Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

[Charles Wilson]

I agree with none of this.

Not surprising and that's OK.

I have done plenty of questioning of the unity of the figure whom we know as Simon Peter (= Cephas, = Symeon).

You are one the Giants on this site and I respect your work greatly.

But the gospel of John is part of the synthesis side of things, not part of the analysis side.

Here, I ask for explanations. "Synthesis" as in Kantian "Analytic-Synthetic" or that John was a cooperative venture after the dissemination of Mark? Plz explain.

I disagree that he was writing in the code that you attribute to him, a code so subtle that it took two millennia and singular mind to crack it.

Let's slow down a bit and test our terms. John appears to be an amalgam of rewritten and redacted parts. Teeple appears to have the largest collection of authors for John and there are many others in the Criticism Movement who see redactions, redactions and rewrites. See also: Genesis. I'm not on thin ice here.

Is it Code?

If "Code" is a pejorative here, then, NO, it is not "Code". The entire NT is in Code. Daniel is in Code. Revelation is in Code. Code, Code, Code. Aphasia beckons. No, there is something more than Code. For what purpose was the NT written?

My Thesis all along has been that there was a Story found, either in the debris of stolen Booty from the Destruction of the Temple or from the pen of Nicholas of Damascus, Mucianus or others, including late work from people who survived, maybe Zakkai. Mark was first of the Gospels with a story of a savior/god. Someone flashed on it and "amended" it for use by the Roman Court, which was given power to deal with outside religions. There is a story here of the Paulines, which show influence of Mucianus and the Gospels, which writes a history of the savior/god by relating stories and events.

At some point, the Tract was seen as something to be manipulated to get the Jews to accept Roman Rule - The Roman Thesis. Father, Son and Holy Domitian. Only there was a Minority Report. Mark is flawed and his story has huge holes. The Crucifixion. Peter's Denials. Geography. Too many clues pointing to an Original, Jewish Story.

John writes corrections that tell the "Proper, True Story" but within the strictures given by the Roman Court. "Code"? Yes, but not in a pejorative way, not in the pejorative way you seem to imply.

John tells of the Second Crucifixion and the believers and later Critics immediately glom onto some explanation - "Oral Tradition!" - without seeing How this Set of Stories could be possible without contradiction. Similar to the Empty Tomb: The Story of the Empty Tomb is without Contradiction if you use the sun as an Objective Marker to correlate the events.

The solution is simple: There were 2 "Crucifixions", one Symbolic, the other actual. The Symbolic Story, with understanding from Poster FJV, is centered on the Temple Slaughter of 4 BCE. The Actual Story is of the Priest who survived the 4 BCE Atrocity, only to die by Crucifixion 12 years later, finally explaining the Cryptic Scream,

"My God, my God, for this was I spared?"

...a code so subtle that it took two millennia and singular mind to crack it

I trust this is not an insult, Ben. The text is not so subtle as to be indecipherable to any but me. As I have stated at various times, the text almost screams at me. "It's there, it really is there".

It's not anything special about me. I was trained in Language, Truth and Logic (See: A J Ayer for the joke). I dropped the apparent requirement that discussions about the NT were discussions about a person, a person seen as a savior/god. "If we drop the Metaphysics of a savior/god, what is left?"

A lot.

Almost 15 years of work on this. It's still there. Mishmarot has not been looked at, the Transvaluation of Culture has not been analyzed yet. "Why would Jews want to believe in a savior/god when God has already told us about the necessary worship techniques?"

It ain't me and it ain't Code, if Code is a pejorative.

CW

[Ben C. Smith]

Here, I ask for explanations. "Synthesis" as in Kantian "Analytic-Synthetic" or that John was a cooperative venture after the dissemination of Mark? Plz explain.

I mean that, if Simon/Symeon, Cephas/Kephas, and Peter were not originally all the same person, then the gospel of John contributes to the synthesis of those two or three figures, not to their analysis back into their separate characters.

I disagree that he was writing in the code that you attribute to him, a code so subtle that it took two millennia and singular mind to crack it.

...a code so subtle that it took two millennia and singular mind to crack it

I trust this is not an insult, Ben.

No, it is not an insult. It is an observation that codes are meant to be cracked by insiders and missed by outsiders. I have long held that it is possible that the early Christian texts were written in code, but it is not desirable that they should be so, from the perspective of a modern person trying to figure them out, since, if they were, then the a priori likelihood is that the key has been lost to history, and that we will therefore never figure the texts out. It is extraordinarily improbable in my estimation that texts written in code millennia ago should be figured out only now without the discovery of the actual key (and no, drawing upon various historical or literary texts which have long been available and which in no way advertise themselves as the key to anything does not count as "discovering the key"). So I have to operate on the assumption that the texts were not written in code, else all serious inquiry stops, only to be replaced by singular theories capable of persuading few more than the designer of each respective theory. This is no slur on the people devising such theories, as it is often the case that they will be of exceptional intelligence, which is not at all the same thing as suggesting that they are likely to be correct. (It takes more than intelligence to be correct.)

I also think it is unlikely that the writings were written in code anyway, so I am happy to pursue the gambit of literary and historical criticism. To be sure, there are codes sprinkled in ("his number is 666," for example, and other instances of gematria), but I am suggesting that the texts themselves, as a whole, are not codes to be broken (or, if they are, we are doomed never to figure them out).

The text is not so subtle as to be indecipherable to any but me.

Who subscribes to your theory besides you? How many are they? (These are serious questions, not rhetorical.)

[Charles Wilson]

Who subscribes to your theory besides you? How many are they? (These are serious questions, not rhetorical.)

The integer value that best approximates this number is Zero. Joe Atwill will only go so far as to say, "Even if Charlie is wrong, he's correct". Every now and then, someone here will comment positively (Thanx, MrM) but for the most part, I give this information for Posterity only.

There is another side to this, however. If I assert that the Temple Slaughter of 4 BCE was the basis for many of the NT Stories, you may agree or not, as is your right. If I state that:

1. "Bilgah and Immer play a role in this Tableau and you can verify that these two Mishmarot Groups were on Duty at the Passover of 4 BCE" AND I give you a method that you can use to verify that this is true, I would hope that someone would attempt to verify this. I did when David Christensen gave me this information a decade ago. He was right.

2. " "Immer" is the same word as "Immar" in Hebrew without diacriticals", you can verify this - https://studybible.info/strongs/H563 , https://studybible.info/strongs/H564 . "The sixteenth Mishmarot Group has the same Hebrew name as the animal "Lamb" ".

3. John 1: 36 (RSV):

[36] and he looked at Jesus as he walked, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!"

Pettinato and Falkenberg (Ebla) studied Sumerian names and found that often a god name would be paired with and animal name. " 'nmmr-ha'ad", "Panther of Ha'ad", may come to us as "Nimrod". Thus, " 'mmr-Yah " may be "Lamb of God", identifying the Semitic "Jesus" as both of Immer and a Priest. That's Code for ya'.

The point of this is that it is all low hanging fruit. It's there and the conclusions are there to be drawn. You can verify all of this easily. It's more direct than "Remember, if the Greek word "Blfffsplktt has the second 'f' as silent then Jesus must have gone to India during his ministry and..." You may argue my conclusions but at least verify the easily verifiable. I try to quote Scripture and History to support the conclusions as much as possible.

BTW, for "Rocky":

https://books.google.com/books?id=2JTmD ... ah&f=false

I identified a Scholar who excavated Meiron and who told me the terrain was "very rocky". That scholar was Neusner, RIP.
***
The result of all of this? <crickets>

Therefore, the net number of people who accept this? Zero.
So it goes...

[Ben C. Smith]

Who subscribes to your theory besides you? How many are they? (These are serious questions, not rhetorical.)

The integer value that best approximates this number is Zero.

Thanks.

There is another side to this, however. If I assert that the Temple Slaughter of 4 BCE was the basis for many of the NT Stories, you may agree or not, as is your right. If I state that:

1. "Bilgah and Immer play a role in this Tableau and you can verify that these two Mishmarot Groups were on Duty at the Passover of 4 BCE" AND I give you a method that you can use to verify that this is true, I would hope that someone would attempt to verify this. I did when David Christensen gave me this information a decade ago. He was right.

2. " "Immer" is the same word as "Immar" in Hebrew without diacriticals", you can verify this - https://studybible.info/strongs/H563 , https://studybible.info/strongs/H564 . "The sixteenth Mishmarot Group has the same Hebrew name as the animal "Lamb" ".

3. John 1: 36 (RSV):

[36] and he looked at Jesus as he walked, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!"

The issue for me in this respect is that it looks and sounds as if I could concede your take on the Passover massacre completely, right down to the priestly courses on duty at the time and the etymology of the name Immer, and still be on firm ground in not buying the connections that you find between that event and the NT writings. Between that event and the NT writings stands some kind of code, and the only one who possesses the key appears to be... you.

[John2]

Who subscribes to your theory besides you? How many are they? (These are serious questions, not rhetorical.)

The integer value that best approximates this number is Zero.

Thanks.

There is another side to this, however. If I assert that the Temple Slaughter of 4 BCE was the basis for many of the NT Stories, you may agree or not, as is your right. If I state that:

1. "Bilgah and Immer play a role in this Tableau and you can verify that these two Mishmarot Groups were on Duty at the Passover of 4 BCE" AND I give you a method that you can use to verify that this is true, I would hope that someone would attempt to verify this. I did when David Christensen gave me this information a decade ago. He was right.

2. " "Immer" is the same word as "Immar" in Hebrew without diacriticals", you can verify this - https://studybible.info/strongs/H563 , https://studybible.info/strongs/H564 . "The sixteenth Mishmarot Group has the same Hebrew name as the animal "Lamb" ".

3. John 1: 36 (RSV):

[36] and he looked at Jesus as he walked, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!"

The issue for me in this respect is that it looks and sounds as if I could concede your take on the Passover massacre completely, right down to the priestly courses on duty at the time and the etymology of the name Immer, and still be on firm ground in not buying the connections that you find between that event and the NT writings. Between that event and the NT writings stands some kind of code, and the only one who possesses the key appears to be... you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytVfug9Zw2k

[Ben C. Smith]

Who subscribes to your theory besides you? How many are they? (These are serious questions, not rhetorical.)

The integer value that best approximates this number is Zero.

Thanks.

There is another side to this, however. If I assert that the Temple Slaughter of 4 BCE was the basis for many of the NT Stories, you may agree or not, as is your right. If I state that:

1. "Bilgah and Immer play a role in this Tableau and you can verify that these two Mishmarot Groups were on Duty at the Passover of 4 BCE" AND I give you a method that you can use to verify that this is true, I would hope that someone would attempt to verify this. I did when David Christensen gave me this information a decade ago. He was right.

2. " "Immer" is the same word as "Immar" in Hebrew without diacriticals", you can verify this - https://studybible.info/strongs/H563 , https://studybible.info/strongs/H564 . "The sixteenth Mishmarot Group has the same Hebrew name as the animal "Lamb" ".

3. John 1: 36 (RSV):

[36] and he looked at Jesus as he walked, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!"

The issue for me in this respect is that it looks and sounds as if I could concede your take on the Passover massacre completely, right down to the priestly courses on duty at the time and the etymology of the name Immer, and still be on firm ground in not buying the connections that you find between that event and the NT writings. Between that event and the NT writings stands some kind of code, and the only one who possesses the key appears to be... you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytVfug9Zw2k

Ha. "George, you're obviously lying. Anyone can see that!" One of my favorite scenes from that show comes from the same episode: in which Kramer is trying to guess George's code ("you may stray, but you'll always return to your dark master").

[Charles Wilson]

The issue for me in this respect is that it looks and sounds as if I could concede your take on the Passover massacre completely, right down to the priestly courses on duty at the time and the etymology of the name Immer, and still be on firm ground in not buying the connections that you find between that event and the NT writings.

Your Logic is unassailable, even if we can't agree on where "firm ground" is.

Nonetheless, there may still be hope since the Thesis does not simply rely on these low-hanging-fruit facts. For example, If you cannot see Fortress Antonia as a Symbol for "The Boat" (walking down the garden path into a trap) then there is little I can say to you and a major part of the Thesis is weakened (See: Michael Turton who sez that Mark is "Temple-Centric". Yes, it is, which leads to seeing Antonia in a different light).

Part of the Thesis is that if these are Stories of Real Events, can you accept that "You must turn as a child" and "Enter through the narrow door" may refer to something that actually happened? 'N if yes, then why not this and...

Between that event and the NT writings stands some kind of code, and the only one who possesses the key appears to be... you.

I still have hope for America and the lands beyond.

Matthew 15: 24 (RSV):

[24] He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Have I mentioned Jannaeus yet?

[Jax]

Who subscribes to your theory besides you? How many are they? (These are serious questions, not rhetorical.)

The integer value that best approximates this number is Zero. Joe Atwill will only go so far as to say, "Even if Charlie is wrong, he's correct". Every now and then, someone here will comment positively (Thanx, MrM) but for the most part, I give this information for Posterity only.

There is another side to this, however. If I assert that the Temple Slaughter of 4 BCE was the basis for many of the NT Stories, you may agree or not, as is your right. If I state that:

1. "Bilgah and Immer play a role in this Tableau and you can verify that these two Mishmarot Groups were on Duty at the Passover of 4 BCE" AND I give you a method that you can use to verify that this is true, I would hope that someone would attempt to verify this. I did when David Christensen gave me this information a decade ago. He was right.

2. " "Immer" is the same word as "Immar" in Hebrew without diacriticals", you can verify this - https://studybible.info/strongs/H563 , https://studybible.info/strongs/H564 . "The sixteenth Mishmarot Group has the same Hebrew name as the animal "Lamb" ".

3. John 1: 36 (RSV):

[36] and he looked at Jesus as he walked, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!"

Pettinato and Falkenberg (Ebla) studied Sumerian names and found that often a god name would be paired with and animal name. " 'nmmr-ha'ad", "Panther of Ha'ad", may come to us as "Nimrod". Thus, " 'mmr-Yah " may be "Lamb of God", identifying the Semitic "Jesus" as both of Immer and a Priest. That's Code for ya'.

The point of this is that it is all low hanging fruit. It's there and the conclusions are there to be drawn. You can verify all of this easily. It's more direct than "Remember, if the Greek word "Blfffsplktt has the second 'f' as silent then Jesus must have gone to India during his ministry and..." You may argue my conclusions but at least verify the easily verifiable. I try to quote Scripture and History to support the conclusions as much as possible.

BTW, for "Rocky":

https://books.google.com/books?id=2JTmD ... ah&f=false

I identified a Scholar who excavated Meiron and who told me the terrain was "very rocky". That scholar was Neusner, RIP.
***
The result of all of this? <crickets>

Therefore, the net number of people who accept this? Zero.
So it goes...

You know, maybe you are painting with to wide a brush. Perhaps narrow the field and pick one aspect of your thesis and really cover it in depth.

My 2 cents

Lane

[Charles Wilson]

Perhaps narrow the field and pick one aspect of your thesis and really cover it in depth

"Barkeep! Set up another pitcher or two. I might be here awhile..."

Thanx, Lane. Poster KK once suggested something similar if memory serves so you're in good company.
Rather than a subject picked by me, what specific part of what I write about would help you understand? You as well, Ben. What would help you?

CW

[Ben C. Smith]

Perhaps narrow the field and pick one aspect of your thesis and really cover it in depth

"Barkeep! Set up another pitcher or two. I might be here awhile..."

Thanx, Lane. Poster KK once suggested something similar if memory serves so you're in good company.
Rather than a subject picked by me, what specific part of what I write about would help you understand? You as well, Ben. What would help you?

I would say, pick a gospel story you deem to be virtually unassailable in its connection to the Passover massacre and lay out exactly what connects it to that event, detail by detail.

Have I mentioned Jannaeus yet?

Well, yes.

Indeed, a search of your posts for the term "Jannaeus" yields 167 hits right now.