But is this really so?Mark, therefore, identifies Jesus not only as the Jewish Messiah but as a world ruler.9 The identity of Jesus in Mark directly opposes both Vespasian's propa- gandistic claims and his imperial identity. Mark presents Jesus as Messiah, rejecting the Flavian propaganda that Vespasian was the fulfillment of Jewish messianic prophecy. But he goes a step further by presenting Jesus as the ruler of the world and, in doing so, usurps Vespasian's claim to that position.
There is something curious about the whole story when you think about it. The way Josephus tells it - the idea came into his head and then Vespasian freed him. But the elements are all borrowed from the Genesis narrative about Joseph. There are at least a dozen obvious parallels. Something doesn't seem to be right.
The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until Shilo shall come and the obedience of the nations shall be his.
Vespasian is in Judea when this recognition supposedly happens.
The idea that Josephus simply 'figured' this out on his own and then when Vespasian heard Josephus explain it the idea basically 'popped into his head' henceforth - 'hey, maybe I'd make a good Emperor' - is absurd. The whole storytelling effort in Josephus (our only real source) is childish in its simplicity.But what more than all else incited them [the Jews] to war was an ambiguous oracle, likewise found in their Sacred Scriptures, to the effect that at that time one from their country would become ruler of the world. This they understood to mean someone of their own race, and many of their wise men went astray in their interpretation of it. The oracle, however, in reality signified the sovereignty of Vespasian, who was proclaimed emperor on Jewish soil. — Josephus, Jewish Wars 6:312-313 (also 3:399-403)
An old and long-standing belief had spread throughout the orient to the effect that it was fated at that time for the rulers of Judaea to hold sway over all things. This prediction — which later events showed to have referred to the Roman emperor — the Jews attributed to themselves, and rebelled. — Suetonius Vespasian 4:5 (see also Tacitus, History 5.13)
There never is a real cause ever explained for the entire Jewish revolt. Again the way Josephus tells the story a series of 'disturbances' in synagogues leads Jews to rebel against the Roman state. But we've all seen these sorts of things in our own times. The Gulf of Tonkin. What was the real sign that a disturbance was afoot in the world? Clearly it was Agrippa and Berenice 'fleeing' from Jerusalem. But if you really read into Josephus he really says that Agrippa had abandoned the country - at least in Galilee - and he had to take over to restore order. I used to think that Josephus was lying. But maybe he was telling the truth. Maybe the Jews were set up.
If you accept that someone figured out that the name Vespasian = Shilo that could or likely did take place BEFORE the Jewish War. What if the Jewish War was set up to 'act out' or live out the prophecy? What if Agrippa and Berenice (who were close to the Flavians) created the situation which Vespasian would later exploit? When you think about it, just having the name = Shilo isn't enough. In order to prove that he was Shilo you need to have the conquering of the Jews. There must always have been disturbances. But Agrippa and Berenice fleeing the palace really sets up the situation for Vespasian to exploit.
Just a thought.
