part of that family. It was John of Gamala, brother of James the Less, Joses, Simon, and Thaddeus/Judas (Theudas) who was the subject of the birth narrative, c 4 BCE, in the gospels and not Jesus."Thou hast been chosen by lot to take into thy keeping the virgin of the Lord. But Joseph refused, saying: I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl. I am afraid lest I become a laughing-stock to the sons of Israel.—"The Protoevangelium of James chap 9"
Jesus in Glastonbury
It is more than coincidence that the raid on Sepphoris occurred at precisely the time that Jesus is supposed to have landed in England according to the Jesus in Cornwall tradition. The House of God in the great Monastery of Glastonbury, called the Secret of the Lord, is recorded in the Doomsday Book (1088 C.E.). Traditionally, the twelve Hides of Land of the Church of Glastonbury, descend from an original grant given Joseph of Arimathaea, by King Arviragus (10 C.E.-74 C.E.), in the XXXI year after the Passion of Christ.
In a letter to Pope Gregory, St. Augustine states that there was a church "constructed by no human art, but divinely contructed (or by the hands of Christ Himself), for the salvation of His people." The historian, Gildas, says Jesus' "Light and precepts" were "afforded...to this island during the ...last year of the reign of Tiberius. Tiberius retired to Caprae in A.D. 27. William of Malmesbury includes in his writings the contents of a letter given by King Ina to Glastonbury, 700 AD." (Tiberius officially reigned till 37 CE) "To the ancient church, situate in the place called Glastonbury (which Church the Great High Priest and Chiefest Minister formerly through His own ministry, and that of angels....." This confirms Gildas' statement that Jesus had a ministry at Glastonbury. The historical records called the Doomsday Surveys, also bear witness to Jesus' presence in Glastonbury. These surveys state that Glastonbury contained 12 hides (160 acre parcels) of land that "have never paid tax." This was because the King Arviragus gave these parcels to Joseph of Arimathea when he arrived in England in 37 AD. Do the math 37-31=6 CE not 30 CE. The little we know about Judas of Galilee comes from the Jewish historian Josephus who worked in the employ of the Roman Emperor and was a Pharisaic Jew totally opposed to Judas and the Zealots. However, it seems likely that the crucifixion of Christ that is mentioned in the Cornwall tradition is that of Judas and not of Jesus.
Problems with the 'Bible Fraud' Timeline
According to author Tony Bushby Jesus and Judas were the illegitimate twins of Miriamne Herod III, the granddaughter of Miriamne Herod I and Herod the Great. Miriamne was the younger sister of Herodias who was born c 15 BCE. This means that Miriamne must have been born no earlier than 14 BCE. Miriamne is the Hebrew form of Mary. It is believed that Mary was only 15 at the time she gave birth. Since John the Baptist was only several months older than Jesus, this would mean that Archelaus called John in for a sit down when he was only 6 years old. It would also mean that Judas, who he claims was Judas of Galilee, would have been captured in the raid on Sepphoris when he was only 6 and it would also mean that Jesus, who he claims was the English King Cunobeline, would have been 9 when he rose to power in Cornwall in 9 CE. This truly would have been a miracle. These are some of the same chronological problems that exist with the gospel timeline.
It seems that Bushby has bought into the Book of Acts as history, where it claims that Judas of Galilee rose up after Theudas. According to Josephus, Judas rose up almost 4 decades prior to Theudas who in all liklihood was one of Judas' sons Thaddeus Judas, one of the so-called apostles of his older brother Jesus.
Who Was the Real Paul?
Apollonius visited Taxila, India c 36-38 CE. From there he brought back 9 writings that he received from Phraotes. These writings form the basis for the original 9 epistles of Paul. Later during the 40s, this time with his trusted companion Damis, he makes another journey this one taking them to far eastern India. This is where they find the scriptures of the Indian Christ Sanat Kumara, the Peacock Angel, which they bring back with them to Jerusalem. On his journeys Apollonius covers many of the same areas that Jesus and or St. Thomas are purported to have visited and they are in the same location at approximately the same time at least twice. These places are Damascus, Syria and Taxila. We have also revealed that Paul was baptized by John while 'Jesus' would have still been alive and living in Israel according to the gospel timeline. This baptism by John was not of a religious nature as claimed by the Church, but signified solidarity of those opposed to the Roman occupation of Israel.
After his return from his first trip in 39 CE, Apollonius created an order of Nazarites known as the 'Order of the Nazarenes' in Southern Judea which earned him the title Apollonius the Nazarene. This is why at times Jesus is called not only the Nazorean, but also the Nazarene. Most Christian scholars mistakenly conflate these two distinctly separate orders. The following is from Epiphanius' description of the founder of the Ebionites: "For he has the Samaritans repulsiveness but the Jews name, the viewpoint of the Ossaeans, Nazoraeans and Nazaraeans,..."
For some of this information I used the channeled confessions found in J. M. Roberts "Antiquity Unveiled." At first I thought the information would be bogus and unreliable, but it all fit and the story came together.
Many Christian scholars have noted that the authors of the scriptures were well educated men and not some itinerrant Jewish apostles. Apollonius left his home in Tyana at age 14, the same age that many state that Jesus left home, and moved to Tarsus, the home of Paul, to study philosophy, mainly that of Pythagoras. He studied there for about a dozen years before moving on to Antioch and then Jerusalem. This means that he may have first arrived in Jerusalem c 27-28 CE, or around the time that we have shown that Paul was baptized, in the Jordan, by John the Baptist.
It has been noted that gospel accounts written in either Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic are all originals and not translations. This would be difficult for any Jew to have accomplished, especailly an uneducated one, but Apollonius was a Cappadocian who wrote in the Hebraic-Samaritan language, and as an educated person of Greek descent obviously also spoke that language. The 9 epistles are second century Marcionite compositions copied from the mutilated memoirs of Damis of the original 9 documents brought back by Apollonius from Taxila, India. The gospel accounts come from the Tamil people of far off southeastern India and were written about the Indian Christ, not Krishna, but Sanat Kumara. It was these 4 writings which were used by both Marcion and the satirist Lucian to create the 4 gospels. The baptism of Jesus is based on the Gnostic texts of the baptism of Hibil-Ziwa and the crucifixion is based on the crucifixion of Yeshu or Jesus ben Onias, the result is that the texts take on the nature of the true story of a real living sacrificed human savior. Add to this the apochryphal texts written by the followers of Yeshu and you get the impression that the story is true. The Gospel of John remains a bit of a mystery, but may have been written about Yeshu's brother John of Gamala and not Yeshu.
According to Philostratus' biography of 'Apollonius of Tyana.' he too was very self absorbed. It was his practice of dressing and acting like a living god which got him thrown in jail by the Roman Emperor Domitian. Since, much like Jesus, there is no historical evidence that a man by the name of Paul ever existed, it is not a far reach to assume that this person, Paul, actually was Apollonius. It was Apollonius and his companions Damis and Leucis who were entrusted by Vespasian to create the scriptures for the new religious order. This project is mentioned briefly in chapter 9 of the Philostratus biography. The article clearly shows that Apollonius is the Apollos mentioned in the epistles. There is also another person of interest, that being the heretical Jewish Rabbi Elisha ben Abuiah who was the Jewish persecutor of the Christians who under went a miraculous conversion and later became an apostate to the law and converted to Christianity and who is conflated with Apollonius to become just Paul.
Both Paul and Apollonius were from Tarsus in Asia Minor which was a hotbed of 'Sun God' worship, in particular the Persian sun god Mithras. In 'Antiquity Unveiled,' Damis reports that it was he who wrote the memoirs of Apollonius which became the framework of both the Philostratus biography and Acts. He also claims that the Greek followers of Prometheus mutilated those memoirs as they were opposed to the introduction of the Indian Christos among the Greeks, and strongly opposed the teachings of Apollonius. This is supported by the following from Acts, which we have demonstrate occurred c 30 CE. It also goes a long way in explaining the reason for the vicarious blood atonement, or mock crucifixion mentioned in the Safed scroll.
"When he [Paul] came to Jerusalem, he tried to join the disciples, but they were all afraid of him, not believing that he really was a disciple. But Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles. He told them how Saul on his journey had seen the Lord and that the Lord had spoken to him, and how in Damascus he had preached fearlessly in the name of Jesus. So Saul stayed with them and moved about freely in Jerusalem, speaking boldly in the name of the Lord. He talked and debated with the Grecian Jews, but they tried to kill him. When the brothers learned of this, they took him down to Caesarea and sent him off to Tarsus"—Acts 9:26-30. The fact that the Grecian Jews are among the 'Christians' tells us that these are not Pharisaic Jews by religion, but called Jews because they live in Judea. These could be the Greek followers of Prometheus.
The Pisonian Conspiracy
It was now the middle of the first century and the Romans had grown tired of the Jews and the numerous religious riots springing up throughout the empire. More and more people in the empire were converting to Judaism, and not just any form of Judaism, but the most dangerous kind "Messianic Judaism" or joining the Nazorean sect. Members of the powerful Piso family were convinced that the way to stem the violence was to create a new peaceful Jewish religion. They presented their idea to Nero, but it was rejected. Lucious Piso conspired with numerous other leading Romans including members of the Senate to kill Nero. The plot known as the 'Pisonian Conspiracy' was discovered and about 50 persons were put to death.
The "Tathbit" tells us of a group of disgruntled Nazoreans who seek the aid of a Roman officer in an attempt to improve their lot amongst the Pharisee in the Temple. When the Romans ask them to bring their book they go back to the elders who tell them that they have done bad. The elders hide the book. The rebels try to recreate the teachings of the Master which I believe to be the Gospel of Thomas. The conspirators then agree to write stories much like those in the Old Testament about their Master, which probably accounts for much of the Apochrypha. So, here you have Roman conspirators conspiring to create a new Judaism for the Empire, the Essene trying to convert the Romans to Judaism and a group of disgruntled Nazoreans seeking the cooperation of the Romans. All the elements are in place.
The Coming of Vespasian
There are many rumors of Jesus visiting India or England and there is good reason for this, because both areas were not under the control of the Romans. While Jesus may have visited India as a teenager, it is almost certain that he visited England. The Jesus in India rumors are bolstered by the fact that Apollonius visited India twice. However, the sovereignty of England was about to change. Under the rule of Claudius the Romans successfully invaded England. During this campaign a young Roman equestrian named Vespasian led the army of the Romans in the south of England.
Prior to the War with the Jews, Vespasian had played a critical role in the Roman invasion of Britain. Most notably, he was responsible for subduing the southwest of Britain which included the modern counties of Hampshire, Wiltshire, Dorset, Somerset, Devon and Cornwall which legend tells us Jesus visited in his youth along with Joseph of Arimathaea. Of course, this would be highly unlikely if the Jesus we read about, still unknown to the masses, were born in 6 CE or even 4 BCE. As we have already mentioned, it was Judas of Galilee, the 'father' of Jesus, who was captured and may have been crucified c 6 CE.
It was Josephus who led the Jewish defense of the city of Jotapata in Galilee against the Romans. After his army was defeated and he was captured it is claimed that he predicted that Vespasian would become Emperor of Rome and his life was spared. This is not quite true. It seems that Vespasian had already enlisted the aid of a seer by the name of Apollonius who was the one who made the prediction which helped spare the life of Josephus.
Tacitus says, "Carmel is the name both of a god and a mountain; but there is neither image nor temple of the god; such are the ancient traditions; we find there only an altar and religious awe."— Hist. xi. 78, 4. It also appears, from his account, that Vespasian offered sacrifice on Mount Carmel, where Basilides, mentioned hereafter, c. vii., "predicted his success from an inspection of the entrails."
Apparently Vespasian had already heard the legend of Jesus while in Cornwall. He then formed an alliance with Apollonius, Damis, the scribe Lucius of Cyrene who may have been a Nazorean and Josephus to carry out the plot of the Pisos. It was this group that authored the original Christian scriptures during the 60s. The original Epistles of Paul know nothing of Jesus of Nazareth only about a Christ derived from Adam Kadmon, the primal man, and mention of a crucifixion and ascension or resurrection. There is no reference as to his life or teachings, since Apollonius had as yet not created the full story. The epistles are taken from the 9 texts that Apollonius had originally brought back from India. So, when Christians talk about Christianity in the mid first century, it is impossible as the story had as yet not been written. It is only during the War with the Jews that the story of Jesus Christ is established.
Now. I cannot say for certain whether or not Apollonius ever met Jesus (Yeshu), but the stories in the gospels reflect the fact that there was no ministry of Jesus Christ. So, they used the military campaign of the Emperor Titus as the basis for the ministry of Jesus. I am certain that the Emperor Titus must have found this quite hilarious. In the gospel of Matthew they relate the Temple prophesy which was originally made by Daniel and claim it to have been made by Jesus even though in all liklihood, it was made by Apollos or Apollonius. They also create the character the 'Son of Man' who is the second coming of Jesus the 'Son of God' who returns to punish the Jews by destroying the Temple. "...For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."—Matthew 24:27. The 'Son of Man' is then used repeatedly throughout the gospels so that the faithful are unwittingly worshipping the Roman Emperor Titus rather than Jesus Christ. This completes the Greco-Roman romance of Jesus Christ.
"...and Hibil-Ziwa (the Nazorean spiritual name for Yeshu) came and burnt and destroyed Jerusalem and made it like heaps of ruins."—Haran Gawaita
Everything was in place for the new religion to be launched except that Vespasian died and 2 years later his son the Emperor Titus also died. This left Domitian as emperor and he did not like the plan nor did he like Apollonius. He appears to have been jealous that Apollonius had raised his brother to the level of a god. Apollonius considerd Domitian a monster no better than Nero. Domitian, not realizing that the Messiah had already come began persecuting the Jewish Christians or Messianic Jews. He interviewed and crucified members of the Davidian line.
Apollonius retired first to the Isle of Patmos where he wrote Revelations and then returned to Antioch where he died c 99 CE. The scriptures of the new religion which had been seen by the likes of Clement of Rome and St. Ignatius of Antioch were lost for about half a century until they were discovered by a young cleric by the name of Marcion. It is Marcion who writes the 'Gospel of the Lord,' and is credited with having written the finished version of Mark. Of course, today the church has credited this work to John Mark which is impossible. It has always been noted that Marcion believed in Paul's teachings and not those of Jesus. It is apparent that Marcion knew that Paul was actually Apollonius of Tyana and it was he who wrote not only the epistles, but also the gospels, but he only knew about Jesus through the writings of Apollonius.
The Marcionite Prologues to the Epistles of Paul
What you will not find in your scriptures today are the Prologues to the Epistles. Here is what esteemed Christian authority Adolf Harnack has to say about these Prologues which can be found in early versions of the New Testement like the sixth century codex Fuldensis. "These Prologues were first recognised as really Marcionite by De Bruyne (Rev[ue] Bénéd[ictine], 1907, Jan., pp. 1-16), who thus made a particularly important contribution to our knowledge of the history of the New Testament. He has absolutely proved that these Prologues belong together (those to the Pastoral Epistles are of a different character); that they are to be ascribed to the Marcionites; and from them came into the Church...."—"The Origin of the New Testament," appendix 1 to para. 2 of Part 1, Adolf Harnack.
Prologue to the Epistle to the Romans:
"The Romans are in the regions of Italy. They had been reached by false apostles and under the name of our Lord Jesus Christ they were led away into the law and the prophets. The apostle calls them back to the true evangelical faith, writing to them from Corinth."
Prologue to the Epistle to the Corinthians:
"The Corinthians are Achaeans. And they similarly heard from the apostles the word of truth and then were subverted in many ways by false apostles, some led away by the verbose eloquence of philosophy, others by a sect of the Jewish law. He calls them back to the true and evangelical wisdom, writing to them from Ephesus through Timothy." (Apollonius' companion Damis was called Timotheus by the Thessalonians)
Prologue to the Epistle to the Galatians:
"The Galatians are Greeks. They at first accepted the word of truth from the apostle, but after his departure they were tempted by false apostles to be converted to the law and circumcision. The apostle calls them back to the faith of truth, writing to them from Ephesus."
Prologue to the Epistle to the Philippians:
"The Philippians are Macedonians. They persisted in the faith after the word of truth was accepted, nor did they receive false apostles. The apostle praises them, writing to them from Rome, from prison, through Epaphroditus."
Prologue to the Epistle to the Colossians:
"The Colossians, they too are Asians, just as the Laodiceans. And they themselves1 had been reached by pseudo-apostles, nor did the apostle himself approach them, but even them2 he corrects through an epistle. For they had heard the word from Archippus, who also accepted the ministry to them. The apostle therefore, already arrested, writes to them from Ephesus."
Prologue to the Epistle to the Thessalonians:
"The Thessalonians are Macedonians in Christ Jesus who, after the word was accepted, still persisted in the faith in the persecution by their fellow citizens; furthermore, they did not receive those things which were said by the false apostles. The apostle praises them, writing to them from Athens."
Prologue to the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians:
"To the Thessalonians he writes and makes note to them concerning the last times and of the detection of the adversary. He writes from Athens."
Prologue to the Second Epistle to the Titus:
"He warns and intructs Titus concerning the constitution of the presbytery and concerning spiritual conversation and heretics to be avoided who believe in the Jewish scriptures."
These are the most pertinent of the prologues and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Marcion was the final author of the original 9 Pauline Epistles. The cities where Paul delivered his epistles most definitely establish his link to the Essene, all of the mentioned cities were where the sect had established monasteries. The Roman imprisonment mentioned is not that of the fictitious Paul, but of Apollonius by the Roman Procurator Felix. Since similar prologues to the pastorals differ in style it is quite possible that they had not as yet been written during the lifetime of Marcion. The adversarial apostles mentioned indicate the competition for converts between the original Nazorean sect represented originally by Simon (Peter) and the apostles of the Romans, Apollonius, Lucius and Damis. The translations are by Ben C. Smith @ http://www.textexcavation.com/marcioniteprologues.html.
There is also another name that comes into play here and that is the heretical Jewish Rabbi Elisha ben Abuiah. It is he who was the Silas of the Epistles of Paul, while Apollonius was Apollos. It is also known from Jewish writings that it was he who persecutes the so-called Christians (Nazoreans). However, Paul who is a non historical person is a second century fabrication by Marcion who conflates the lives of Apollonius with the heretical Jewish Rabbi to create the Christian evangelist Paul. Although Christians today are unaware of events from the life of Jesus, outside of the gospels, it was well known then that Apollonius and not Jesus was the Christ. Alas, however, since he was of Greek heritage, he could not have been the Jewish Messiah.
The Gospel of Luke was not written by the Luke (Lucius) who knew Paul (Apollonius) but by the second century satirist Lucian, who is also credited with having written the first 5 chapters of Acts of the Apostles. Since the originals written by Apollonius were lost or destroyed it is impossible to say exactly what was written, but we can rest assured that the basic structure must have been the same or Joseph Atwill would not have been able to connect them to the writings of Josephus and Barbara Thiering would not have been able to decipher her pesher.
Now, Barbara Thiering, who discovered the hidden pesher in the gospels believed that they were actually written by Jesus himself, but what better person to write a pesher than Apollonius a student of Pythagorean philosophy in Tyana. It was Pythagoras who was responsible for creating the Greek form of numerology and kabbalah which was copied by the Hebrews. Why would Jesus write a blatantly false account of the events of the crucifixion, for Jewish consumption, only shortly after the actual event had taken place. Rumors of the event would have spread and the people living in Israel would have known the true story. It seems all to obvious that these false gospel accounts were written at a later date for Gentile and not Jewish consumption.
Of the four gospels Matthew seems to be the most bogus, including the actualization of the Temple prophesy proclaiming the Emperor Titus as the second coming of Jesus Christ. It is hard to believe that the authors wrote that without strong input from the Emperor Titus himself. Furthermore, I cannot imagine a latter day author writing about Titus as the Messiah. The Roman Emperors had one thing in common. they were all egomaniacs. Matthew also contains numerous antisemitic verses aimed at the Pharisee which indicate a somewhat later date of authorship for the final version. The fledgling religion was obviously competing with the Pharisee for new converts to Judaism at the time it was written, but this was not true during the time that the original manuscripts were inked by Apollonius. At that time they were concerned with competition from the Nazorean sect and not the Pharisee.
The lack of historical corroboration of the gospel stories creates an interesting conundrum. If the gospels are accurate then why would the Christians have spent so much energy burning ancient manuscripts. On the other hand, if there were no such individuals as Jesus and Paul then there would have been no manuscripts written about about them to burn. Therefore, whatever was written and committed to the flames must have contradicted what is written in the scriptures.
After Marcion and Lucian wrote their gospels all the gospels fell into the hands not of the Orthodox clan, but the Gnostics. This led Irenaeus to claim when he published the gospels around 185 CE that he knew they were accurate because they were in use by the Church's chief Gnostic competitors.
Archaelogical Evidence
The catacomb research of Eisler has shown that early Christians were unaware of the existence of a man named Jesus. In his work "Orpheus the Fisher," Eisler shows that there are no depictions of either Jesus, the cross or the crucifixion. The leader of the sect is depicted as a vegetarian favoring the abolition of animal sacrifice and a friend of animals, either under a fig tree, or playing his lyre surrounded by animals, or as the Good Shepherd carrying a lamb around his neck. These depictions are consistent with the vegetarian non alcohol drinking Apollonius and not the wine drinking meat eating Jesus of the gospels.
The Dead Sea Scrolls, found in 1945, reveal that there were groups of sectarian Jews, who did not believe in the Temple worship of the Pharisee, who practiced Christian like rituals as much as 200 years prior to the time of Jesus and John the Baptist. There are 3 scrolls that describe the sacred meal, baptism and the belief in a messiah long before the coming of Jesus and John the Baptist. This has led some scholars to believe that both Jesus and John were connected or influenced by a group dwelling in the area of the Dead Sea.
The Mandaean Gnostic Texts
While it is notable that there exist many references to a 'False Messiah' in the early Gnostic texts of the Mandaeans (Nazoreans), none of these ever refer to him as Jesus or Jesus Christ. It is also quite possible that this 'False Messiah' is a fictitious person created by an individual whose name has been eradicated from the text.
In the ancient Book of Miryai, we are told that Miryai was the daughter of the Jewish High Priest who ran away with the leader of the Nazorean sect. We would suppose that this was Jesus, but according to Epiphanius, this might just have been Paul. According to David Asia Israel, author of 'Yeshu' the high priest referred to was Elizer (Eleazar). Since there were only 2 Eleazars who were high priests during that time frame this means that her father was either Eleazar Boethus (4-3 BCE) or Eleazar Ananus (16-17 CE). This does not necessarily mean that this romance had to have taken place while this individual was in office. Once this person had been high priest, the title would stay with him for the rest of his life.
"MIRYAI am I, of the Kings of Babel a daughter, a daughter of Jerusalem's mighty rulers. They have given me birth; the priests brought me up. In the fold of their robe they carried me up into the dark house, into the temple. Adonai laid a charge on my hands and on my two arms: I must scour and cleanse the house [that is] without firmness. There is naught therein for supporting the poor, naught to revive the tormented souls."—Ancient Scroll of Miryai
"She ran away from the priests, fell in love with a man, and they took hold of each other’s hands. Hold of each other’s hands they took, went forth and settled at the mouth of Frash. (Euphrates)"—Ancient Scroll of Miryai
"We will slay them and make Miryai scorned in Jerusalem. A stake (Cross) will we set up for the man who has ruined Miryai and led her away. There shall be no day in the world when a stranger enters Jerusalem."—Sidra d’Yahya, Book of John the Baptist from Mandaic Doctrines of Kings
It is assumed that these verses refer to Jesus. But, that makes absolutely no sense. Regardless of what sect Jesus would have been born into, he was a Pharisaic Jew and also a son of David. In other words Jesus would have been a prime catch for any young Jewish maiden, event a daughter of the high priest.
"The Ebionites, one of the earliest of the Christian sects, claimed that Paul was originally a Gentile, that becoming infatuated with the daughter of the high priest he became a convert to Judaism for the purpose of winning her for a wife, but being rejected, he renounced the Jewish faith and became a vehement opponent of the law, the Sabbath, and circumcision"—Epiphanius Against Heresies, chapter xxx, sec. 16. The only high priest, during that period of Paul's life, that Paul could have worked for persecuting Christians would have been Joseph Caiaphas (18-36 CE) who was married to the sister of high priest Eleazar ben Ananus. This would mean that the woman in question was the daughter of Eleazar ben Ananus. Remember, it was Caiaphas who was the high priest responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus.
Perhaps the most revealing text we have from the Mandaeans is the Haran Gawaita. Here we find reference to the 'False Messiah,' but we are never told who that person was. It could just as well have been Paul as Jesus. "... and Haran Gawaita receiveth him and that city in which there were Nasoraeans, because there was no road for the Jewish rulers. Over them was King Ardban. And sixty thousand Nasoraeans abandoned the Sign of the Seven and entered the Median hills, a place where we were free from domination by all other races. And they built cult-huts (bimandia) and abode in the Call of the Life and in the strength of the high King of Light until they came to their end. And they loved the Lord, that is, Adonai, until in the House of Israel there was created something which was not placed in the womb of Mary, a daughter of Moses. It was hidden in her womb for nine months and bewitched her until the nine months were fulfilled and she was in labour and brought forth a messiah."
".. and he called the people to himself and spoke of his death and took away some of mysteries of the (Sacred?) Meal and abstained from the Food. And he took to himself a people and was called by the name of the False Messiah. And he perverted them all and made them like himself who perverted words of life and changed them into darkness and even perverted those accounted Mine. And he overturned all the rites. And he and his brother dwell on Mount Sinai, and he joineth all races to him, and perverteth and joineth to himself a people, and they are called Christians." All of these perversions could just as well have applied to Paul as to Jesus (Yeshu).
"... and from Nisrat (Nazareth), a city of the Jews, which is called the city of Qum ..."—Haran Gawaita. The only version in existence on the web comes from the Vatican Press, so you can be assured that any references that would contradict Church doctrine would have been removed. For this reason, we never find out what actually happened to the 'False Messiah.' It is also notable that the name of the person being received at the outset has been eradicated. It could not have been Jesus for the text goes on to describe the pregnancy of Mary. However, the manner in which it is described indicates that this person who was supposeldy born, the 'False Messiah' may not have been a real person. It is also possible that the person that is received is actually Paul, who is the real 'father' of the 'False Messiah.' Notice that they refer to Nazareth as a city of the Jews much in the manner of the gospels which indicates that this text was written, by non Jews, in response to the gospels. It also seems to equate this city with Qum or possibly Qumran as part of the name is missing. It is notable that Apollonius created his order of Nazarites at Nazarita in Southern Israel which just might have been Qumran, or at least in the vicinity of Qumran which is east of Jerusalem, but some 2,500 feet lower in elevation. The Haran Gawaita includes references to Mohammad which means that it must have been written after the 7th century. However, the Mandaeans were in the habit of updating their texts rather than creating new texts, so the parts about the 'False Messiah' may have been originally written as early as the second century or close to the time of the publication of the original gospels.
According to author Ralph Ellis, 'King Jesus: From Egypt, Kam to Camelot,' the person responsible for re-establishing the religious site at Qumran at the turn of the first century was known as Zadok, the deputy leader of the Galilean sect. "Unite with respect to the Law and possessions, under the authority of the Sons of Zadok."—Dead Sea Scrolls. In similar fashion the hero of the Essene was called the 'Teacher of Righteousness,' where righteousness in Hebrew is Zadok. This could have been the same Sadduc who accompanied Judas of Galilee.
Jesus the Stranger
According to author Tony Bushby in "The Bible Fraud: An Untold Story of Jesus Christ
" The British Chronicles record that King Tenvantius was the father of a man called Cunobeline, which means absorbed into the family by marriage. He identifies this person as Rabbi Jesus. Wikipedia describes Cunobeline as a late 1st century BC - 40s AD historical king in pre-Roman Britain. His life is comemorated by references by classical historians Suetonius and Dio Cassius, and from his many inscribed coins. He appears to have controlled a substantial portion of south-eastern England, and is called "Britannorum rex" ("king of the Britons") by Suetonius. He also appears in British legend as Cynfelyn (Welsh), Kymbelinus (Medieval Brito-Latin) or Cymbeline (Shakespeare, et al.). From numismatic evidence Cunobelinus appears to have taken power around 9 CE, minting coins from both Camulodunum (Colchester, capital of the Trinovantes). Cunobelinus disappears from the narrative, most likely because he died, sometime before 43 CE. It is reported that a Group from Bethany, not referred to as Christians, which became known as the Culdees landed in Britain. The name Culdee refers to 'Essene Initiates.' There is no record that Jesus Cunobeline ever returned to the Middle East. We have already demonstrated that this exodus occurred in 6 CE after the capture of Judas of Galilee and not in 30 CE.Jesus is absent for 18 years in the gospel accounts if you go by the reported age of Jesus in the Synoptics. However, Jesus left Israel c 6 CE and never returned. Yet, in the gospels we find Jesus living in Israel c 30 CE but he was not recognized by members of his own community. This seems to indicate that he had been away living somewhare else for quite sometime, or this person was not Jesus.
"And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt fine of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee."—Matthew 17:24-27
Although Jesus was a son of David, for some strange reason he pays the strangers tax. Why?
John the Baptist, who was Jesus' cousin, and spent time with Jesus as they grew up, was very uncertain as to Jesus' identity at his baptism. If Jesus had spent the "lost years" in Judea, he and John would certainly have seen each other at the three yearly Feasts. "And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."—John 1:33
Then we find other accounts of Jesus' identity being questioned. "Is this not Joseph's son?" "Brought up here?"—Luke 4 "Is not this the carpenter's son?"—Matt 14, and in John 1 we find that Nathaniel, who only lived five miles from Nazareth, doesn't know Jesus. "Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me?"—John 1:48
"Even Jesus' own brothers did not believe in him."—John 7:5
"Jesus entered a house. Again a crowd gathered. It was so large that Jesus and his disciples were not even able to eat. His family heard about this. So they went to take charge of him. They said, "He is out of his mind."—Mark 3:20-21
"Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet,...they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren."—Acts 1:12,14
So, it was the crucifixion and the resurrection and not the message that earned their belief much like the Greek Prometheans required. If these people were as religious as we are led to believe, why did they only start praying after the crucifixion. Who were they and what did they do before?
The Temple Prophesy
While the Temple Prophesy, made by Jesus, in Mark predicts the destruction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, the prophesy in Matthew repeats what is said in Mark but also tells us by whom and when the Temple will be destroyed. This person is the 'Son of Man.' Now, the gospels were written at least some 40 years after the crucifixion of Jesus and if Jesus had made this prophesy then you would expect that both gospels would have the same information. That is to say that just because one gospel was written later than the other should not change the prophesy one iota. Ah, but it does! However, this so-called prophesy stirred enough resentment among the Jews that it was actually recorded by Josephus in 'War of the Jews.'
"At this time (57-58 AD) there came to Jerusalem from Egypt a man who declared that he was a prophet and advised the masses of the common people to go out with him to the mountain called the Mount of Olives, which lies opposite the city at a distance of 5 stadia. For he asserted that he wished to demonstrate from there that at his command Jerusalem's walls would fall down, through which he promised to provide them an entrance into the city. When Felix (the Roman governor) heard of this he ordered his soldiers to take up their arms. Setting out from Jerusalem with a large force of cavalry and infantry, he fell upon the Egyptian and his followers, slaying 400 of them and taking 200 prisoners. The Egyptian himself escaped from the battle and disappeared."–Josephus, "Antiquities" (XX, 169-172).
In Jerusalem in 58 AD, Paul was asked: "Are you not the Egyptian, who before these days stirred up and led out at the Wilderness 4000 men of the Sicarii?"–Acts 21:38
Thus it is recorded that this event took place during the late 50s and the person believed to have been responsible for this prophesy was Paul not Jesus. Remember, that Paul and Apollos are one in the same person Apollonius, and Apollos was referred to in the epistles as an Egyptian from Alexandria and not a Greek from Tyana. In fact Slavonic Josephus reports that the crucifixion of Jesus took place because of this very same prophesy. It is note worthy that although readers are led, by Christian tradition, to believe that the person who is to be crucified is Jesus, the narrative never actually mentions who that person was, only the headings mention Jesus. The description of the person is not only consistent with the Jesus of the gospels, but it is also consistent with the description of Apollonius. The only mention of Jesus comes from the following added insertion.
The Triangular Inscription Concerning Jesus
"At it (the barrier of the Temple) were columns . . . and on these inscriptions in Greek and Roman and Jewish characters, publishing the law of purity and [proclaiming] that no foreigner should enter the inner [court]; for they called it the Holy [Place] to which one had to ascend by fourteen steps, and whose upper part was built in a square."
According to the testimony of Jewish high priest Ananias (46-52 CE) in 'Antiquity Unveiled,' the foreigner who violated the Holy Place was not Jesus, but Apollonius who he claims should have been known as Apollos and not Paul. "I was one of the accusers of Apollonius before Felix. the name ought to have been Apollos, instead of Paul....The charge was that he had attempted to enter the Holy of Holies, claiming the divine right to do so."—J. M. Roberts, 'Antiquity Unveiled'
The consequent arrest of Paul or Apollonius by Felix, c 58 CE, was recorded in both the biography of Apollonius by Philostratus and Acts of the Apostles. This clearly demonstrates the inauthenticity of the gospel accounts of the passion of Jesus of Nazareth, and shows that it was Apollonius and not Jesus who made this prediction.
"And it happened one day, when John, the brother of James - who are the sons of Zebedee - had come up to the temple, that a Pharisee named Arimanius approached him and said to him, 'Where is your master whom you followed?' And he said to him, "He has gone to the place from which he came." The Pharisee said to him, 'With deception did this Nazarene deceive you (pl.), and he filled your ears with lies, and closed your hearts (and) turned you from the traditions of your fathers.'"—Apocryphon of John. Apollonius, not Jesus, was known as the Nazarene. Jesus was the Nazorean, but the gospel writers saw fit to conflate both terms in the gospels.
"And over these tablets with inscriptions hung a fourth tablet with inscription in these [three] characters, to the effect: Jesus has not reigned as king; he has been crucified by the Jews, because he proclaimed the destruction of the city and the laying waste of the temple."—Inserted in B. J. V. v. 2.
The Crucifixion
The common idea that Jesus was crucified at age 30 comes from early dating errors. Originally, according to the Gregorian calendar Jesus was supposed to have been born in the year 1 with BC meaning Before Christ and AD meaning Anno Domini (year of our Lord), there is no year 0. It was taught that Jesus started his ministry at age 30 and died that same year. Hence 30 or 31 has long been the assumed date of the crucifixion. However, a dating error by a 6th century monk, named Dionysius Exiguus, who lacked astronomical data, has thrown the calculations off by no one knows exactly how many years.
One way to establish the date of the crucifixion is to examine the history of those individuals known to have been participants. We know that Jesus is supposed to have died within a year of the death of John the Baptist. According to Slavonic Josephus, John survived the death of Philip who died 33-36 CE. Caiaphus was deposed in 36 CE the same year that Pilate was recalled to Rome. So, the crucifixion must have occurred as late as 36 CE and no earlier than 34 CE.
Today, when we view the events of the first century, our opinions are skewed by the effects of both Christianity and anti Jewish Roman propaganda. However, back in the days when the documents that we refer to were written, people had a different view of current events. Although there was no mass communication as there is today, people would have heard rumors as to what the truth actually was. As I have described, much of what we know about the real Jesus (Yeshai, Yeshu) comes from both the Safed scroll and the early Gnostic writings now in the possession of the Mandaeans. From everything the documents that we examined say, it becomes obvious that Jesus would have been in his mid 50s at the time of the crucifixion, which is attested to by Irenaeus. Yet, the Safed scroll describes him as a young Essene in his 30s. It has often been claimed that someone other than Jesus was crucified. According to, no less skeptical person than, Michael Shermer, this person was actually Apollonius of Tyana. We have already demonstrated that according to Galatians Paul was in Jerusalem in 30 CE meeting with Peter and James. According to Robertino Solàrion the image on the shroud of Turin matches a bust of Apollonius of Tyana including a scar in the configuration of the number 11 above Apollonius' left brow. "Yeshai was tall slender, not erect, little bent. Brows arched and dark; a high-ridged lofty head. Thin temples..."—Raymond W. Bernard, "The Secret Life of Jesus the Essene"
The Jews were trying to convert the Roman followers of the Promethean religion to worship the God of Israel. However, the Romans believed in the superstition of a vicarious atonement much in the sense of Decius Mundus. The original Nazorean mystery religion did not require a real live sacrifice. The concept was a Gnostic revelation of inner knowledge. The Safed Scroll, which depicts a 6 hour crucifixion much like the gospels, claims that Yeshai was chosen to be this Jewish expiator of sins. The story about Jesus (Yeshu) and the crucified Jesus (who was known as Yeshai beth Halacmee) may be stories about 2 distinctly different people. The first, the Jewish Nazorean 'Son of God' was never crucified, the second the Greek Nazarene 'Sun of God' (Apollonius) was the one who was crucified. Even though it was a pseudo crucifixion, it was still brutal and a successful outcome was not guaranteed. All three victims survived, but Judas died soon after from the poison. This is why there was so much confusion as to the dates of birth and the dates of the crucifixion among the Early Church Fathers and explains why they wound up replacing Jesus, who was much older, with his younger half brother John who was closer to the age of Apollonius.
"Now, dear friend, you must realize that Hebrew writers of the time, realizing the fiasco of the whole enterprise (the crucifixion etc.) abstained from recording anything about it. The only few fragmentary records we find are in letters from Roman officers stationed in Palestine which they sent home to Rome."—Raymond W. Bernard, "The Secret Life of Jesus the Essene.
Although Christians have often accused Philostratus and Julia Domna of creating Apollonius to compete with Jesus, it must be noted that he kept Apollonius out of Israel. For this reason he has Apollonius entering Alexandria to shouts of Hosannas while according to the testimony of Apollonius in 'Antiquity Unveiled' that event actually took place, c 35 CE, in Jerusalem. Apollonius then set out for India. The miraculous conversion is a conflation of the lives of Apollonius and the Jewish apostate Rabbi Elisha ben Abuiah, who was a generation younger than Apollonius, created during the second century by the heretic Marcion.
"In order to calm the Romans, Yeshai was taken out from the country and, with his faithful Mary Magdalene (Miryai), left for India and traveled like Moses through the Asiatic continent, seeking culture, knowledge, and the truth."—Raymond W. Bernard, "The Secret Life of Jesus the Essene. It must be noted here that Apollonius' first trip to India, on which he was not accompanied by Damis, took place 36-38 CE. According to the Cornwall tradition, Jesus remains in England until the late 20s when he returns to Israel to begin his ministry, or whatever, with some of his brothers serving as Apostles. The crucifixion takes place not at Jerusalem which is often claimed to heighten the drama, but at Qumran which explains how he could have been on cross for 6 hours when he was crucified at high noon and taken down at 3 pm. Because of the heat of the searing sun in the dessert at Qumran, on the Dead Sea, 9 am was considered high noon. Herod Antipas is a part of the the plot and convinces Pilate to go along. Those crucified are Jesus, Simon the Zealot (Simon Magus) and Judas Iscariot (the Sicarii leader). These events parallel those outlined by Barbara Thiering in her pesher analysis of the crucifixion.
"...it was growing darker although the full moon ought to shine in the sky. From the Dead Sea was perceived a thick, reddish fog..."—Raymond W. Bernard, "The Secret Life of Jesus the Essene"
Only Simon's legs were broken. Jesus and Judas are offered poison to shorten their suffering. They both accept it. When they appear dead Herod wants to remove them from the cross, but Pilate is bound by duty and fears the consequences of a botched crucifixion. Herod convinces him that they have an air tight room and even if Jesus and Judas are still alive they would soon suffocate. They are taken down and brought to the prearranged location where there is ample amounts of Aloe and Myrrh. Although Simon's legs are broken he is still able to tend to Jesus. He feeds him the Aloe which acts as a purgative causing him to regain consciousness and vomit out the poison. He then treats his wounds with both herbs. Traces of both can still be found on the Shroud of Turin.
Simon is dressed in his white linen gown common to the Essene. In the morning Jesus arises and staggers out of the room. When Mary arrives she sees Simon sitting on the empty slab where Jesus' remains were placed to rest. She assumes that Simon is an angel and that Jesus has risen.
After this Judas who was not purged by the Aloe has his stomach explode from the poison. Jesus is seen alive by numerous startled people who only a few days earlier had seen his limp seemingly dead body removed from the cross. The elders among the Essene feel it better that Jesus and Mary flee, which is what they do using the 'Silk Road' which starts in Baghdad and was accessible by a route just north of Capernaum and the Sea of Galilee where Jesus is once again seen. They travel to the areas north and east of the Jordan or modern day Iraq and Syria first stopping in Damascus. According to some Arab accounts Jesus spends a few years in Damascus which, according to scripture, is where Paul has his miraculous conversion.
Apollonius Equated with Both Paul and Jesus
We must always keep in mind that the scriptural accounts are the works of the authors and do not necessarily reperesent true events. Hence it would be possible for the author, especially if that person were Paul himself, to have twisted the truth. Hence, the story of the savior's youth is taken from accounts from the life of Jesus, but all the events starting with the baptism of Jesus represent events from the life of Paul or Apollonius. While Paul makes claims of a miraculous baptism on the road to Damascus, those events are strongly contradicted by the Gnostic Mandaeans: "The Jordan in which Messiah Paulis was baptized, have I made into a 'trough.' The bread which Messiah Paulis receives, have I made into a 'sacrament.' The drink which Messiah Paulis receives, have I made into a 'supper.' The head-band which Messiah Paulis receives, have I made into a 'priest-hood.' The staff which Messiah Paulis receives, have I made into a 'dung [-stick]."—"Gnostic John the Baptizer." While Paulis, the Latin form of Apollos, probably refers to Paul, Lorsback informs us that it is the equivalent of a Persian word meaning 'Deceiver.' Hence it may simply mean Messiah Deceiver. While most readers may think that Messiah Deceiver refers to Jesus, it may actually refer to Paul. Therefore, it is also possible that there was no Paul and that the name Paul derived from similar epithets made by the Nazoreans towards Jesus. Although the Judean Pharisee would not have considered these people to have been Jewish, it is clear that the Romans considered everyone living in that region, including Arabs, to have been Jewish.
In the Arab world, there were numerous reports of Jesus having been seen in Damascus and other Middle Eastern locations after the crucifixion. In Islam, Jesus is considered a prophet, it is mentioned that someone else was crucified in his place. Persian historian Mir Kawand, states that a site close to Damascus is called Maqam-Isa or Mayuam-i-isa, which means "the place where Jesus lived." The Talmud of Jmmanuel (Jesus) concurs, stating that Jesus went there following his final meeting with his apostles and stayed there for two years, which includes the time that Paul had his conversion on the road to Damascus.
Other historians record that Jesus, Mary and Thomas (Judas-Thomas, presumably) having traveled to Nisibis (Nasibain) near Edessa, now Urfa in southeast Turkey just north of Syria, where Jesus preached to the king. In 1417 Mir Muhammad bin Khawand Shah Ibn-i-Muhammad, also known as Mir Khawand bin Badshah, wrote of the journey of Jesus away from the Jerusalem area to Nisibis. In the former, Jesus and Mary first go to Syria; in the latter, they and Thomas have some confrontations with the king of Nisibis.
In some Muslim writings Jesus is referred to as Yuz Asaf. The meaning and derivation of the name is uncertain. "Yuz" is thought by some to mean either "Jesus" or "leader," and "Asaf" to refer to those he cured of leprosy. Thus one interpretation is that Yuz Asaf means "leader of those he cured of leprosy." It is obvious that after the crucifixion Jesus would have remained incognito.
In Iranian traditions recounted by Agha Mustafai, it is said that Yuz Asaf came there from the west and preached, causing many to believe in him. His teachings are said to have been similar to those of Jesus. However, if he had taught reincarnation, one would not expect that his surmised teachings on that subject would have been carried along by Muslim writers anymore than by Christian writers, since Islam also does not embrace the concept of reincarnation. Among the Nazoreans ressurection did not mean coming back from the dead, but reincarnation.
Now, according to the Christian scriptures Jesus died was resurrected and ascended. There is no mention of his having visited any of these places. However, it is noted that Paul was in Damascus shortly after the crucifixion. It is also noted that Apollonius revisited Jerusalem c 35 CE before embarking on his first trip to Taxila, c 36-38 CE, which is located in Punjab to the west of present day Islamabad. "And while he thus spake and thought, it chanced that there was there a certain merchant come from India whose name was Abbanes, sent from the King Gundaphorus and having commandment from him to buy a carpenter and bring him unto him."—Acts of Thomas 2. This person origianlly associated with Gondophares I, who lived at the end of the first century BCE, is now believed to have been Gondophares-Sases. There is a similar reference to a visit to this region by Apollonius of Tyana where, at about the same time, he meets with King Phraotes which was the Parthian name for Gondophares.
"...it is a remarkable, if not a suspicious circumstance that should not be passed unnoticed, that several Christian writers, while they recount a long list of miracles and remarkable incidents in the life of this Cappadocian Savior (Apollonius), extending through his whole life, and forming a parallel to similar incidents of the Christian Savior, not a word is said about his crucifixion."—Kersey Graves, "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors"
While Christians have long claimed that Jesus was the one and only true resurrected crucified savior, antiquity reveals that there were a whole host of such savior figures. Christians believe that Jesus' miracles were performed through God, and that the miracles of the others were the work of the devil. However, to followers of Mithras or Osiris it would be their deeds that were the act of God and Jesus' the act of the devil. The only difference in all of these religions is belief.
Just Who Was Crucified?
Just who was it who died on the cross? Although Paul spends much verbiage talking about Jesus Christ, it becomes obvious that his Jesus Christ is not based on Jesus of Nazareth, but on the esoteric primal man of the kabbalah, Adam Kadmon. So, who actually died on the cross. Well, according to Paul it was he, Paul! "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? "—1Corintians 1:12-13. He seems to be saying that although there are different factions, it was Christ who was crucified and it is in his name that he baptizes. There are many different ways that he could have said this without implying that he, Paul, was crucified. This is Gnosticism, for in order to crucify Christ you had to crucify the host which was Paul. "But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. Was then that which is good made death unto me?"—Romans 7:8-13. It is clear that his sinful life led to his death, but wait isn't he still alive? Yes, it is he Paul who has been resurrected, not Jesus of Nazareth. "According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain."—Philippians 1:20.21. He is telling us that Christ dwells not in Jesus of Nazareth, but within him, Paul.
"For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.:—Ephesians 5:23. While most Christians would find the expalanation for this phrase obvious, it really is not. When Jesus says destroy this temple and I will rebuild it in 3 days, he obviously is not talking about the physical Jewish Temple, but about his body. So, if you substitute temple for church, what you find is that Christ is the head of the body.
"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."—Galatians 2:20. What most Christians fail to realize, is that this is an admission that it was he, Paul who was crucified. This is similar to where Matthaias records the teachings of the Savior as he travels with Thomas. We assume that the Savior is a man named Jesus, but this may not be the case. The Savior just may be the Christ dwelling within Thomas. So, when Paul says that he is crucified with Christ he means that when they crucified Paul they also crucified the Christ within. This is Pauline dualism at its best or worst, depending on your point of view. According to no less an authority than the Bishop of Lyon, Irenaeus, Paul was a Gnostic, but he conceals his Gnosticism with veiled references to a real life crucified savior, Jesus Christ about whose life and teachings he knows nothing.
"To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour."—Titus 1:4. While most Christian ministers will tell us, Titus was Paul's son in faith because it was Paul who baptized him, It is clear that Paul never says this and does not give much heed to others that he baptized.
"I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel..."—1Corinthians 1:14-17
Titus was with Paul, on and off starting just prior to the Jerusalem conference c 50 CE, which was before 1Corintians was written, all the way through to the time that the Epistle to Titus was written, probably in the mid 60s. If we do a little math, we will find that Paul left Jerusalem, for India, with Mary c 36 CE who according to the Safed scroll married (Yeshai) Paul. This would have made Titus about 13 years old when he joins his father preaching in Jerusalem. So, what we have in these epistles is Paul confessing his carnal sins, of a relationship possibly with either a married woman or a widow, to his audience. He then affirms that he has renounced his carnal lifestyle and been resurrected, in Christ, by his faith.
"In order to make good his escape from Jerusalem, he married Mary Magdalene and disguised as an old couple, they were smuggled out of the city. She bore him two children....it was said that they traveled to the East, preaching the doctrines of the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of humanity. They lived as Essenes and preached abstinence from animal food (vegetarainism)."—Raymond W., Bernard, "The Secret Life of Jesus the Essene"
While this passage is helpful, it represents the conflation, from memory, of the lives of 2 separate individuals. The first being Yeshai who had at least 2 sons who I believe were Ananias and Justus of Tiberias (Tiberias is a Hellinistic Galilean city just a stones throw from Capernaum), the second person is Apollonius of Tyana who, as Yeshai, married Mary Magdalene. Ananias is mentioned in Acts of the Apostles and Justus was the preeminent historian who was a competitor of Josephus. All we know about Justus comes from a mention of him by Josephus in his autobiography. Although Justus makes no mention of Jesus, it may be because only fragments of his manuscripts are still in existence, the rest in all liklihood having been committed to the flames by the conspirators.
"...the person who may have re-established Qumran as a religious site at the turn of the first century was Zadok (Sadduc), the deputy leader of the Galilean sect."—Ralph Ellis, "From Egypt to Camelot."
"In Hebrew, Justus was probably called "Zadok," though the name "Justus" was very common among the Jews at that time."—Jewish Encyclopedia. Justus is the Hellenized version of Zadok. The name may have been used by individuals aligned with the Galilean (Nazorean) and Essene sects or it may have been used to refer to members of Jesus' immediate family. Therefore, 'James the Just' would simply mean James Zadok. Justus was the son of Pistus which can simply be translated from the Gnosis Pistis-Sophia as just 'faith.' Hence, Justus was the 'Son of Faith,' or the son of Jesus. If Justus is derived from Zadok and was used to describe members of the family of Jesus, then it makes sense that Zadok was Jesus.
Simon the Magician
"But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one: To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God. And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries. But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered , beholding the miracles and signs which were done. Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money."—Acts 8:9-20
"For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles ; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues ; to another the interpretation of tongues:"—1Corinthians 12:8-10. Here Paul mentions the very same spiritual gifts that Simon was seeking to obtain from the Apostle Philip.
What we know about Simon Magus comes from the book of Acts, the pseudo Clementines and the patristic writings of Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Hippolytus of Rome, Epiphanius of Salamis, apocryphal Acts of Peter, early Clementine literature, and the Epistle of the Apostles. Except for a few fragments of works either penned by him or his followers called the 'Apophasis Megale', or 'Great Declaration.' He is also believed to have written several treatises called 'The Four Quarters of the World' and 'The Sermons of the Refuter,' but are lost to us today. It is here that we find out that Simon is a latter day pagan competitor of Jesus, preaching in Samaria, who seeks to purchase from Peter the powers of the Holy Spirit.
The claim made in Acts, that Simon tried to purchase the power of the Holy Ghost from the Apostles represents the competing claims made during the formative years of the Christian Church by various factions. It was strongly refuted in the Clementines, a mid to late second century composition of the Jewish Christians. According to them: "He can make himself visible or invisible at will, can pass through rocks as if they were clay, throw himself down from a mountain unhurt, loose himself when bound; he can animate statues, make trees spring up; he can throw himself into the fire without harm, can appear with two faces: "I shall change myself into a sheep or a goat. I shall make a beard to grow upon little boys. I shall ascend by flight into the air, I shall exhibit abundance of gold. I shall make and unmake kings. I shall be worshipped as God, I shall have divine honors publicly assigned to me, so that an image of me shall be set up, and I shall be adored as God."—Recognitions 2.9. 'Recognitions' and the 'Homilies' are 2 different editions of similar content.
According to 'Recognitions, Book II, Chapter VII, Simon was born in the Samaritan town of Gettones (Gitta) to parents Antonius and Rachel (this passage is symbolic as the Antonius in qustion was the real son of Mark Antony and Rachel stands for the mother of Joseph of the 12 tribes). In other words we are talking about an individual who had dual citizenship like Saul the Jew and Paul the Roman. He grew up in the northern Egyptian city of Alexandria and was educated in Greek literature. Indeed, everything that we know about Simon Magus comes not from the first, but the second century, including the verses from Acts. He believed himself to be an exalted power above God the Creator. "And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus. This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John."—Acts 18:24,25. In the words of nineteenth century German theologian, philosopher, Bruno Bauer, the author of Mark’s gospel was "an Italian, at home both in Rome and Alexandria."
"Only from Alexandrian Gnosticism, or, as Reizenstein (l.c. pp. 25-26; comp. pp. 278, 285) convincingly shows, only from pagan pantheism, could he have derived the idea of the "pleroma," "the fulness" of the Godhead dwelling in Christ as the head of all principality and power, as him who is before all things and in whom all things consist (Col. i. 15-19, ii. 9)."—Jewish Encyclopedia
Just as Jesus is associated with the purported prostitute Mary Magdalene, Simon had his own consort Helena who he redeemed from a brothel in the Phoenician city of Tyre. He recognized her immediately as the incarnation of Ennoia, His First Thought, the Holy Spirit, the Mother of All. He purchased her from her master and she became his constant companion during his travels and teachings.
In the pseudo-Clementine stories of Clement's journey to Judea and conversion there is a dispute between Peter and his enemy Simon Magus who clearly serves as a cipher for the 'lawless' Paul. "The most elaborate legendary story is told of him, especially with reference to his contest with Peter, in the Clementine writings, where there is an occasional blending of the character and utterances of Simon Magus with those of Paul."—JE
Simon is also mentioned by Josephus in 'Antiquities' where he helps Bernice convince her sister Drusilla to dump her husband King Azizus of Emesa, who had gotten circumcised to marry her. Here he refers to Simon as a Cypriot, but "Gitta" was often confused with the "Kittim," or Sea Peoples of Cyprus. From the Pauline side of Christianity we have the counterpart of the Peter, Simon Magus confrontation in the Clementines. Here we find in Acts 13:8 Paul confronting the sorcerer Elymas who uses the paternal name bar Jesus which reflects Simon's recent appearance in Judea as Jesus. It seems strange that the author had to choose another name for the sorcerer other than Simon Magus. Could it be that he was all too aware that Paul could not confront himself?
Now, you may be wondering, how could Simon have been Paul, after all Paul was not known to have performed miracles. "Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them."-Acts 15:12, "And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:"-Acts 19:11 "He (Apollonius) is mentioned in connection with magical writings, and is called by the Arabs Sahib al-Talismat ("The Author of Talismans"). They attribute to Apollonius "Risalah fi Tat'hir al-RuHaniyyat fi al-Markabat," a work that treats of the influence of pneumatic agencies in the world of sense, and which also deals with talismans."—JE
"Simon Magus first spoke of a “putative passion of Christ and blasphemously asserted that it was really he, Simon himself, who underwent these apparent sufferings. “As the angels governed this world badly because each angel coveted the principality for himself he [Simon] came to improve matters, and was transfigured and rendered like unto the Virtues and Powers and Angels, so that he appeared amongst men as man though he was no man and was believed to have suffered in Judea though he had not suffered” —Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. I, xxiii sqq.
This claim by Simon, in the quote by Irenaeus, is really not so far fetched as we have already shown that according to Barbara Thiering's 'Pesher of Christ,' indeed it was he, Simon, who was at the center of the crucifixion story. She also claimed that both individuals in question were indeed friends for some time. Therefore, it is not so strange that Simon actually considered that it was he, Simon, and not Jesus who had been the expiator of sins.
We find the following written about Apollonius in the Jewish Encyclopedia. "Pythagorean philosopher and necromancer; born about the year 3 B.C.; died, according to some sources, in the thirtyeighth year of his age. In Arabic literature his name is cited in the form 'Balinas' (from the Emerald Table we get the following: 'Truth! Certainty! That in which there is no doubt! That which is above is from that which is below, and that which is below is from that which is above, working the miracles of one. As all things were from one. Its father is the Sun and its mother the Moon. The Earth carried it in her belly, and the Wind nourished it in her belly, as Earth which shall become Fire. Feed the Earth from that which is subtle, with the greatest power. It ascends from the Earth to the heaven and becomes ruler over that which is above and that which is below.') or 'Belenus,' (the Celtic sun god and had shrines from Aquileia on the Adriatic to Kirkby Lonsdale in England) which has often been mistaken for 'Pliny.'"—Jewish Encyclopedia. If we do the math, we find 38-2=36 CE, there was no year '0'. This corresponds with the actual year of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as revealed by interpreting the Gnostic texts.
"Necromancy; is a form of magic in which the practitioner seeks to summon the spirit of a deceased person, either as an apparition or ghost, or to raise them bodily, for the purpose of divination."—Wikipedia
"Aquila relates Simon's parentage and his Samaritan origin, and declares that he claims to be greater than the God who created the world”—'Homilies' 2.22; 'Recognitions' 2.7. The Roman Emperor Domitian charged Apollonius "With wearing garments which differ from those of other men, thereby attracting crowds of boisterous people to the detriment of the good order of the city. Of wearing the hair long and of living not in accord with good society. ...With allowing and encouraging men to call him a god."—Philostratus, 'Life of Apollonius.' According to the Clementina, both Jesus and Simon shared the same teacher, John the Baptist, and it was Simon and not Jesus whom John chose as his successor. "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:"—Matthew 3:11
According to he Simonians, the second century Gnostic adherents of Simon Magus, in the 'pseudo-Cyprian De Rebaptismate' says that on the strength of the words of John, that "we were to be baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire," the Simonians maintained that the orthodox baptism was a mere form, and that they had the real baptism, for, as soon as their neophytes went down into the water, a fire appeared on it. Interesting!
According to radical critic Hermann Detering, Simon Magus may be a proxy for Paul of Tarsus, with Paul originally being detested by the church, and the name changed when Paul was rehabilitated by virtue of forged Epistles correcting the genuine ones.
Notably, Simon Magus is sometimes described in apocryphal legends in terms that would fit Paul, most significantly in the previously mentioned Clementine Recognitions and Homilies. It is contended that the common source of these documents may be as early as the 1st century, and must have consisted in a polemic against Paul, emanating from the Jewish side of Christianity. Paul being thus identified with Simon, it was argued that Simon's visit to Rome had no other basis than Paul's presence there, and, further, that the tradition of Peter's residence in Rome rests on the assumed necessity of his resisting the arch-enemy of Judaism there as elsewhere. Thus, the idea of Peter at Rome really originated with the Ebionites, but it was afterwards taken up by the Catholic Church, and then Paul was associated with Peter in opposition to Simon, who had originally been himself.
Although there is little remaining of the teachings of Simon Magus, the little that we do have is nowhere consistent with the writings or the Gnosticism of Paul. While Paul was a mere babe when it came to the subject, Simon was a full blown second century Gnostic living a century before his time. However, according to Beyschlag, the Simon presented in Acts was not a Gnostic, but was turned into a Gnostic, by his disciples the Simonians, by the time of Justin Martyr. According to Justin, Simon arrived on the scene during the reign of Claudius, c 41-54 CE., but most have him arriving on the scene c 35 CE. Quite strangely these dates correspond nicely with both the death of Apollonius in the Jewish Excyclopedia and Apollonius' trips to India. "With respect to the Magi, Apollonius has said all there is to be said, how he associated with them and learned some things from them, and taught them others before he went away."—Philostratus, "Life of Apollonius" chap. 26. Could it be that there was no Paul and no Simon Magus, but that Apollonius, who also had acquired all the yoga siddhis attributed to Simon was actually all 3 individuals? Remember, nothing was known of the life of Simon until the mid second century which was almost a full century later. Could it be that Christian apologists intentionally sought ot separate Simon from Paul much in the manner that Marcion conflated the lives of Apollonius and Rabbi Elisha to create Paul and later Philostratus wrote his biography to distance Apollonius from Paul.
One common methods of hiding people's real identities in the gospel stories was to give a person several different names. This has been noted by Biblical scholars Robert Eisenman and Barbara Thiering from who's pesher the following is derived. It is then up to the reader to put the clues together revealing this person's true identity. In this manner Simon the Cyrene was also Simon the Canaanite, one of the 12 apostles, and Simon Zelotes or Simon the Zealot is also that same person, as is Simon the Leper, a Samaritan from Canaan. Samaritans were considered 'lepers' by the Orthodox Jews. According to some of the gospel accounts Simon, who is really Simon Magus, is Jesus' close friend Lazarus. According to Luke's 'Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus', Lazarus after living a life of poverty (and leprosy) gains 'Paradise' in 'Abraham's Bosom', while the 'Rich man' is tormented.... 'Abraham's Bosom' was the nickname of cave 4 at Qumran and 'Paradise' was the nickname of cave 7 and or 8. So, Jesus says to the 'Good Thief' (Simon the Cyrene, Simon Magus, Lazarus) "verily I say unto thee, to day shalt thou be with me in paradise."—Luke 23:43. When reading the gospels, we have to keep in mind that these accounts were written decades later, not by some itinerrant apostles, but by the perpetrator in chief Apollonius (Simon Magus) himself.
It is always difficult to discern what actually happened from what was written. Did Apollonius actually use the names Simon and Apollos or were those identities created by latter day redactors? Was there actually a person named Paul, or did Marcion create Paulus out of the Parthian word Paulis used by the Nazoreans which means deceiver? It is quite likely that the authors of the gospels rearranged and edited events to fit their means. The individuals who were actually crucified were Apollonius (Paul) and Damis along with Judas Iscariot. Going by the testimony of Pilate, who obviously was not a part of the plot at least when he testified, then Damis must have given his name as Jesus.
Although much is written about Simon, it is sometimes difficult to attach dates to these events. However, the following passage from the 'Acts of Peter' clearly assigns a time frame for his supposed demise. "But Agrippa the prefect had no longer patience, but thrust away Simon with his own hands, and again the dead man lay as he was before."—Acts of Peter. We know that Agrippa served as King of Judea c 37-44 CE and Agrippa II served as King c 50-93 CE. The only reference we have of Agrippa actually having met Paul is "Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for thyself. Then Paul stretched forth the hand, and answered for himself:"—Acts 26:1. This places the year for this fanciful event c 58 CE, when Paul (Apollonius) was arrested by the Roman procurator Felix and later released by his successor Festus.
"He was worshiped by many as a god, and seemed to himself to be one; for among the Jews he appeared as the Son [thus identifying himself with Jesus], in Samaria as the Father, and among other peoples as the Holy Ghost"—comp. "Philosophumena," vi. 19; Tertullian, "De Anima," xxxiv.; Epiphanius, "Panarion." xxi. 1; "Acta Petri et Pauli," in Lipsius, "Apocryphische Apostelgeschichten und Apostellegenden," ii., part 1, pp. 30, 301. "According to Basilides, Christ seemed to men to be a man and to have performed miracles. It was not, however, Christ, who suffered but Simon of Cyrenes who was constrained to carry the cross and was mistakenly crucified in Christ’s stead. Simon having received Jesus’ form, Jesus returned Simon’s and thus stood by and laughed. Simon was crucified and Jesus returned to his father"—Irenaeus, Adv. Char., 1, xxiv.
"...for he claims that not Jesus, but Simon of Cyrene was compelled to carry the cross of Christ; for he claims that not Jesus, but Simon of Cyrene has suffered. When the Lord was taken from Jerusalem, as we must conclude from the Gospel, one Simon of Cyrene was compelled to bear the cross. Here he found (an occasion) for his trickery, a way to compose his drama, and he says as follows. As he bore the cross Jesus changed Simon into his own form and himself into Simon, and delivered Simon to crucifixion in his place....It was Simon himself who was crucified, not Jesus."—Epipnanius 'Against Basilides' section 2, 3,2-5. From this passage, it is clear that Basilides, a student of Menander, equates Simon of Cyrene with Simon Magus.
The Catholic Church has always maintained that, although there were other gospels written, the four gospels in the New Testament were the most authentic because they were the originals. Following this logic then it would only be natural that the first written of these four gospels would give the most reliable account of the events from the life of Jesus of Nazareth. This being the case, then how can any Christian explain the following: "Now they compelled a certain man, Simon a Cyrenian, the father of Alexander and Rufus, as he was coming out of the country and passing by, to bear his cross. And they brought him to the place Golgotha, which is translated, Place of a Skull. Then they gave him wine mingled with myrrh to drink, but he did not take it. And when they crucified him..."—Mark 15:21-24. This pericope clearly states that it was Simon and not Jesus who was crucified. The reference to Alexander and Rufus point to the total inauthenticity and the latter day non Jewish composition of the gospels. Alexander is Tiberius Alexander who was responsible for the crucifixion of James and Simon c 47 CE, while Rufus refers to Terentius Rufus who was resposnsible for the capture and crucifixion of Simon bar Giora at the end of the siege of Jerusalem c 70 CE. Someone recording an on site account of the life and crucifixion of Jesus Christ would never have heard of Alexander and Rufus. This passage also strongly contradicts Acts of the Apostles where it states that James and Simon were crucified in 44 CE by Agrippa I rather than Tiberius Alexander in 47 CE.
Now, Matthew changes the wording somewhat, but nowhere does he claim that it was Jesus who was crucified. "And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe. And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify him. And as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name: him they compelled to bear his cross. And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull, They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink. And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots."—Matthew 27:28-35. Notice that Matthew actually says the same thing as Mark. No matter how you read it, it says that they crucified Simon! Now, the use of the first person pronoun 'my' further indicates that the author of the gospel was indeed the person crucified.
The Gospel of Luke repeats the story of Simon of Cyrene, but makes it more difficult to discern exactly who was crucified. "And as they led him away, they laid hold upon one Simon, a Cyrenian, coming out of the country, and on him they laid the cross, that he might bear it after Jesus. And there followed him a great company of people, and of women, which also bewailed and lamented him. But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children. For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck. Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us. For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry? And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death. And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left. Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots."—Luke 23:26-34
The Gospel of John omits the encounter with Simon entirely, leaving little doubt as to who was crucified, but most scholars would agree that Luke and John were the last gospels written, and by then the story of the crucifixion had already been fictionalized to correspond to the theology of the resurrected savior. In John this becomes obvious since they change the color of the robe that adorned Jesus from scarlet, which would have been easily obtainable as it was the color of the uniforms worn by the Romans, to purple which is the spiritual color and the color of the Papacy, as well as the color of the Peacock. This choice of color can also be found in the once lost Gospel of Peter. Strange as it might seem this gospel mentions neither Simon of Cyrene nor Jesus Christ. It does mention Mary Magdalene and Pilate. This gospel is like a movie script which has yet to cast its leading man. It is the Church's claim that the gospels were written as accounts of the life and crucifixion of Jesus, yet in this gospel we have a crucifixion with no mention of Jesus Christ. It only refers to the crucified figure as our Lord. This is similar to Thomas the Contender where the term Savior is used rather than Jesus. The Peter Gospel could easily have been a prototype of the crucifixion story brought back from India by Apollonius.
So, why do the New Testament gospels tell a story which contradicts the Church doctrine that Jesus Christ died for your sins and was resurrected? It seems that these gospels were not originally intended for the Orthodox Church which was not in existence at the time that they were written. This fact is clearly attested to by the honorable Irenaeus. “So firm is the ground upon which these Gospels rest, that the very heretics bear witness to them, and starting from these documents, each of them endeavors to establish his own peculiar doctrine." In other words they were originally intended for use by the various Gnostic sects, the heretics.
The following description of Paul although not identical is consistent with an aged version of the individual described as Yeshai in the Safed scroll. "A man of moderate stature, with crisp [scanty] hair, crooked legs, blue eyes, large knit brows, and long nose, at times looking like a man, at times like an angel,..."—Acta Pauli et Theclæ. This is the only known description of Paul whose crooked legs could well have been the result of having had his legs broken either during his crucifixion, or having broken his legs after he had fallen from his flight when he was prayed down by Peter in the Clementine narrative. Remember, it was Paul who was Simon who had his legs broken. In all liklihood, it was Damis who was, the physical Jesus along with Judas Iscariot, who drank the poison. It was Simon (Paul), however, who represented the host or embodiment of Jesus Christ.
Ferdinand Christian Baur, the founder of the "Tübingen School" of New Testament criticism, believed that Simon Magus was simply a sobriquet for the Apostle Paul used by the Jewish Christians who believed that Paulinism was a heresy and represented a schism from the original Jewish Christianity of James and Peter. The harsh treatment directed at Simon in the Clementines was meant to be directed at Paul. Simon Magus never existed. The name, Simon, which appears in Acts, which was compiled during the middle of the second century, was copied from the earliest version of the Clementines. The work is referred to as the Clementines as it was originally believed to have been written by or about Clement of Rome, who was a Flavian, but this was later shown not to be the case.
Simon, much like Paul, was rebuked by Peter for his theology. Could this rebuke have happened, as we have stated in our article about Paul, when Paul visited Jerusalen and met with Peter c 30 CE. Why did Apollonius use the name Simon? Could this have been his Jewish name? Remember, according to the Ebionites Paul converted to Judaism in order to win the hand of the daughter of the Jewish high priest. As we have already demonstrated, all of this occurred not after, but prior to the crucifixion. As we have learned from analyzing the scriptures, Simon Magus was first Simon the Zealot. It is likely that his reputation as Simon the magician came about after he survived the crucifixion along with 'Jesus' (Damis). After the crucifixion, Simon, (Apollonius) travels to India where he receives 9 documents from Phraotes and returns as Simon Magus, he would later travel to farther India and return for the Jerusalem council as the Apostle Paul. Of course, during his lifetime he was probably just known as Apollos. According to Christian scholar Barbara Thiering the pesher in the gospels was written by Jesus, but who better to write a pesher than a true student of the father of all peshers, Pythagoras. In order to hide their conspiracy, the Roman Christians burned all references to the life of the true crucified savior, Apollonius, including the Library at Alexandria. "Every trace of the old philosophy and literature of the ancient world has vanished from the face of the earth."—John Chrystostom
Jesus in the Talmud
In the Jewish writings, Jesus is believed to be equated with Balaam of Genesis: "Woe unto him who maketh himself alive by the name of God....A sectarian said to R. Chanina: Do you know how old Balaam was? [R. Chanina] replied: It is not written. However, since it says (Psalms 55:24) "Men of bloodshed and deceit will not live out half their days..." he was 33 or 34. [The heretic] said: You said well. I have seen the chronicle of Balaam and it said "At 33 years Balaam the lame was killed by Pinchas (Phineas) the robber."—Sanhedrin 106b. This quote in particular seems to refer to the gospel accounts of the crucifixion, as by now you should be well aware that the term 'robber' referred to the 'Messianic Jews' and would have been out of context in the Genesis narrative. Nowhere in the Torah does it say that Balaam was lame. By the way, Apollonius (Paul) was actually born 2 CE which would have made him 33-34 years of age, at the time of the crucifixion, just as it is stated in the Safed scroll, and from the only known description of him, he had crooked legs. According to the Toldot Jeschu, it was Jeschu (Jesus) who entered the holy place and copied the name of God, but according to the testimony of Jewish high priest Ananias it was actually Apollonius or Apollos (Paul) who violated the Holy of the Holiest, not Jesus. As a result of this violation he, Apollonius (Paul) was arrested by the procurator Felix. This incident is well documented and ocurred 58 CE or well after the crucifixion.
"And the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the rewards of divination in their hand; and they came unto Balaam, and spake unto him the words of Balak."—Numbers 22:7. A good portion of Numbers 22 is devoted to the story of Balaam the sorcerer. Balaam was a non Jew living in the city of Pethor in Mesopotamia. For some strange reason the authors of the New Testament saw fit to once again broach the subject of sorcery. "Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray , following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;"—2Peter 2:15." Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core."—Jude 1:11. "But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication"—Revelation 2:14. There seems to be some sort of an analogy being drawn between events in the New Testament and those concerning Balaam in the book of Numbers.
The following clearly shows that Balaam and Yeshu are 2 distinctly different people: "[Onkelos Bar Kalonikus] called up Balaam from the dead. [Onkelos] asked: Who is honored in that world? [Balaam] replied: Israel. [Onkelos asked:] What about joining them? [Balaam] replied: (Deut. 23:7) "You shall not seek their peace or welfare all your days." [Onkelos] asked: What is your punishment? [Balaam answered]: In boiling semen.
[Onkelos] called up Yeshu from the dead. [Onkelos] asked: Who is honored in that world? [Yeshu] replied: Israel. [Onkelos asked:] What about joining them? [Yeshu] replied: Seek their good. Do not seek their bad. Whoever touches them is as if he touched the pupil of his eye. [Onkelos] asked: What is your punishment? [Yeshu answered]: In boiling excrement. As the mast said: Whoever mocks the words of the sages in punished in boiling excrement."—Talmud Gittin 56b-57a
The Talmud refers to Jesus by 2 other names: the first being Stadea and the second Panthera. According to the Gemara, "Ben Stada was Ben Panthera, Rabbi Chisda said; The husband was Stada, the lover Panthera. Another said; the husband was Paphos ben Jehuda; Stada was his mother ... and she was unfaithful to her husband." Unlike the Balaam references which were aimed at Paul, this reference is about Jesus (Yeshai) and is consistent with the Safed scroll.
Behind the Theology of Simon and Apollonius
The writings that we find attributed to Apollonius are precisely the types of works that you would expect to find coming from the pen of Simon and those works attributed to Simon reflect an Oriental theology that you would expect from Apollonius. From Arab sources we find: "They attribute to Apollonius "Risalah fi Tat'hir al-RuHaniyyat fi al-Markabat," a work that treats of the influence of pneumatic agencies in the world of sense, and which also deals with talismans."—JE. In this case pneumatic means spiritual and talismans comes from the Greek "telein" which means "to initiate into the mysteries," or an amulet believed to possess supernatural powers.
Since the Christians found Simon's gnosis too metaphysical to comprehend and too threatening to their power they destroyed his writings. What remains comes only from the Christian response to his teachings by the Church Fathers. "There is one Power, differentiated into upper and lower, self-creating, self-increasing, seeking itself, discovering itself – its own mother, its own father, its own sister, its own consort, its own daughter, its own son – Mother-Father, One, the root of the All." What we have here is typical yogic (yoga meaning union of mind body and spirit) philosophy of the upper and lower self. The following could have come directly from the Hymn to the Purusha (self) in the "Rig Veda:" "What is hidden is hidden in what is manifest in fire; and what is manifest in fire originates in the hidden. What is involved is what Aristotle calls dynamei (potentiality) and energeia (actuality), or Plato, the noeton (intelligible) and aistheton (perceptible)." What you find in the theology of Simon is a primitive explanation of quantum physics as an explanation for the creation of the universe.
"Simon explained the purpose of the Magus – completely misunderstood by the followers of Jesus – in mythic imagery. Being enlightened, the consciousness of the Magus is one with Nous. Hence he does not reincarnate blindly as do those who have yet to awaken to their true nature, but rather descends into the world. But Nous (Reason) cannot be active without Thought (Epinoia) and so must be united with it. Simon therefore called himself "the Power of God" (Nous) and denominated his thought Helena, a Greek term meaning 'light'."—Katinka Hesselink.Net
The Balaam Prophesy and Roman Admissions to the Conspiracy
"I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A star shall come out of Jacob and a scepter will rise out of Israel. It shall crush the foreheads of Moab and break down all the sons of Sheth. Edom shall be dispossessed."–Numbers 24.17-19
Most likely originally a reference to King Josiah, this text came to be interpreted as a prediction of the coming of the Messiah, as can be seen in the Testament of Judah.
"And after this there shall arise for you a star from Jacob in peace. And a man shall arise from my posterity like the sun of righteousness, walking with the sons of men in gentleness and righteousness, and in him will be found no sin. And the heavens will be opened upon him to pour out the spirit as a blessing of the holy Father. And he will pour out the spirit of grace on you. This is the shoot of God most high; this is the fountain of life of all humanity. Then he will illumine the scepter of my kingdom, and from your root will arise the shoot, and through it will arise the rod of righteousness for the nations, to judge and to save all that call on the Lord."–Testament of Judah 24.1-6 alluding to Joel 2.28-29 and Isaiah 11.1-5
This text purported to have been written by the sons of Jacob actually only dates to the second century BCE. Similar references can be found from the Qumran document known as the "War Scroll." While the Jews in particularly the Essene and Messianic Jews saw this as a prophesy foretelling the coming of the Jewish Messiah, the Romans had their own interpretation.
"There had spread over all the Orient an old an established belief that it was fated at that time for a man coming from Judaea to rule the world. This prediction, referring to the emperor of Rome, as it turned out, the Jews took to themselves, and they revolted accordingly."–Suetonius, "Vespasian" 4.5
The Jews, having taken this prophesy to heart produced an innumerable number of Messianic wannabes during the first century BCE and the first century CE. It seems that no sooner had the Romans nailed one messiah to the cross that another soon appeared. The most notable of these was Judas of Galilee and it was from his lineage that many of these would be messiahs sprang, like Menahem and later Simon bar Kosiba. It is for this reason that the conspirators made the belief in one and only one true messiah a basic tenet of their new faith, and that person was to be the best kind of Jewish Messiah for the Romans, a dead one.
While writing 'Caesar's Messiah', Joseph Atwill unearthed a series of horticultural analogies used by the conspirators. After the war with the Jews, the Romans wanted to bring back a trophy of their victory to Rome and that prize was the title of Messiah. This is clearly stated in the following quote from Pliny the Elder. "The balsam shrub is native to Judea but was brought to Rome by "the Vespasian emperors" and "it now serves [Rome] and pays tribute along with its race (cum sua gente) [i.e. Judeans]. The Jews did violence to it as also to their own lives, but the Romans protected it in response, and there has been warfare over a bush!"–Pliny the Elder, who later died during the eruption of Mount Vesuvius (79 CE), dedicated his "Naturalis Historia" to Titus.
The Roman historian Tacitus also has his own horticultural analogy, 'destroy the vine and destroy also the branch.' Paul also enjoins with the following from Romans 11:24: "For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?" There is also the analogy made to describe the pruning of the Jewish warrior Eleazar during the siege of Jerusalem.
There is also another telling horticultural analogy and this comes from the Jewish writings. Elisha Ben Abuiah was from Jerusalem. His dates are unknown, but most place his adult life between the Jewish wars. It was he who was the Christian persecutor and later convert to Christianity. He was nicknamed Aher for traitor. The Latin version of Apollonius is Paulus, and both individuals are conflated into just Paul. While there exists no secular historical material pertaining to Paul, there is a record of the anti-Pharisaic Rabbi Elisha, probably a remnant of the defunct Sadducean sect, in the Jewish writings. Since he was a contemporary of Rabbi Akiva who was born in 50 CE, it is likely that he was at least a generation younger than the Paul of the scriptures. The idea that Paul (Apollonius) persecuted Christians is ludicrous, first because the Christ concept was his own idea which he was trying to sell, and even according to Christian scripture, the term Christian was only first used in Antioch c 41 CE.
"According to Grätz, he was a Karpotian Gnostic; according to Siegfried, a follower of Philo; according to Dubsch, a Christian; according to Smolenskin and Weiss, a victim of the inquisitor Akiba....The oldest and most striking reference to the views of Elisha is found in the following baraita (Hag. 14b; Yer. ii. 1): "Four [sages] entered paradise—Ben 'Azzai, Ben Zoma, Aher, and Akiba. Ben 'Azzai looked and died; Ben Zoma went mad; Aher destroyed the plants; Akiba alone came out unhurt."... It means that Elisha, like Paul, in a moment of ecstasy beheld the interior of heaven—in the former's case, however, with the effect that he destroyed the plants of the heavenly garden."–Jewish Encyclopedia. The Nazoreans considered reality to be heaven and their religion as the new shoot of Judaism. So, the destroying of the plants refers to the destruction of the shoot of Judah. I have no idea what a Karpotian means, nor as far as I can find does anyone else.
The following affirms that even as late as the end of the first century, no one had ever heard of a crucified Jewish Messiah by the name of Jesus Christ. "Now there still survived of the family of the Lord grandsons of Judas [Thomas], who was said to have been his brother according to the flesh, and they were related as being of the family of David. These the officers brought to Domitian Caesar, for like Herod, he was afraid of the coming of the Christ [Messiah]."—Eusebius quoting Hegesippus, "Ecclesiastical History." Keep in mind that this statement was made by an early Christian chronicler during the second half of the second century, hence he refers to Judas as the brother of the family of the Lord. It is obvious that the Romans were aware that many of the messianic wannabes came from this very same family, but as of the time of Domitian the Romans had no reason to believe that the Jewish Messiah had as yet appeared. Hence, the story of the resurrected Jewish Messiah was not grounded in reality, but in the fictions of the gospels which were roundly rejected by Domitian who was Apollonius' arch enemy.
Peter, First Pope?
I think not. The pagan priests of the mystery religions were called PATORS or PETERS. It is clearly stated by Josephus that Simon/Peter was crucified along with his brother James the Less in 47 CE. "And besides this, the sons of Judas of Galilee were now slain; I mean of that Judas who caused the people to revolt, when Cyrenius came to take an account of the estates of the Jews, as we have showed in a foregoing book. The names of those sons were James and Simon, whom Alexander commanded to be crucified…"—Jewish Antiquities, XX: 5.2. It is this event which clearly ties the family of Jesus, as mentioned in the scriptures, to the family of Judas of Galilee which is covered extensively by Josephus. The book of Acts cites a parallel event, but dates it c 44 CE, in order to make it seem that the crucifixion was the result of religious persecution at the hands of the Jewish Procurator Agrippa rather than the Roman Tiberius Alexander. A careful reading of Acts reveals that after Peter's miraculous escape the author's emphasis switches from Peter, who only makes a cameo appearance years later to be crucified, to Paul. The Simon/Peter who was later taken back to Rome and crucified, during the 60s, was the Sicarii leader Simon bar Giora who was captured by Terentius Rufus, in the subterranean tunnels and caves beneath Jerusalem, at the end of the siege by the Romans, not Simon bar Jonas. Josephus wrote his histories during the second half of the first century, while Acts was written in the middle of the second century from first century notes taken by Damis. The change in dates for the crucifixion was no accident, but an intentional attempt to place the blame on the Jews. Remember, Josephus and Damis were well acquainted during the time that Josephus was inking his manuscripts and such a discrepancy, in the original notes, would be highly unlikely.
There exists no evidence that Paul visited Rome prior to 60-61 CE, and on that trip, it is evident that he did not seek out Peter or anyone from the Christian community in Rome. Rather he sought out members of the Jewish community. "And when we came to Rome,...Paul called the chief of the Jews together...And they said unto him, We neither received letters out of Judaea concerning thee, neither any of the brethren that came shewed or spake any harm of thee. But we desire to hear of thee what thou thinkest: for as concerning this sect, we know that every where it is spoken against."–Acts 28:16,21,22. Paul did not seek out Peter, because he knew that Peter was dead and he did not seek out members of the Christian community because there were no Christians living in Rome as late as 60 CE.
"For the bishops of Rome were, first, Peter and Paul, the apostles temselves who were also bishops..."—Epiphanius, 'Panarion' Against Ebionites section 2, 6,1.
Unless Peter was in Rome during the 40s then Peter could not have been the first Pope or Bishop of Rome. The first Pope was the very same person who authored 'Revelations,' on the Isle of Patmos, St. John the Divine, or Pope John I, or just plain old Paul, Apollonius of Tyana. It is therefore likely that the Gospel of John was actually first written about the crucifixion of Paul, Simon Magus, Apollonius of Tyana. This is why the Gospel of John has a more mystical Gnostic sense than the Synoptics which were written from the perspective of the Jewish social reformer Jesus (Yeshai beth Halachmee). This explains why the crucifixion in John takes place not on Passover, but on the eve of Passover, the day of the slaughter of the Paschal Lamb. This would have have been a sore point for the vegetarians Apollonius and Damis. "I came to destroy the sacrifices, and if ye cease not from sacrificing, the Wrath of God will not cease from you."–Matthew, Aramaic text; Epiphanius, Panarion 30.16,4-5
Summation
The Christian religion was not created by a person named Jesus Christ, but had been in existence for sometime and its rites were usurped, from the Essene sect of the Nazoreans, first by Paul and later by the Romans. While Christians are taught all about the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ, even their own scriptures clearly state that the person crucified was actually Simon. John is the only gospel that clearly states that the person crucified was Jesus and that gospel in all liklihood was written about Simon who was actually Paul, or St. John the Divine. The reference to Simon as the father of Alexander and Rufus, who were the Roman soldiers responsible for the arrest and execution of Simon/Peter and James the Less as well as Simon bar Giora, clearly indicates that the gospels were not written as onsite accounts of the life and crucifixion of Jesus Christ, but were latter day compositions. Both of these events, which ocurred decades after the scriptural crucifixion, point to the total inauthenticity of the gospels. Could this reference mean that Simon, much like Shakepeare was the father of Hamlet, was the father of the counter insurgency responsible for the destruction of the 'Jewish Messianic Movement,' clearly represented by those individuals who were crucified. It is inconceivable that any Jew would have made such a statement. This also confirms that the Simon crucified c 70 CE was not the Apostle Peter, but the Idumean Jewish revolutionary leader Simon bar Giora, for a person cannot die from crucifixion twice.
The person in both the Mandaean and Talmudic literature, where he is compared to Balaam, was Paul and not Jesus. From everything that I could gather, it is possible that Yeshu (Zadok) left Israel for Cornwall after the demise of Judas of Galilee and in all liklihood never returned. The name Jesus Christ was not officially used until after the Nicene Council of 325 CE, when it was agreed that he, and not Apollonius who, during his life, was worshipped by some as a god, would become the iconic figure of the new religion. The life of this fictitious character is based partially on the early life of Yeshai beth Halachmee and partially on the life and teachings of, the Pythagorean philosopher and necromancer, Apollonius of Tyana. The character who gets baptized by John in the gospels is actually Apollonius (Paul) not Jesus. To conceal this fact, which would place Paul in the vicinity of Jerusalem c 30 CE, the conspirators, and in this case I mean Marcion and Lucian, incorporated the miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus from the life of Rabbi Elisha ben Abuiah into the life of Paul. When it came to their attention that Yeshu was much older than Apollonius they moved his birthdate to that of his younger sibling John of Gamala who shared the same lineage.
It seems abundantly clear that Christian writings like the Gospel of Peter, the Shepherd of Hermes, and Thomas the Contender, in which the chief religious figure was only referred to as Lord or Savior, represent an earlier tradition and formed the fabric onto which Orthodox Chrisitanity wove its passion of Jesus Christ.
It was the kabbalistic mystery religious practice of the Nazorean sect known as 'The Way' which was the form of Judaism practiced by the Messianic Jews including the Zealots and the Sicarii. 'The Way' was also another title used to designate the Essene. By the middle of the first century this religion had become the fastest growing religion in the Roman Empire, and it was to stem its growth that the Romans, with the aid of Paul (Apollonius) created a new religious order to compete with it. Perhaps, it was just fate that brought Vespasian, who had heard about Yeshu while in the south of England, and Apollonius together, but who knows.
Although today, the definition of Messiah and Christ are considered interchangeable, due mostly to Christian teachings, this was not always the case. This incompatibility was nowhere more apparent than it was to the Jews, who took their designation of Messiah very seriously. The term Jesus Christ is not of Jewish origin. The title Christ is incompatible with the idea of the Jewish Messiah. To the Jews the Messiah was a kingly warrior who would save the Jewish state by defeating its enemies on the battle field. The Christ on the other hand is an Indian concept which refers to a pacifistic spiritual leader not a military leader. The Jewish Messiah had to be a son of David, but the Nazoreans considered Jesus to be the 'Son of God' and therefore not a true descendant of David. Jesus' illegitimate birth is another reason why the Catholic Church changed Jesus from Yeshu into his half brother John of Gamala. It was Apollonius of Tyana who brought back the Christ concept from India and it is he and not Jesus who was known as the Christ. The Pauline Epistles inform us that the author knows absolutely nothing about Jesus of Nazareth, his life or his teachings yet he is willing to devote his life to being his servant. The Christ Jesus that is mentioned is fashioned after Adam Kadmon, the primal man of the kabbalah, and not a real living person. This is how a Gnostic would view the epistles, but for the uninitiated he (Paul) choreographed a real live crucifixion, casting himself as the crucified savior, Jesus (Simon, Paul). The unconvincing nature of the epistles led the Church to place the gospels, which were created later, before the epistles in the New Testament.
Now, it would seem obvious that since the ministry of Jesus parallels the military campaign of the Roman Emperor Titus that the authors of the gospels used Josephus' 'War of the Jews' as their source, but this could not be the case. Not if the gospels were written c. 70 CE as 'War of the Jews' was not published until c 79 CE, So, Josephus and the authors of the gospels had to be writing concurrently from current events on the ground during the war. This points to only one possible source, that being the cadre of Apollonius, Damis and Lucius.
This brings us back to the 'Tathbit Dala'il Nubuwwat Sayyidina Mahammad.' "HIS DISCIPLES said to him. "Does circumcision help or does it not?" He said to them, "If it helped people's fathers would beget them from their mothers already circumcized."—Gospel of Thomas 53. While I have no idea if Jesus even had a position on circumcision, it is clear from the Jerusalem Council that Paul was opposed to circumcision. So, it is likely that the disgruntled Nazoreans mentioned in the text were actually followers of Paul and not Jesus. While the Council adopted a platform against circumcision they upheld Jewish dietary law, that is with the exception of Paul, who agreed to the Council's decisions, but went about teaching his own religious precepts.
According to the fifth century Bishop of Hippo, St. Augustine, "those Christians who "abstain both from flesh and from wine" are "without number".—St. Augustine, "On the Morals of the Catholic Church 33." Even the author of the Vulgate St. Jerome was a vegetarian. Therefore the question is, Why were the followers of a wine drinking, meat eating religious icon like Jesus vegetarians? I think the answer is simple. These people were not following a religious icon by the name of Jesus Christ, but one by the name of Apollonius.
This raises another problem. Why would a devout vegetarian who travelled to India, a vegetarian country, and brought back scriptures from a vegetarian religion say the following:
"One man hath faith to eat all things: but he that is weak eateth herbs."—Romans 14 Vs. 1-2
"But him that is weak in faith receive ye, yet not to doubtful disputations. "One man hath the Spirit saith expressly, that in later times some shall fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of Devils, Through the hypocrisy of men that speak lies, branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by them that believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving: "For it is sanctified through the word of God and prayer."—1Timothy 4 Vs. 1-5
"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast day or a new moon or a sabbath day: —Colossians 2:16
After the Nicene council, certain "correctors" were appointed whose task it was to rewrite the scriptures, omitting all that pertained to vegetarianism and abstinence from alcohol. This is indicated in the following statement by Archdeacon Wilberforce, who writes: "Some are not aware that, after the Council of Nicea, A.D. 325, the manuscripts of the New Testament were considerably tampered with. Prof. Nestle, in his `Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the Greek Testament,' tells us that certain scholars, called `correctores,' were appointed by the ecclesiastical authorities, and actually commissioned to correct the text of the Scripture in the interest of what was considered orthodoxy."
Why would this be necessary if the scriptures were as claimed by the Church originally written by those professing the Orthodox form of Christianity. These quotes from the Pauline Epistles are obviously latter day Roman interpolations and not the words of Paul. This being the case then how do we know what was originally written by Paul and what was written by Marcion and what was written by Constantine's correctors?
As we have clearly shown Paul claims that he was crucified with Jesus, and Simon claims that it was he who was actually crucified. Hence Paul, which is derived from the Parthian word Paulis which means deceiver, was actually Simon. And, as we have shown in our article on Paul, Apollonius of Tyana was the real Paul.
The scriptures that you find today in your Bible are not those of Yeshu, who may or may not have actually existed, and the Nazorean sect, but reflect the views of the Gnostic Paul and his Roman redactors, who only accepted the concept of a literal crucifixion and rejected the Gnostic view. It is far more logical to believe that a religion that started without a crucified savior added one at a later date, then to believe that some of the faithful forgot that he actually existed. The reason that the Gnostics did not believe in the real live crucified savior Jesus Christ is that they knew the true story behind the crucifixion. The crucifixion pericopes in Mark, Matthew and Luke show without a doubt that the source for the Christian scriptures were the Gnostic schools begun by Simon Magus (Paul). It was the leaders of the Church in Rome which held true to Roman superstitions requiring a real live human sacrifice and resurrection from the dead. The similarities to the Essene come from the fact that Apollonius was probably also the leader of that sect, possibly the Teacher of Righteousness mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls. You didn't have to be born Jewish to be an Essene. The original teachings of Yeshu and the Nazorean sect are what the Roman Christians spent much of the 4th century burning along with any writings mentioning Apollonius. This is why Jesus' views are similar, but not the same as the Essene and why he is pictured as being opposed to the Pharisee. The views he is made to espouse are Roman and not Jewish.
Sources:
http://www.apollonius.net/bust-shroud.html
http://biblesearchers.com/
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/gno/gjb/index.htm
http://www.webcom.com/gnosis/library/grs-mead/gnostic_john_baptist/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judas_of_Galilee
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/eric_laupot/nazoreans.html http://www.luigicascioli.eu/en_argomenti_gesu_apostoli.htm"
http://vridar.wordpress.com/2006/11/26/a-cyrenius-cyrenian-link-between-josephus-and-mark/
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/his/Simon-Magnus.html
http://www.jewish_encyclopedia
http://www.newadvent.org
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html
http://www.mandaeanworld.com/mandaean_glossary3.html
http://www.ntcanon.org/Marcion.shtml
http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/legends.htm
http://www.textexcavation.com/marcioniteprologues.html
http://depts.drew.edu/jhc/eisenman.html
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/josephus/josephus.htm
http://www.geocities.com/nephilimnot/jesus_twin.html
http://www.cabiz.net/heartlink/joseph_of_arimathea.htm
http://www.biblestudy.org/apostlepaul/timeline-life-of-paul-from-birth-to-first-missionary-journey.html
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Gondophares
"Antiquity Unveiled", J.M. Roberts, Esq.
"Apollonius of Tyana the Nazarene" by RW Bernard
"Caesar's Messiah-The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus", Joseph Atwill
"Guardians of the Holy Grail: The Knights Templar", Mark Amaru Pinkham
"King James Version" of the Bible
"King Jesus: From Egypt, Kam to Camelot", Ralph Ellis
"The Christ Conspiracy-The Greatest Story Ever Sold", Acharya S
"The Gnostic Scriptures", Bentley Layton
"The Dutch Radical Approach to the Pauline Epistles", Hermann Detering
"Yeshu", Davied Asia Israel
"The Life of Apollonius of Tyana", Philostratus
"The Redemption of the Peacok Angel", Mark Amaru Pinkham
"The Secret Life of Jesus the Essene", Raymond W. Bernard
Return to Nazoreans / Contents