Two Attestations That Jesus Was NOT Crucified Alive by Rome / Q Source of the Gospel of Mark [Bio of Julius Caesar and the Homeric Epics]
Introduction – The Bio of Julius Caesar Version
Due to a lack of ships, Julius Caesar [Jesus Christ] was only able to transport approximately half of his troops across the sea.
He sent the ships back to Brundisium (modern Brindisi) and commanded Antonius [Peter] to follow with the rest of the troops and their equipment.
Antonius [Peter] hesitated
because of the weather and the cruising enemy fleet of Pompey the Great [John the Baptist].
[Octavian who would become Augustus Caesar is the Beloved Disciple.]
Desperate, Julius Caesar [Jesus Christ] slipped, alone and incognito onto a small boat during the night to help bring his men across.
Using the current of the river which flowed into the sea to his advantage,
he wanted to glide across the water, the breakers [heavy sea waves that breaks into white foam on the shore].
However, when, in the night, the off-shore wind dropped and a strong breeze arose from the sea, the current collided with the sea surge and forced the boat back.
The helmsman despaired, and at that moment Caesar [Christ] revealed himself and said:
“Do not fear, you sail Caesar [Christ] in your boat…”
Introduction – The Gospel of Mark Version
Jesus [Julius] constrained his disciples to get into the ship and to go to the other side before him
unto Bethsaida while he stayed to send away the people who had come to hear him speak.
And when Jesus had sent them away, he departed into a mountain to pray.
And when evening had come, the ship was in the middle of the sea. Jesus was alone on land.
Jesus saw them toiling in rowing. [Had the off-shore wind dropped and a strong breeze arisen from the sea?]
Jesus saw them toiling in rowing for the wind was contrary unto them.
About the fourth watch of the night, Jesus came to them.
When they saw him walking upon the sea [that is the Homeric Epic of the Gospel of Mark’s Q Source part with Hermes floating over the waters],
they supposed it had been a spirit.
Jesus: Be of good cheer, it is I. Be not afraid.
Peter, you’re the helmsman, come on out here.
Peter [Antonius] I need some help, I can’t get all of these soldiers across by myself.
Jesus [Julius] helps him.
= = =
Jesus supposedly crossed Lake Gennesaret but Mark and Matthew do not speak of a lake but a sea: when Jesus calms the storm, “He speaks to the sea: Be still!”
He speaks to the sea by use of the word “thalassa.”
The correct word should have been limne. Luke’s gospel uses the word limne.
Mark and Matthew use the word thalassa because of their closeness to the Q Source which is partly the biography of Julius Caesar. Caesar did cross a sea, the Ionian sea.
(to be continued)
The First Attestation That Jesus Was NOT Crucified Alive by Rome – The Babylonian Talmud
The Mishna systematically sets out to clarify the procedure of hanging, a postmortem punishment.
For sorcery and idolotry, Jesus was killed and hung by Jewish authorities.
Jesus was someone who really practices magic and not just entertains people with optical deceptions.
The Talmud states that a herald announced the execution 40 days before it was to take place.
In the gospels Jesus tells his disciples he will be killed.
Either as a response to the gospels or referencing facts in Jewish history, the Babylonian Talmud convicts Jesus, sentences his Earthly life, executes him, and sentences his afterlife. For further details, see the book Jesus in the Talmud by Peter Schafer, published by Princeton University Press.
Antonius or Mark Antony is the biblical Peter.
We discussed the Mark Antony/Peter episode of Jesus Christ and Julius Caesar helping men with wind problems when crossing water by boat.
Peter: Jesus, you are Christ
Jesus: On you my church will be built.
Mark Antony: Julius Caesar, you are Parenti Optime Merito: Parens, Optimus, Meritus : [in Ancient Greek] Ktistes, Aristos, Chrestos.
[Upon these words, the Cult of Julius Caesar was built.
EXPLANATION:
I should be observed that linguistically, parens, “parent” or “father” and creator in the sense of “founder” especially a “founder of cities” is called ktistes by the Greeks while optimus is usually rendered aristos. Meritus, “meritorious” and bonus from which we get good, better, best yields optimus, the best, translated by the Greek word chrestos, a word whose classical pronunciation was already becoming replaced by the late Hellenistic christos.
The base of Julius Caesar’s statue had the words Parenti Optime Merito.
Greeks would have translated that into their language as Ktistes, Aristos, Christos.
This would not surprise anyone. Greeks were accustomed to addressing their deceased on epitaphs with the word chreste, “good.” For Julius Caesar [Jesus Christ}, the word fit perfectly because he was good, proven by his much acclaimed clemency.
Julius Caesar was even called good, Chrestos, “Christ” by Pompey the Great, his rival in the civil war.
But Christ means anointed.
Nobody would have gained anything by a possible confusion of chrestos-meritorious with christos-annointed; nor would they have taken offense because both priests and kings were anointed. Julius Caesar was a priest and by reputation, a king.
Christos looks like an abbreviation of Pontifex Maximus which Julius Caesar was (while Jesus was a priest on the order of Melchizedek).
What is Pontifex Maximus in Ancient Greek?
Answer: archiereus megistos
Abbreviation/Contraction in Capitol Letters of Pontifex Maximus which Julius Caesar was:
arCHieReus megISTOS = CHRISTSOS
= = =
The gospels are an abridged Hebrew telling of the life Julius Caesar, Christ.
One stab wound hastened Julius Caesar’s death.
One stab wound hastened Jesus’ death.
I really dont see how you come up with Yehoshua being Julius, there is really nothing similar between the two. Julius’ life is pretty well documented (for the time) and Yehoshua’s much less so, but there really isnt any parallels. Pontifex Maximus was a priesthood of the gentiles. The Hebrews of the day would HAVE HAD NOTHING TO DO with such a thing, in their view promoting such an individual would deserve death. I mean seriously glorifying the priest of jupiter?! They wouldnt even say the name of a false god unless forced to, and even then many probably wouldnt.
Caesar was a priest of Jupiter for a short time, early in life and then it was taken from him, which is convenient because a priest of Jupiter couldnt even look at an army. but by the time he had gained power and been elected pontifex maximus he had made a name for himself that no Hebrew would glorify, even the hebrews in that day.
Christos is a translation of Meshiach מָשׁוּחַ translated from anointed, which is a word that existed greek, no need to piece it together. Yehoshua was a priest in the order of Meleck Tzedek מַלְכִּי-צֶדֶק aka the king (meleck) of righteousness (tzedeck) this priesthood is not based on the physical body as is the Levitical priesthood, it is based on the “spiritual” being which has no beginning of days or ending of days, and has no mother or father. Gen 14 accounts for a being known as Meleck Tzedeck, this is not Yehoshua it is a shadow picture, in other words it was a physical individual that represented an archtype and if understood correctly the shadow picture (which was not the real thing) would bring understanding so that when the real thing was witnessed it would be understood for what it is.
In some traditions the gen 14 Meleck was Shem son of Noach, who lived 500 years after the flood, which if each generation had children at 20 years old, Shem could have out lived his children to 22 generations. At the gen 14 incident its about 350 years after the flood and everyone there had probably long forgot where this guy came from, they only knew he had always been, and seemed that he would always be, and since shem came from Noach who was perfect in all his generation, it would seem that shem took after the family traditions and was considered righteous.
Your questioning things and looking for truth which is great, so am I, but I dont think that direction will get you there.
R. Wheeler
There is really nothing similar between the Julius Caesar and Jesus Christ.
Steefen
1. Priestly Authority
2. Went out on the water and reassured men they could cross
3. Forgiveness and Mercy towards Enemies
4. Taking Care of the Poor
5. Enduring Persecutions
6. Beheaded Mentor
7. Betrayal by Friend/Friends
8. Awareness of Impending Death
9. Does Not Put Up a Fight against the Plot to Take His Life
10. Desires No Delay When the End Comes
11. Pierced/stabbed by Longinus
12. Wreath placed on each of their heads
R.Wheeler said
Yehoshua was a priest in the order of Meleck Tzedek מַלְכִּי-צֶדֶק aka the king (meleck) of righteousness (tzedeck) this priesthood is not based on the physical body as is the Levitical priesthood, it is based on the “spiritual” being which has no beginning of days or ending of days, and has no mother or father. Gen 14 accounts for a being known as Meleck Tzedeck, this is not Yehoshua it is a shadow picture, in other words it was a physical individual that represented an archtype and if understood correctly the shadow picture (which was not the real thing) would bring understanding so that when the real thing was witnessed it would be understood for what it is.
In some traditions the gen 14 Meleck was Shem son of Noach, who lived 500 years after the flood, which if each generation had children at 20 years old, Shem could have out lived his children to 22 generations. At the gen 14 incident its about 350 years after the flood and everyone there had probably long forgot where this guy came from, they only knew he had always been, and seemed that he would always be, and since shem came from Noach who was perfect in all his generation, it would seem that shem took after the family traditions and was considered righteous.
What is your point?
Is your position that Hebrews 5: 8-10 should not have referred to Jesus Christ?
|
English: A Lame Person
Latin: Claudo Vicinus
Julius Caesar “Heals Clodios”
Jesus Heals the Lame
Healing the Lame/Clodios
In order to maintain the parallels between the life of Julius Caesar and the Gospels, proper names turn into generic names. One Claudius stands out: Publius Clodius Pulcher.
Julius Caesar’s Biography
There was a house, Julius Caesar’s house.
Clodius entered the house but not through the front door.
He entered with the help of servants.
He wanted to commit the sin of making his lay with Julius Caesar’s wife.
Julius Caesar told him to take what you did laying a bed in my house and walk free.
Julius Caesar forgave the man which also cleared Julius Caesar’s wife, but he divorced her also.
Accusers were horrified at the forgiveness.
The Gospel of Mark
There was a house.
A man entered the house but not through the front door.
He entered the house by the help of servants lowering him through the roof.
The lame man, on his mat, lay on the floor–on his mat of a bed.
Jesus said your sin is forgiven. Arise, and take your mat and walk.
Scribes were horrified at the forgiveness.
Source: Jesus Was Caesar by Francesco Carotta, pages 185-192
Note my first draft of an amazon reader review of this book.
4 out of 5 stars
Search YouTube for the close to two hour documentary film, The Gospel of Caesar. It was posted by God Spanker.
Because I watched this video, I bought this book.
So far, I am giving this book four out of five stars.
Problem #1 Sometimes the arguments are not constructed as tightly as needed.
The majority of critical arguments are constructed tightly.
Problem #2 The book needs an index.
Draft: 5/24/2017 (Wed.)
Steefen said
The flagellation and assassinated King Jesus may be this:Antigonus II Mattathias (Hebrew: מתתיהו אנטיגונוס השני, Matityahu), also known as Antigonus the Hasmonean (died 37 BCE) was the last Hasmonean king of Judea. He was the son of King Aristobulus II of Judea. In 37 BCE Herod handed him over to the Romans for execution [after flagellation], after Antigonus’s three-year reign during which he led the Jews’ fierce struggle for independence against the Romans.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
– Wikipedia
The Second Attestation That Jesus Was Not Crucified Alive
Gospel of John
And Pilate wrote a title and put it on the cross
Jesus of Nazareth, The King of the Jews
Gospel of Matthew
And set up over his head
This is Jesus King of the Jews
Gospels of Luke and Mark
written in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew
King of the Jews
Mark, then Luke: King of the Jews <then Matthew adds Jesus> Jesus King of the Jews
<then John adds of Nazareth> Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews
Basileus did not always mean king, in Greek, it could frequently indicate the Latin imperator as basileia could indicate imperium
The crucifix help up at Julius Caesar’s funeral was a tropaeum.
That is the Gospel of Mark leaving in the original reference to Julius Caesar.
= = =
Gospel of Mark
They crucified him
parted his garments
and cast lots
QUESTION: What garments, plural
The biblical Jesus only had “The Robe” singular
Julius Caesar had garments, plural, put on his funeral pyre before it was set on fire.
That is the Gospel of Mark leaving in the original reference to Julius Caesar.
“If we look at the verb stauro, stauro does not mean crucify but to put up posts or slats or a palisade: fence in.
Christians turned stauro into a torture post to get cross and crucifixion.
Christians also mistranslated kleros to be “cast lots”.
To first century Greek speaking people, kleros originally meant heirloom.
The Christian meaning of stauro and kleros reads:
And when they crucified him, they parted his garments, casting lots upon the garments.
But a Greek of the first century would not have understood the Greek of that English sentence in the Bible.
The original Greek understood by Greeks of the first century would have understood the original reference to Julius Caesar:
and when they were putting up posts or stakes to fence off [Caesar’s body and the stuff under his body].
Three historians attest:
Appianus:
There they collected together pieces of wood and benches and anything they could find for a funeral pyre, throwing upon it adornments of the procession [heirlooms; allotment], some of which were very costly. Some cast their own wreaths upon it and many military awards.
So casting lots for Jesus garment is the Gospel of Mark leaving in the original reference to Julius Caesar. It is not Roman soldiers betting for Jesus’ robe because it has supernatural powers.
Plutarchus:
and they hauled benches, barriers, and tables from the place and helped them around the corpse
[an already dead Julius Caesar, an already dead Jesus Christ]
Suetonius:
and immediately the throng of bystanders heaped on it dry branches and the judges’ chairs and the court benches and whatever else came to hand and could serve as an offering. Then the flute players and actors pulled off their robes … and flung them into the [stauro] fenced off area which was burning.
Likewise, the veterans of Julius Caesar’s legions through valuable arms into the fenced in area where Caesar’s body was burning.
Matrons offered up jewels and their children’s purple fringed tunics.
It is easy to detect that the passage from Mark is an abridgment of Caesar’s funeral.
Jesus was not crucified alive, we are reading the cremation of an already dead Julius Caesar.
Appianus:
Before Caesar was cremated, the people bore him to the Capitol
The Roman derived Capitolium from caput.
An Etruscan king, Olus (Aulus Vulcentanus) was killed and buried there and that the Capitoline temple and hill received its name after his skull was later found there.
Gospel of Mark
They bore Jesus to Golgotha, the place of a skull.
= = =
In both the Caesar and the Jesus accounts, the Greek word phero (pherousin) is used which means to bear or to carry.
Both Julius Caesar and Jesus Christ are born/carried to a place of the skull.
Okay Steefen, looks like you are trying awfully hard to convince readers of something (11 posts under this subject alone!). But I still cannot tell what you are trying to convince us of. Maybe if you went back to your basic thesis “Jesus was not crucified alive”. What does that mean? Is there a meaning difference between “… not crucified” and “… not crucified alive”? There seems to be, why else would you put the “alive” word in there? Though I cannot figure out what the difference is.
So do you think there never was a historical Jesus of Nazareth who preached in Galilee, gained a following before going to Jerusalem to be executed? The entire story is fictitious, or only part of the story? If entirely fictitious, who made up the story and why? Had to be many people involved in the fabrication since there are several authors involved in writing Jesus stories. If partially fictitious, what parts do you think are historical and which parts fictitious? And what evidence do you have that it is fictitious? I’m sorry but finding parallels between Julius Caesar and Jesus Christ is not any kind of attestation. It may help provide back-up evidence but that is all. If you want to convince me of whatever your point is, or anyone else, you have to do a much better job of providing evidence than you have been providing.
mreichert said
“Jesus was not crucified alive”. What does that mean? Is there a meaning difference between “… not crucified” and “… not crucified alive”? There seems to be, why else would you put the “alive” word in there? Though I cannot figure out what the difference is.
The origin and significance of Easter Week is quite different with Jesus not dying on the cross
vs Jesus dying on the cross.
What say you?
mreichert said
“Jesus was not crucified alive”. What does that mean?
Earlier Post
The First Attestation That Jesus Was NOT Crucified Alive by Rome – The Babylonian Talmud
The Mishna systematically sets out to clarify the procedure of hanging, a postmortem punishment.
For sorcery and idolotry, Jesus was killed and hung by Jewish authorities.
Given crosses on and in Christian churches are ubiquitous, the origin and significance of how Jesus died is quite different 1) if Jesus was stoned to death and then for further punishment, after death, was hung; 2) if Jesus’s manner of death is not a historical fact but a theological fact with a) Jewish King Antigonus being flagellated and not Jesus being the historical fact, b) Julius Caesar being stabbed by Longinus and not Jesus stabbed by Longinus being the historical fact, and c) an effigy of Julius Caesar held high on a cross at his funeral to show his cause of death and not Jesus dead on a cross by flagellation, crucifixion, and stabbing by Longinus being the historical fact.
It is important to know morals of historical fiction, theological truths of historical fiction, but also historical facts.
Well Steefen, you seem to have a hard time giving a clear answer to a simple question. What I gather is that you are saying that Jesus may have been already dead before being crucified? Is that what you think? A simple “yes” or “no” answer would suffice, although I am beginning to think that it is impossible for you to answer a “yes” or “no” question with a yes or a no.
So, with regard to the rest of your “attestation”, there is zero evidence that Jesus was stoned and then hung. Zero. So why do you keep bringing that up? The only evidence we have, apparently independent testimonials, is that Jesus was crucified. “Crucified alive” if you want to use those words. If you have evidence that indicates these testimonials are incorrect, I would love to see that. But your “attestations” mean nothing, provide no evidence of anything.
mreichert said
Well Steefen, you seem to have a hard time giving a clear answer to a simple question. What I gather is that you are saying that Jesus may have been already dead before being crucified? Is that what you think? A simple “yes” or “no” answer would suffice, although I am beginning to think that it is impossible for you to answer a “yes” or “no” question with a yes or a no.So, with regard to the rest of your “attestation”, there is zero evidence that Jesus was stoned and then hung. Zero. So why do you keep bringing that up? The only evidence we have, apparently independent testimonials, is that Jesus was crucified. “Crucified alive” if you want to use those words. If you have evidence that indicates these testimonials are incorrect, I would love to see that. But your “attestations” mean nothing, provide no evidence of anything.
We are waiting to read how you discredit
a) the Babylonian Talmud (where Jesus was dead before hung on a “tree”)
b) the systematic use of Julius Caesar’s biography in the Gospels (Julius Caesar was dead before his effigy was hung for all to see)
mreichert said
The only evidence we have, apparently independent testimonials, is that Jesus was crucified.
Four gospels, historical fictions, do not constitute evidence.
Four gospels which systematically use the biographies of Julius Caesar, Vespasian, and Titus do not constitute evidence.
Four gospels which systematically use content from the Homeric epics do not constitute evidence.
I know almost nothing about the Babylonian Talmud, so I looked it up. I found one quote (from someone who knows about it) stating that the Talmud references “… give no historically reliable information about the teachings or actions of Jesus during his life.” Okay, good enough for me. Is that discrediting the Talmud? I don’t know, perhaps. But I will say Steefen that you appear to give it too much credence.
I will also say that gross similarities between Julius Caesar and Jesus Christ do not discredit the gospels as copied from a biography of Julius Caesar. The dissimilarities between the gospel accounts and Julius Caesar’s life are hugely greater than any perceived similarities.
But most importantly I am still trying to figure out where you are coming from, what you believe. I am disappointed, but not surprised, that you could not answer one simple yes or no question. Through all your too-many-words to express too-little-meaning entries I finally gather that you think the gospels are historical fiction based on various other biographies and Homeric epics, and that the Talmud provides some kind of accurate biography of Jesus. Okay, easy enough to disagree with you on those points.
I personally think that the gospels are typical of many biographies, containing some historically accurate information along with lots of embellishments and plain old made-up stories. There is too much that rings true (to me) to pass them off as fiction. On the other hand stories of immaculate conception, born in Bethlehem, rising from the dead, other miracles, strike me as embellishments or just plain made up stories.
You on the other hand seem to think that the Talmud is the only accurate portrayal of Jesus, and everything else about him is fictitious based on someone else’s biography or writing. Am I correct? If you want to convince me or anyone else of your point of view then it would be worth while to explain your point of view first, then defend it. Otherwise someone like me has no good idea of what you are talking about. You may as well be talking to, and trying to convince, yourself.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)