On the link between Capernaum and John the Baptist

[Giuseppe]

Capernaum = place of desolation = the lower parts of earth = netherworld or Ades (see the gnostic Heracleon).

The place of desolation is the wilderness.

In the wilderness there is John the Baptist.

So Jesus descended on John the Baptist.

Jesus, a pure celestial being, was considered "imprisoned" inside the material body of John the Baptist.

This "Jesus Son of Father" prisoner of John and considered in the eyes of the people as John risen from the dead (being Jesus descended on John in the Ades= Capernaum). But a prisoner is probably a criminal and a killer, for the stupid hoi polloi. So Jesus son of Father was defamed by the Judaizers as "Jesus Barabbas".

This is therefore the origin of the tradition about Barabbas as criminal.

But Pilate was inserted by the Judaizers in the narrative as the RELEASER (the sense of PLT in hebrew) of the criminal Barabbas. So in the earliest gospel Pilate was absent,.....

....or he was simply who released Jesus Barabbas to Herod. A historical fact.

Herod crucified the seditious John the Baptist, in the form of which Jesus appeared.

So John the Baptist was the historical "Jesus".

[Giuseppe]

The greatest obstacle against this theory is that there is no evidence of a John the Baptist being really a seditionist and a criminal (at least in the eyes of the Roman authorities), so that he could be an apt human ARCHONTIC recipient for the Son descending in the lower levels (as per Ascension of Isaiah).

In addition to this, the scholar G. Doudna is going to prove that John the Baptist was probably the distorted (by Josephus) memory of John Hyrcanus II. The latter was not a seditionist.

[Giuseppe]

Here is the solution of the enigma:

John (the Josephian John, not the historical "John", i.e. Hyrcanus II) was not a seditionist. But he was a potential terrorist, in the eyes of Herod, according to Josephus.

So, when the Son descended in the archontic territory, he assumes the form of a demon to be crucified by demons.

On an earthly level, this is translated (="euhemerized") so: the Son assumes the form of a terrorist, since the terrorist is the earthly equivalent of a celestial demon. But the terrorism of John the Baptist, in Josephus, is only shown as a terrorism in nuce, 100% potential, not effective.

The rapidity by which Herod killed John as potential terrorist, was "read" by the euhemerizers as the rapidity by which the "Archon of this world" killed Jesus as potential intruder in the his archontic territory.

In both the cases, the victim is a dangerous intruder/usurper in the eyes of the killer:

• in the Ascension, the nature of Jesus as intruder leads him to death by demons.

• in the case of the Josephian John the Baptist, the his nature as potential terrorist leads him to death by Herod.

[Giuseppe]

I wonder if this can be considered the ground for building a case against John's passage's authenticity in Josephus.

Only ask yourself:


you desire the earthly equivalent of a celestial archontic intruder in the earthly equivalent of a celestial archontic territory.

who better than John fulfills this role:

the Ascension of Isaiah + Earliest Gospel	the "real" (invented) History
the Son takes the form of a demon	the Son takes the form of John
"Capernaum" = the Josephus's spring in a wilderness	the baptism with water by John in the wilderness
the demons see this false "demon" as an intruder in their kingdom	Herod sees John as a potential usurper of the his kingdom
the Archon of this Celestial World kills the Son	Herod kills John the Baptist

[Giuseppe]

This research proves in the my eyes:

• that the text known as Ascension of Isaiah was decisive for historicizing the marcionite Jesus in the form of an apparent criminal and seditionist,

• that the origin of the baptism with water by John derives from "Capernaum" being (in Josephus) a famous spring sprouted miracolously in a wilderness

• that the Baptist passage in Josephus was a provvidential interpolation by Josephus himself (per Doudna) and exploited by the euhemerizers.

• that Pilate was introduced in the fiction only to introduce Barabbas (of which Pilate is the mere releaser, the sense of PLT in Hebrew), and Barabbas was the judaizing parody of the marcionite Son of Father (per Couchoud).

• that Jesus was euhemerized by marcionites, not even by Marcion.

[DCHindley]

But why?

[Secret Alias]

... because Giuseppe says so. That's what it comes down to every time

[arnoldo]

I entered the OP into an alleged AI chatbot and the following is part of the response. . .

Are you currently in the tradition about Barabbas as criminal? I will learn that Pilate was inserted by the Judaizers in the narrative as the RELEASER the sense of PLT in hebrew of the criminal Barabbas . That was a long time ago. I will learn that ..or he was who released Jesus Barabbas to Herod . What is it? If a deaf person goes to court, is it still called a hearing? I don't think I know John
https://www.pandorabots.com/mitsuku/

[Giuseppe]

But why?

it is more simple than you, arnoldo and Secret Alias can think. Please, reflect on this point: the Ascension of Isaiah says us that the Son assumed the form of the archon of the heaven X during his crossing of the heaven X, for each X from 7 to 1.
Now, if the Son assumed the form of a demon in the relative heaven, which form would have he taken more probably on the earth? More probably, the form of the earthly (human)equivalent of a demon. The form of a potential criminal or seditionist. So the Son descended on John the Baptist in the Earliest Gospel, since John is connected with the wilderness and "Capernaum" (as mentioned in the incipit of the Earliest Gospel) allegorizes just the spring (per Josephus) sprouted in the wilderness.
When it is written in John 1 that John denied that he was Christ:

19 Now this was John’s testimony when the Jewish leaders[c] in Jerusalem sent priests and Levites to ask him who he was. 20 He did not fail to confess, but confessed freely, “I am not the Messiah.”

21 They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?”

He said, “I am not.”

“Are you the Prophet?”

He answered, “No.”

22 Finally they said, “Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?”

23 John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, “I am the voice of one calling in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way for the Lord.’”

...the author was denying the claims in the Earliest Gospel that John was possessed by the spiritual Christ, just as the Cerinthians believed that Christ descended on the man Jesus.

Being John the Baptist a potential seditionist, the Son possessing him was taken wrongly for a seditionist. That is the real origin of Jesus Bar-Abbas being a murderer and a seditionist. So Jesus was appeared on the earth in the form of a seditionist and not the contrary, that a mere seditionist was considered the Christ by the his followers.

And since John the Baptist never existed (he was the distorted figure of John Hyrcanus II, per Greg Doudna), then even more so Jesus never existed.

[Giuseppe]

That is the reason why Jesus was considered wrongly as the John redivivus, as one of the prophets redivivus, and as the Jewish Messiah. Really, he wasn't John redivivus but he assumed the form of John redivivus (if he descended on John when John was in the Ades="Capernaum" per Heracleon), of one of the prophets and of the Jewish messiah, without being really them.

The original gospel story assumed that Jesus the Son of Father (masked as John) gathered the disciples of John (who believed that their master was risen) and preached the good news of a higher god, distinct from the demiurge. This explains why the Pillars recognized immediately their master when they abandoned the nets. This explains the wonder of Herod:

At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead