Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-04-2013, 07:20 PM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(04-04-2013 07:05 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  I'm reading alla that Dio stuff. Thumbsup

Of course. You're smart. And inquisitive.

Someone else around here won't be bothered though.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
05-04-2013, 01:25 AM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2013 02:16 AM by ralphellis.)
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(04-04-2013 03:44 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(03-04-2013 11:34 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Sorry Ralph. Jerusalem was not destroyed in 70 CE. That happened after the bar Kochba revolt about 50 years later. The temple was, not the city.

Ralph...you're getting the first and second Jewish wars mixed up.

Hadrian was emperor from 117-138. He banned all Jews from Jerusalem after the SECOND war of 132-135.

Jews returned to Jerusalem after the first war, including the Nazarenes.



There were two wars, and all the Jews were exiled after both of them (but not cities like Tiberias that surrendered straight away). Is that a difficult concept?


But when Titus had composed the troubles in Judea, and conjectured
that the lands which I had in Judea would bring me no profit, because a
garrison to guard the country was afterward to pitch there, he gave me
another country in the plain. Life 76

So this Fronto slew all those that had been seditious and robbers, who were
impeached one by another; but of the young men he chose out the tallest
and most beautiful, and reserved them for the triumph; and as for the
rest of the multitude that were above seventeen years old, he put them
into bonds, and sent them to the Egyptian mines
Titus also sent a
great number into the provinces, as a present to them, that they might
be destroyed upon their theatres, by the sword and by the wild beasts;
but those that were under seventeen years of age were sold for slaves.

Now the number of those that were carried captive during this
whole war was collected to be ninety-seven thousand; as was the number
of those that perished during the whole siege eleven hundred thousand,
the greater part of whom were indeed of the same nation [as Jerusalem], but not belonging to the city itself.

from its first building, till this last
destruction, were two thousand one hundred and seventy-seven years; yet
hath not its great antiquity, nor its vast riches, nor the diffusion
of its nation over all the habitable earth, nor the greatness of
the veneration paid to it on a religious account, been sufficient to
preserve it from being destroyed.
War 6:9, 6:10


There were 97,000 slaves taken, and 1,100,000 killed. Even allowing for Josephusian exaggeration, this was a complete destruction and exile of Jerusalem.

And try this...

It is estimated that as many as one million Jews died in the Great Revolt against Rome. When people today speak of the almost two-thousand-year span of Jewish homelessness and exile, they are dating it from the failure of the revolt and the destruction of the Temple. Indeed, the Great Revolt of 66-70, followed some sixty years later by the Bar Kokhba revolt, were the greatest calamities in Jewish history prior to the Holocaust. In addition to the more than one million Jews killed, these failed rebellions led to the total loss of Jewish political authority in Israel until 1948. This loss in itself exacerbated the magnitude of later Jewish catastrophes, since it precluded Israel from being used as a refuge for the large numbers of Jews fleeing persecutions elsewhere. Jewish Virtual Library.


The Diaspora Jews of Europe would not be dating their exile from the Jewish Revolt, if this was not a complete exile of the Jews - more so than even the Bar Kochbar uprising.

And by the way - Bar Kochbar was the 'Son of the Star', and so he carried the same name as John the Baptist, Saul-Josephus, and in some respects Jesus too. Thus the Bar Kochbar uprising was probably by the same family or the same Nazarene cult.





(04-04-2013 05:16 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I can't buy the idea Josephus=Paul=the gospel authors.

I think all 3+ were batting for the same team....the Roman government....under Vespasian and Titus' direction, but they weren't the same men.

There is a really good podcast here,
http://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/the_...roved.html


Yes, a good podcast. The only omissions are:

a. The Colosseum was built using funds captured from Queen helena in Judaea - including the Temple's golden menorah.

b. That the Eastern Star Prophesy Vespasian used to become Emperor originally belonged to Jesus. This was the Eastern Star that Jesus was born under.

Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him. Math 2:2


Note that Jesus was 'born as a king', he did not become one. But which king? A clue is here, where Jesus is called the 'Only Begotten Son':

No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. Joh 1:18


But of course the other 'Only Begotten Son' in this era was King Izas, the son of King Monobazus:

Yet did King Monobazus openly place all his affections on this his Only Begotten Son Izates (Izas). (Josephus, Antiquities 20:2:1)


But King Izas was the leader of the Jewish Revolt, who was crucified in the Kidron Valley alongside two other leaders. But only one of these survived, who was taken down from the cross by Josephus Flavius (of Arimathaea). All sound rather familiar??


But if you agree that Jesus was King Izas, then you will eventually be forced to see that Saul was Josephus (and yes, he was working for the Romans). It is the only conclusion you can come to.

Christianity did not want its followers to know that Saul was a Roman spy and quisling, any more than they wanted their followers to know that Jesus fought the Romans as the leader of the Revolt. The very basis of their creed dictated that:

a. Saul be separated from the vile quisling traitor, Josephus.
b. Jesus be separated from the royal warlord, King Izas.

And that separation was achieved by Saul-Josephus himself. After the Jewish Revolt, he was the only Jew left standing, and he could delete or amend any text he so cared to do. He could even invent (or rather continue to promote)** his new Rome-friendly Simple Judaism, and he did that too. And today we call this creed, Christianity.





** Saul-Josephus invented Simple Judaism during his evangelical travels around the Mediterranean. Surprisingly, the basis of this creed was actually given (reluctantly) by James, the brother of Jesus, who was badgered by Saul-Josephus into allowing Gentiles into a parallel pseudo-Judaic creed. See Act 15:13-20.


.











.
Find all posts by this user
05-04-2013, 02:05 AM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2013 02:22 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(05-04-2013 01:25 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  
(04-04-2013 03:44 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Ralph...you're getting the first and second Jewish wars mixed up.

Hadrian was emperor from 117-138. He banned all Jews from Jerusalem after the SECOND war of 132-135.

Jews returned to Jerusalem after the first war, including the Nazarenes.


There were two wars, and all the Jews were exiled after both of them (but not cities like Tiberias that surrendered straight away). Is that a difficult concept?




But when Titus had composed the troubles in Judea, and conjectured
that the lands which I had in Judea would bring me no profit, because a
garrison to guard the country was afterward to pitch there, he gave me
another country in the plain. Life 76

So this Fronto slew all those that had been seditious and robbers, who were
impeached one by another; but of the young men he chose out the tallest
and most beautiful, and reserved them for the triumph; and as for the
rest of the multitude that were above seventeen years old, he put them
into bonds, and sent them to the Egyptian mines
Titus also sent a
great number into the provinces, as a present to them, that they might
be destroyed upon their theatres, by the sword and by the wild beasts;
but those that were under seventeen years of age were sold for slaves.

Now the number of those that were carried captive during this
whole war was collected to be ninety-seven thousand; as was the number
of those that perished during the whole siege eleven hundred thousand,
the greater part of whom were indeed of the same nation [as Jerusalem], but not belonging to the city itself.

from its first building, till this last
destruction, were two thousand one hundred and seventy-seven years; yet
hath not its great antiquity, nor its vast riches, nor the diffusion
of its nation over all the habitable earth, nor the greatness of
the veneration paid to it on a religious account, been sufficient to
preserve it from being destroyed.
War 6:9, 6:10


There were 97,000 slaves taken, and 1,100,000 killed. Even allowing for Josephusian exaggeration, this was a complete destruction and exile of Jerusalem.

And try this...

It is estimated that as many as one million Jews died in the Great Revolt against Rome. When people today speak of the almost two-thousand-year span of Jewish homelessness and exile, they are dating it from the failure of the revolt and the destruction of the Temple. Indeed, the Great Revolt of 66-70, followed some sixty years later by the Bar Kokhba revolt, were the greatest calamities in Jewish history prior to the Holocaust. In addition to the more than one million Jews killed, these failed rebellions led to the total loss of Jewish political authority in Israel until 1948. This loss in itself exacerbated the magnitude of later Jewish catastrophes, since it precluded Israel from being used as a refuge for the large numbers of Jews fleeing persecutions elsewhere. Jewish Virtual Library.


The Diaspora Jews of Europe would not be dating their exile from the Jewish Revolt, if this was not a complete exile of the Jews - more so than even the Bar Kochbar uprising.


And by the way - Bar Kochbar was the 'Son of the Star', and so he carried the same name as John the Baptist, Saul-Josephus, and in some respects Jesus too. Thus the Bar Kochbar uprising was probably by the same family or the same Nazarene cult.


.

Hey Ralph, I've never read anywhere that Bar Kockbar was a Nazarene....in fact I've read he definitely wasn't.
My friend and author Douglas Lockhart has written extensively on the Nazarenes. You will find this summary interesting...

http://douglaslockhart.com/pdf/THE%20NAZ...20SECT.pdf

PS I've always understood the Jews returned to Jerusalem in the years after the first revolt. Do you have any evidence that they were permanently banned?

PPS here's another take on it..
http://www.jeremiahhaber.com/2007/07/no-...le-of.html
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
05-04-2013, 03:03 AM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2013 03:13 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
05-04-2013, 03:18 AM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
.

(04-04-2013 10:59 AM)Doctor X Wrote:  *****


(03-04-2013 12:15 PM)Doctor X Wrote:  ******


Hey, Doc, quit deleting your old posts.

You were quick enough to write them, so either substantiate them or retract them with good grace.


.
Find all posts by this user
05-04-2013, 03:57 AM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(04-04-2013 07:20 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(04-04-2013 07:05 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  I'm reading alla that Dio stuff. Thumbsup

Of course. You're smart. And inquisitive.

Someone else around here won't be bothered though.

Guy is such a gossip. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
05-04-2013, 07:01 AM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2013 07:13 AM by ralphellis.)
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(05-04-2013 03:03 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  .Ok Ralph, I've been sitting and thinking about your ideas for a while. Would you answer a few questions for me please?

How do you see James, the brother of Jesus, fitting into all of this? Please note that at least five or six contemporary or near contemporary historians claim that this James was the brother of Jesus. Are you saying that this James was the brother of King' Izas?

If your Jesus did his thing in the 60s, are you saying that Matthew's mention of Jesus being born circa 4BCE and Luke's mention of Jesus being born circa 6A.D. are interpolations? Are you saying that the gospels mentions of Pontius Pilate are also interpolations? How do you explain the gospels' mention of John the Baptist and Herod? Both of these characters were not around in the 60s.

If Paul and Josephus are the same person, why are their writings so obviously different? If Josephus wrote all the gospels why have millions of biblical scholars not worked this out already? Why are all the four gospels written in a different style and with often markedly different emphasis? If Paul was actually Josephus and Josephus was writing about Jesus in the 60s, why didn't Josephus go back and turn Paul's Christ into someone similar to Jesus?

Who do you think wrote Acts?

Who, in your opinion, are the relatives of Jesus, otherwise known as the Desposyni? Allow me to cut and paste a little of my book so everyone knows a little about them...


James was the elder brother of Jesus.
.... In the Josephusan record he is Izas-Monobazuz the elder (Josephus continually confuses father and two sons, as they have nearly the same titles).
.... In the historical record, he was King Manu (Emmanuel) V of Edessa.

Josephus says that Jesus (Izas-Manu VI) was the favourite, but since he was away (in Jerusalem??) his elder brother of the same name (biblical James) took the throne until he came back. James-Manu V was therefore king from AD 50 to AD 57, when Jesus-Izas-Manu returned to Edessa-Adiabene. James abdicated in AD 57, but was (possibly) killed by Saul-Josephus in about AD 62. The Recognitions are confused as to whether James died, or whether he was crippled. If he was Stephen, as Professor Eisenman maintains, then he was killed. (Stephen merely means 'the Crowned One'). This may be another reason for Saul-Josephus being sent to Nero in '63. (There is further confusion, as Saul-Josephus was supposed to be in prison or under house arrest in 62. Day-release, perhaps??)

Jesus could well have been born in AD 4, as the NT claims. He would then have been 66 during the Jewish War - not impossible by any means. Bishop Irenaeus says he was 'over 50 years of age', and seems to say he died in AD 98 ish.

Actually, the works of Saul and Josephus are not different at all. In fact, their books are virtual copies of each other, with major items like the armed gathering on the Mount of Olives being fleshed out in much more detail in Jewish War. In the historical version of this armed assault, Jesus-Izas (the Egyptian False Prophet) had more than 30,000 men and was ready to take Jerusalem by force of arms. This is why the Roman guard arrested him, and why it took a whole spira to do so. This was not a dozen disciples with swords, this was 30,000 armed men, which is why it took a whole spira to subdue them.

The similarities betewwn Saul and Josephus are numerous, and have been well documented in my books and elsewhere. Indeed, William Whiston says the very same thing.

Thus Saul-Josephus wrote: Antiquities, Jewish War, Life, Against Apion, Acts of the Apostles, Gospel of Luke, and most of the Judaean Talmud. A prolific writer if ever there was one. And do remember that Saul and Josephus had the same publisher (scriptorium), led by Epaphroditus - which is another reason they were the same person.

The other gospels had different authors, but nothing was produced in this era and region without Saul-Josephus' permission, so I am sure he would still have been editor in chief of the other gospels (it is alsways good to have other supporters write accounts that back up your story).



.
Find all posts by this user
05-04-2013, 06:33 PM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2013 06:37 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(05-04-2013 07:01 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  
(05-04-2013 03:03 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  .Ok Ralph, I've been sitting and thinking about your ideas for a while. Would you answer a few questions for me please?

How do you see James, the brother of Jesus, fitting into all of this? Please note that at least five or six contemporary or near contemporary historians claim that this James was the brother of Jesus. Are you saying that this James was the brother of King' Izas?

If your Jesus did his thing in the 60s, are you saying that Matthew's mention of Jesus being born circa 4BCE and Luke's mention of Jesus being born circa 6A.D. are interpolations? Are you saying that the gospels mentions of Pontius Pilate are also interpolations? How do you explain the gospels' mention of John the Baptist and Herod? Both of these characters were not around in the 60s.

If Paul and Josephus are the same person, why are their writings so obviously different? If Josephus wrote all the gospels why have millions of biblical scholars not worked this out already? Why are all the four gospels written in a different style and with often markedly different emphasis? If Paul was actually Josephus and Josephus was writing about Jesus in the 60s, why didn't Josephus go back and turn Paul's Christ into someone similar to Jesus?

Who do you think wrote Acts?

Who, in your opinion, are the relatives of Jesus, otherwise known as the Desposyni? Allow me to cut and paste a little of my book so everyone knows a little about them...


James was the elder brother of Jesus.
.... In the Josephusan record he is Izas-Monobazuz the elder (Josephus continually confuses father and two sons, as they have nearly the same titles).
.... In the historical record, he was King Manu (Emmanuel) V of Edessa.

Josephus says that Jesus (Izas-Manu VI) was the favourite, but since he was away (in Jerusalem??) his elder brother of the same name (biblical James) took the throne until he came back. James-Manu V was therefore king from AD 50 to AD 57, when Jesus-Izas-Manu returned to Edessa-Adiabene. James abdicated in AD 57, but was (possibly) killed by Saul-Josephus in about AD 62. The Recognitions are confused as to whether James died, or whether he was crippled. If he was Stephen, as Professor Eisenman maintains, then he was killed. (Stephen merely means 'the Crowned One'). This may be another reason for Saul-Josephus being sent to Nero in '63. (There is further confusion, as Saul-Josephus was supposed to be in prison or under house arrest in 62. Day-release, perhaps??)

Jesus could well have been born in AD 4, as the NT claims. He would then have been 66 during the Jewish War - not impossible by any means. Bishop Irenaeus says he was 'over 50 years of age', and seems to say he died in AD 98 ish.

Actually, the works of Saul and Josephus are not different at all. In fact, their books are virtual copies of each other, with major items like the armed gathering on the Mount of Olives being fleshed out in much more detail in Jewish War. In the historical version of this armed assault, Jesus-Izas (the Egyptian False Prophet) had more than 30,000 men and was ready to take Jerusalem by force of arms. This is why the Roman guard arrested him, and why it took a whole spira to do so. This was not a dozen disciples with swords, this was 30,000 armed men, which is why it took a whole spira to subdue them.

The similarities betewwn Saul and Josephus are numerous, and have been well documented in my books and elsewhere. Indeed, William Whiston says the very same thing.

Thus Saul-Josephus wrote: Antiquities, Jewish War, Life, Against Apion, Acts of the Apostles, Gospel of Luke, and most of the Judaean Talmud. A prolific writer if ever there was one. And do remember that Saul and Josephus had the same publisher (scriptorium), led by Epaphroditus - which is another reason they were the same person.

The other gospels had different authors, but nothing was produced in this era and region without Saul-Josephus' permission, so I am sure he would still have been editor in chief of the other gospels (it is alsways good to have other supporters write accounts that back up your story).







.

Hi Ralph. Thanks for your reply.

So ...James was the brother of Jesus. Agreed. But...didn't you claim King Izas (who you say is Jesus) was an "only begotten son?"

When I google "Izas-Monobazuz the elder" I get ONE reference... this one. It seems the internet world has never heard of this character.

I'm no expert on Josephus, but I can't see why "James" has to be someone else. Why can't "James" be...um..."James." Here is what Josephus writes about James, and most historians (but not all) think that this James is in fact the brother of Jesus.

“The younger Ananus, who had been appointed to the high priesthood, was rash in his temper and unusually daring. He followed the school of the Sadducees, who are indeed more heartless than any of the other Jews, as I have already explained, when they sit in judgment. Possessed of such a character, Ananus thought that he had a favorable opportunity because Festus was dead and Albinas was still on the way. And so he convened the judges of the Sanhedrin, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, the one called Christ, whose name was James, and certain others, and accusing them of having transgressed the law delivered them up to be stoned. Those of the inhabitants of the city who were considered the most fair-minded and who were strict in observance of the law were offended at this. They therefore secretly sent to King Agrippa urging him, for Ananus had not even been correct in his first step, to order him to desist from any further such actions. Certain of them even went to meet Albinus, who was on his way from Alexandria, and informed him that Ananus had no authority to convene the Sanhedrin without his consent. Convinced by these words, Albinus angrily wrote to Ananus threatening to take vengeance upon him. King Agrippa, because of Ananus' action, deposed him from the high priesthood which he had held for three months and replaced him with Jesus the son of Damnaeus.” (Antiquities of the Jews, chapter 29)

I agree with you about Bishop Irenaeus. He seems totally confused as to how old Jesus was when he passed on.

Despite my lack of expert knowledge on Josephus, I'm afraid I don't see the similarities in the writings of Paul and Josephus that you see. Paul was a religious fruitcake, with his head in the clouds, whereas Josephus was a matter of fact historian. It's a very long stretch to claim that they were the same person. I do accept that there are some similarities in their lives, but that doesn't mean they're the same person. Extraordinary claims, such as you're making, require extraordinary evidence. The burden of proof is on you to prove that they were the same person.

Please enlighten me on what a "Spira" is. I've looked it up on google and in the dictionary and it doesn't seem to relate to what you're talking about.

I much prefer your idea that Josephus supervised the writing of the gospels rather than writing them himself. I don't think there's any linguistic evidence the four gospels were written by the same author.

Who, if anyone, are the other brothers and sisters of Jesus frequently mentioned in the Gospels?

Do you have any comments to make about the desposyni mentioned by many contemporary and near contemporary historians? Are you aware that the Emperor Domitian (81-96) sort some of these men out and interviewed them, as he imagined they were descended from David and therefore potential future messiahs?

Who do you think wrote the gospel of the Nazarenes upon which some of the gospel of Matthew may be based?

Please explain Pontius Pilate's and Herod's and Caiaphas' appearances in the gospels if the story is based in the 60's, not the early 30's.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
05-04-2013, 06:46 PM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2013 06:54 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
Ralph, you claim, without explanation, that Josephus wrote "most of the Talmud"

I hope you agree that josephus was a first century historian. Please note that the Talmud was written at the very earliest in the second century, And much of it in the fifth century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

Please provide some evidence that Josephus wrote "most of the Talmud"

PS google doesn't distinguish between "judaean Talmud" (your words) and "Talmud"
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
05-04-2013, 11:10 PM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
And!

I was watching Egyptian pharoahs all day, and it doesn't seem likely Psusennes could have been the actual David. He has this known pedigree, this list of likely accomplishments... it just seems like, you know, conflation. Big Grin

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: