Ralph Ellis
I found an Adam and an Eve.

Steefen
And back in 2010, I was inspired to do this video about your thoughts on an Adam and an Eve.
It has 6,614 views.

** you do not have permission to see this link **

Author Ralph Ellis
Josephus says the Hyksos were the Israelites.

Steve Campbell, Author of Historical Accuracy
The Hyksos were in the northern lower kingdom. They had their pharaohs.

The southern upper kingdom gave them incentives to leave the land of Egypt.

end of video, next we have

Bart Ehrman, 7/20/12 post, Paul the Persecutor and the Historical Jesus

(We covered the May30th, 2016 post Paul, Persecutor of the Church.)

And we have N.T. Wright: Paul Invented Christian Theology.

Finally, the thread can be reviewed for what conclusions can be drawn for New Testament Criticism. For instance, Em-Manu-El and the crown of thorns do point us to the biblical Jesus referencing King Monobazus and Queen Helena’s royal line.

Studying the history of Edessa, Armenia, and Parthia puts us in the 20s and 30s CE at the palace of King Monobazus, Queen Helena, and Prince Izates.

The gospels tell us the timeline of the gospels covers the ministry of Jesus to the Tribulation of the First Jewish-Roman War and the Jewish Civil War.
New Testament Criticism must cover is time period (not just via Paul).

Robert said

Steefen said

Finally, the thread can be reviewed for what conclusions can be drawn for New Testament Criticism. For instance, Em-Manu-El and the crown of thorns do point us to the biblical Jesus referencing King Monobazus and Queen Helena’s royal line.

No, this conclusion is not supported. Immanuel comes from Matthew’s use of Isaiah 7,14. I’ve explained the meaning of Immanuel to you ** you do not have permission to see this link **.

  

Steefen, Argumentation Specialist

Your explanation is insufficient.

Prophecy is also insufficient.

The gospels use a literary technique of reading into biblical prophecies allusions to various historical circumstances and events contemporary with and related to the Hebrew Bible. So, yes, author/s of Matthew certainly could be alluding to Edessan royalty with Em-Manu-El and King Jesus crowned with a crown of thorns (worn by Edessan royalty). [Ralph Ellis uses a term similar to pesher.]

Robert said
Well, at least you’ve backed off from a conclusion that Matthew did point to King Monobazus and Queen Helena’s royal line to a lesser claim that Matthew could be alluding to Edessan royalty. Anything’s possible. But what’s likely? How do historians and other critical scholars judge what is historically probable? Have any concluded that your explanation is most likely or even probable in the technical sense? In the past you’ve claimed, that critical scholars do not accept your theories because of academic politics–is that still your contention here? How about looking at how pesher exegesis was actually done in this time period?

  

I did not back off from a conclusion that Matthew pointed to King Monobazus and Queen Helena’s royal line.

“Have any concluded that your explanation is most likely or even probable in the technical sense?”
Bring that up with Ralph Ellis. Maybe he will listen to you.

Critical scholars do not accept my theories?
Again, for me, St. Peter is not a composite figure of critical scholars selected by you, Robert. LOL. You overstate your competence and service.
If a critical scholar has outlined and detailed problems with my book, I would know their names and our correspondence would not have you copied.

How pesher exegesis is actually done?
Again, I decline to be misinformed by you, Robert. Ralph Ellis has put forth his position, and judgment does not depend on other examples of gospel authors pulling terms and motifs out of earlier scripture.

Robert
Steefen, have I ever once misinformed you?

Steefen
Yes. You have your lines of reasons which my better lines of reason cannot accept.
Your conclusions about Jesus living in the late 20s / early 30s are preposterous.

Robert
As for pesher exegesis, I was speaking of examples from Qumran texts. If Ellis uses the idea of pesher to say Immanuel refers to Edessan royalty, it seems like he doesn’t really understand how pesher exegesis works.

Steefen
Your opinion has been read, not accepted as valid or persuasive.

Robert
I was speaking of the disdain critical scholars have for the fringe theories of people like Ellis, theories that you adopt and adapt as if they had any credible standing at the exclusion real scholarship.

Steefen
I am a judge of critical scholarship. Your critical scholars espouse the preposterous claim that Jesus existed as a unique biological human being crucified by Pontius Pilate. Your method of argumentation is inferior to mine even though you throw out “critical scholarship” this and “real scholarship” that. I have judged critical and real scholarship and I have judged “fringe” independent investigation. My editing and argumentation skills serve me well. Your “camp” excludes important findings and important conclusions and misinforms.

Robert
Richard Carrier, who has the most academic defense of mythicism, would give the historicist position a 30% chance of being correct.
What probability percentage would you attribute to an historicist position?

Steve Campbell, Author of Historical Accuracy
Jesus born of a virgin, no biological impregnation by a human male, who ran afoul of Leviticus 17:10 in the late 20s/early 30s?
Answer: zero %.

Robert
So would you agree with Ellis who claims that academics have blinkers [what? blinders?] and closed minds and that people need tinfoil hats to listen to academic dissemblers?

Steefen
Ellis has more experience than I do in that sphere. I am not qualified yet to answer that question. I would need a lot more public relations. Ellis has years on me knocking on doors.

As a very good editor, I would say, I rank

Francesco Carotta with a grade of B- for delivering his material (not for content)

Ralph Ellis with a grade of C for delivering his material (not for content)

Joseph Atwill with a grade of C- for delivering his material (not for content)

As an author, myself, I needed patience (not tinfoil hats) reading the works of Carotta, Ellis, and Atwill. An author’s writing should be B+, A, or A+.

= = =

Excuse me for a second.

Yes, Claudius was a historian but his works or lost except for the Lyon Tablet.

The Lyon Tablet is an ancient bronze tablet that bears the transcript of a speech given by the ** you do not have permission to see this link **.

That’s what I have so far. // Robert Graves in Claudius, the God says King Agrippa, father of Agrippa II, thought he could be the prophesied messiah. So, yes: we have a self-proclaimed king and messiah killed by Rome. The Manu royal line had competition. … No, I do not know if any of the historians and I do not know if Robert Graves comment on Tiberius, Caligula, or Claudius interacting with them BUT Claudius did know of the King of Osroene, Sampsigeramus.

Osroene is in lower Armenia. Samsigeramus, I am getting, was a priest-king in Syria. Graves does say there was a Cotys in Lower Armenia.

Cotys IX or Kotys IX (name in ** you do not have permission to see this link ** and Pythodoris I of Thrace,

Osrhoene is adjacent left to Adiabene (Queen Helena and her husband).

Either way, Emperor Claudius was concerned with Agrippa probably trying to, as Messiah, take over the Roman Empire using Syria and Osrhoene, and Monobazus and Helena, representing Adiabene and Judea since they had a palace there. So, Claudius had Agrippa, with allusions of Messiah, poisoned.

The day Agrippa was poisoned, he appeared publicly in a robe that made him shine like an angel–his transfiguration.

= = =

Okay, I’m back. I finished my reply to you Robert. Anything I did not reply to, I am not replying to. Maybe if you write one or more books, one of which is of interest to me, I read it, and write a thoughtful, well-drafted, amazon verified purchaser review, you will have my input on how you reason.