Caesar's Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus:Flavian Signature Edition (55 page)

It is important to bear in mind that because Josephus’ time sequences are fiction, there is no real way to know when Jerusalem was destroyed or when Masada fell. In fact, if we conclude that all the dates in Josephus are untrustworthy, we lose our entire chronological understanding of the first century. But this is beside the point with regard to this work. All we need to know is whether Josephus was
intentionally
creating the impression that it was seven years from the beginning of the war until the fall of Masada. And of this we can be certain, because the precise alignment of the dates required to “prove” that Daniel’s prophecies were coming to pass, could only have been evidence of God’s hand on earth or – have been created intentionally.

In fact, all the dates Josephus mentions that are in alignment with the New Testament are to be
expected.
Once Josephus has linked events from the war to Daniel’s prophecies, he cannot stop until the conclusion of the “week”—that is, three and a half years from when the “daily sacrifice” ended. Just as, once the New Testament began the forty-year cycle of the Exodus with the establishment of its Passover Lamb, there could be no stopping until the “men of war were consumed because they obeyed not the voice of the Lord.”

The Book of Daniel states:

Then he shall confirm a covenant for one week; but in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering, and on the wing of one abomination shall be the one who makes desolate …
¹⁹⁴

Once Josephus has shown that the end of the daily sacrifice occurs exactly three and a half years from the beginning of the “week,” that is, from the beginning of the war, he must stay within the confines of Daniel’s prophecies in order to prove that they have “come to pass.” He must conclude the seven-year “week” three and a half years from the date he gives for the end of the daily sacrifice. He orients the reader to this time structure with the title he creates for the chapter of
Wars of the Jews
that describes the destruction of Masada:

CONTAINING THE INTERVAL OF ABOUT THREE YEARS.  FROM THE TAKING OF JERUSALEM BY TITUS, TO THE SEDITION OF THE JEWS AT CYRENE.

Notice that this chapter’s title uses the same device that the author used to orient the fall of Masada to the forty-year cycle. The two streams of theological support for Christianity, Moses and Daniel, have been fused. They are heading for a simultaneous conclusion at Masada on the day Christianity replaces Judaism.

Josephus outlines the symbolic landscape of his theological coup
by recording that the leader of the Jewish rebels at Masada was another Eleazar—who, as noted above, was a descendant of Judas the Galilean, and, like his ancestor, a leader of the Sicarii.

The New Testament and Josephus work together to create a subtle but clear relationship between the families of Judas the Galilean, their Sicarii followers, and Jesus and his family and followers.

This relationship has three central points. First, the New Testament records that Jesus’ family agreed to pay the Roman tax
by going to Bethlehem to register in the census of Quirinus. This places Jesus’ family in direct opposition to Judas the Galilean because Josephus records that:

a certain Galilean named Judas prevailed with his countrymen to revolt; and said they were cowards if they would endure to pay a tax to the Romans and submit to mortal men as their lords …
¹⁹⁵

Second, the New Testament records that Judas the Iscariot (Sicarii), son of Simon the Iscariot, was responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion, thereby showing that the Sicarii are responsible for Jesus’ death.

He alluded to Judas, the son of Simon the Iscariot. For he it was who, though one of the Twelve, was afterwards to betray Him.

John 6:72

While supper was proceeding, the Devil having by this time suggested to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, the thought of betraying Him …

John 13:2

Finally, Josephus records that Eleazar, Judas the Galilean’s descendant, and his Sicarii followers destroyed themselves at Masada forty years
to the day
from Jesus’ resurrection. This perfectly identifies the Sicarii as members of the “wicked generation” who Jesus warned would be destroyed before the generation passed away.

The fall of Masada brings an end to what Josephus describes as the “fourth philosophy,” a synonym for the Sicarii, the messianic movement founded by Judas the Galilean. The suicide of the Sicarii on this date was meant to represent “atonement” for their role in crucifying Jesus forty years ago. By simultaneously concluding Christianity’s forty years of “wandering” and the end of the “fourth philosophy,” the messianic movement Christianity replaced, Josephus is making the point that the future belongs to Christianity.

And he was correct of course: the future did belong to Christianity. By the midpoint of the second century C.E., Judaism had been driven from its homeland and would never again be a significant threat to Rome.

Josephus’ recording of the fall of Masada contains many telling points: He reiterates that John, the Sicarii leader who was lampooned as the Apostle John, like the man from Gadara with the unclean spirit in the New Testament, filled the countryside with wickedness.

Yet did John demonstrate by his actions that these Sicarii were more moderate than he was himself, for he not only slew all such as gave him good counsel to do what was right, but treated them worst of all, as the most bitter enemies that he had among all the Citizens; nay, he filled his entire country with ten thousand instances of wickedness …

Wars of the Jews,
7, 8, 263

Josephus records Eleazar’s belief that God has condemned the Jewish nation. The unspoken point, since God has condemned Judaism, is that Christianity is its replacement.

It had been proper indeed for us to have conjectured at the purpose of God much sooner, and at the very first, when we were so desirous of defending our liberty, and when we received such sore treatment from one another, and worse treatment from our enemies, and to have been sensible that the same God, who had of old taken the Jewish nation into his favor, had now condemned them to destruction …

Wars of the Jews,
7, 8, 327

Josephus makes Eleazar repeat time and again that God has turned against the Jews.

“… we are openly deprived by God himself of all hope of deliverance;

“for that fire which was driven upon our enemies did not of its own accord turn back upon the wall which we had built; this was the effect of God’s anger against us for our manifold sins, which we have been guilty of in a most insolent and extravagant manner with regard to our own countrymen;

“the punishments of which let us not receive from the Romans, but from God himself …

“… however, the circumstances we are now in ought to be an inducement to us to bear such calamity courageously, since it is by the will of God, and by necessity, that we are to die;

“for it now appears that God hath made such a decree against the whole Jewish nation, that we are to be deprived of this life which [
he knew
] we would not make a due use of.

“This it is that our laws command us to do this; it is that our wives and children crave at our hands; nay, God himself hath brought this necessity upon us; while the Romans desire the contrary, and are afraid lest any of us should die before we are taken.

“Let us therefore make haste, and instead of affording them so much pleasure, as they hope for in getting us under their power, let us leave them an example which shall at once cause their astonishment at our death, and their admiration of our hardiness therein.”
¹⁹⁶

The suspicion scholars have regarding the accuracy of Eleazar’s speech is well-founded. They should also question Josephus’ dates for the siege and the fall of Masada, which are no more historical than his descriptions of either the siege or Eleazar’s speech. The dates have been invented to provide support for Christianity. Readers who wish to confirm my findings for themselves may simply take the dates of Jesus’ ministry and crucifixion as found in the Gospel of John and compare them with the dates Josephus gives for the events of the war and his use of phrases from the Book of Daniel. The truth will be visible.

When Josephus ends the war on the day following Passover in 73 C.E., he unifies the two “principles” that Christianity was based on—Exodus and the Book of Daniel. Only the day Josephus records for the conclusion of the siege of Masada would simultaneously complete the seven-year week that concludes the prophecies of Daniel and the end of the symbolic forty-year “wandering” of Christianity after the resurrection of Jesus. Such a miraculous occurrence could not happen by chance and supports the theory that Josephus has falsified history to show that Christianity was God’s replacement for Judaism. Notice that the technique the authors of Christianity used is consistent throughout. Simon and John are transformed into Christian Apostles. The story of the Passover and Exodus becomes the first forty years of Christianity. Titus becomes the Messiah.

One must admire the craftsmanship of the intellectuals who produced the works of Josephus and the New Testament. Though the method they used, the fusing of Daniel’s prophecies with a new forty-year Exodus, was utterly preposterous from both a historical and a theological perspective, with it they were able to neatly remove from history a religious movement that opposed them militarily and replace it with one aligned to their interests. In doing so, they were able to conform history to theology to such an extent that one movement ended and the other came forth on the same day.

It is interesting that the creators of Christianity did not pass along this theological fusion to the early Church fathers. There is no evidence that any of the early church fathers, with the possible exception of Eusebius, understood that the destruction of Masada represented the simultaneous conclusion of Christianity’s forty-year “wandering” and the prophecies of Daniel. The intellectuals who produced Christianity were not to have their work appreciated for 2,000 years.

This disconnect between the creators of Christianity and its implementers is fascinating because it suggests that its first bishops did not need to understand a key element of Christianity. This may have some bearing on a subject of interest but one that I will not cover in this work—this being, at what point did Christianity lose the memory of its Roman origins? The first church scholars’ lack of awareness of this key theological element perhaps suggests that this disconnect may have occurred very early. An example of an early Christian scholar who did not understand the New Testament’s original intent was Origen, who was troubled by the name “Jesus Barabbas.” On the other hand, Cesare Borgia, a fifteenth century Roman Catholic cardinal and a son of Pope Alexander VI (Rodrigo Borgia) was quoted as saying, “It has served us well, this myth of Jesus.”

The reader may find it interesting to see how Christianity’s forty-year cycle of “wandering” was achieved. The Gospel of John was created, among other reasons, to provide the necessary point of orientation to begin the forty-year cycle. The date was determined by calculating backward.

Josephus records that the destruction of Masada occurred on the fifteenth of Xanthicus.

This calamitous slaughter was made on the fifteenth day of the month Xanthicus …
¹⁹⁷

Xanthicus is the Syrian word for Nisan. A typical sleight of hand by Josephus, not to be too obvious.  Josephus also records that the Jewish Passover was celebrated on the fourteenth of Xanthicus/Nisan.

When God revealed that with one more plague he would compel the Egyptians to let the Hebrews go, he commanded Moses to tell the people they should have a sacrifice ready and should prepare themselves on the tenth day of the month Xanthicus in readiness for the fourteenth (this is the month that is called Pharmuthi by the Egyptians, and Nisan by the Hebrews, but the Macedonians call it Xanthicus), and he should then lead away the Hebrews with all they had.
¹⁹⁸

The Gospel of John differs from the Synoptics in its dating because John describes three Passovers and thus gives Jesus’ ministry a three-year span. The Synoptics describe only one Passover and thus do not reveal the year in which Jesus was crucified.

The Gospel of John is also different from the Synoptics in that it describes Jesus’ crucifixion as occurring on the day before Passover, whereas in the Synoptics Jesus is crucified on Passover itself. Jesus was to be the Passover lamb of the new Judaism; therefore, this central image of Christianity was promoted in all the Gospels—in contrast to Rabbinical Judaism, which merely edited out or replaced all the features of Second Temple Judaism that could not be performed without the temple. However, the Synoptics make an “error” in that they record Jesus’ crucifixion as being on the day of Passover. In the Gospel of John, Jesus is “slaughtered” on the day before Passover, which is when the paschal lambs were actually killed. John’s date is more symbolically correct because it makes Jesus the true “lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world.”
¹⁹⁹