Category Archives: 03 Jesus

Jesus Supplanted Temple Sacrifice Then God Turned His Face from Jesus

In the Synoptic gospels, Jesus has the bread and wine metaphor for body and blood consumption.

In the Gospel of John, Jesus says it is not a metaphor, followers are literally eating his body and blood. (In the gospel of John, the last of the four gospels, Jesus brings up literal cannibalism before the last supper. Jesus brings it up and loses followers. He says this teaching is too hard for those who do not stay with him.)

Any Israelite or any alien living among them who eats any blood—I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people.

Lev. 17: 10

The agony in the garden happens after Jesus makes the bread and wine metaphor.

Jesus renounces the God of Israel, then he goes to the Garden of Gethsemane and finds the God of Israel is not on his side for him to continue living.

My House Shall Be Called a House of Prayer – Not Historical

Bart Ehrman: “…someone like Jesus, an “enemy of the state” who was executed for treason.”

Jesus wasn’t an enemy of the state until Palm Sunday week and the Jews brought him to Pilate’s attention?

John the Baptist supposedly preached “The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.”
Jesus, continuing the element of John the Baptist’s message also preached, “The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.”
Neither of these two instances made either of the two speakers “enemies of the state.”

John the Baptist was not executed for treason by Pontius Pilate (26 – 36 A.D. after Gratus before Marcellus) under the reign of Tiberius.

John the Baptist, in the gospels, not necessarily in Josephus, preached a kingdom other than the Roman Empire for which people should set priorities.
Jesus preached a kingdom other than the Roman Empire for which people should set priorities.
This gets a pass by Rome.
Both speak of a Kingdom of Heaven which implies a king–and that king is not Tiberius.
That’s a little bit too much leeway.

So, what made Palm Sunday and Monday’s turning over the tables treason?

The turning over the tables was not an act of treason, it was an act, as reported by the gospels, of Temple spiritual integrity: “Is all this commerce a house of prayer or what?”
Even this does not sound right. This sounds right if Jesus was not Jewish and thought all the slaughtering was not necessary. A Jewish Jesus would have known the necessity for sacrifices to be arranged. He didn’t like the layout of Herod’s Temple? Prayer is done in deeper courts of the Temple. Passover is not Yom Kippur.

Yom Kippur (Hebrew: יוֹם כִּפּוּר, IPA: [ˈjom kiˈpuʁ], or יום הכיפורים), also known as Day of Atonement, is the holiest day of the year for the Jewish people.[1] Its central themes are atonement and repentance. Jewish people traditionally observe this holy day with an approximate 25-hour period of fasting and intensive prayer, often spending most of the day in synagogue services.

Leviticus 16:29 mandates establishment of this holy day on the 10th day of the 7th month as the day of atonement for sins. It calls it the Sabbath of Sabbaths and a day upon which one must afflict one’s soul.

Leviticus 23:27 decrees that Yom Kippur is a strict day of rest.

I’d like to make a criticism that a singular biblical Jesus did not make a scene on Passover saying this is a place and time for prayer. It is not historical.

Okay, and it’s not a reason for treason against Rome. So, we’re left with Caiphas explaining to Pilate that Jesus’ entry was Jesus’ way of saying, I, like Solomon, am a Davidic king of Jerusalem and the Jews. Then, in Roman simplicity, they put this over his cross and crucify him.

Now, if Jesus’ entry is not historical, we have a problem.

Dr. Ehrman, I have a problem with the Monday event (turning over the tables) of Passover Week. Is there any criticism of the Sunday event, the manner in which Jesus entered Jerusalem?

Atwill’s Cranked-up Jesus Richard Carrier Blogs Freethought Blogs Review

Richard Carrier believes Jesus was not crucified on Earth. Richard Carrier has a reading comprehension problem. When asked for his peer-reviewed article which will show whether or not he has examined the Testimonium Flavianum as a sarcastic inclusion by Josephus, he does not provide the name of the journal and the name of the article so a person can search for it at a seminary library.

“Others propose that Josephus included the passage so as to curry favor with the Christians, because he was in trouble with his own Jewish compatriots. Still others interpret the passage as intended sarcasm, though the argument for that view is too convoluted to summarize here.”
– p. 234 of Josephus and the New Testament, Second Edition by Steve Mason

In a thorough examination, even challenging views must be heard for a final decision to be claimed. One version of the sarcasm view is not all that convoluted. Joseph Atwill advises that one simply read the passage after the Testimonium Flavianum and see 1) Decius Mundus as a sarcastic reference to Savior of the World/Mundus and 2) Decius Mundus appeared to one who loved him on the third day, as did Jesus appeared to those who loved him on the third day.

Re: Page 225-227 of Josephus and the New Testament, Second Edition by Steve Mason

My reply:
I would like to introduce my reply with a preview of the bottom line, which is beyond page 227, but on page 236, and I quote: “…since most of those who know the evidence agree that [Josephus] said something about Jesus, one is probably entitled to cite him as independent evidence that Jesus actually lived, if such evidence were needed. But that much is already given in Josephus’s reference to James (Ant. 20.200) and most historians agree that Jesus’ existence is the only adequate explanation of the many independent traditions among the NT writings.”

What you have written is this:

The most credible alternative theory of Christian origins is that Jesus began life as a celestial being, known only through private revelations, who was believed to have been crucified and resurrected in the lower heavens. The Gospels were the first attempts to place him in history as an earthly man, in parables and fables meant to illustrate Christian theology and ideals. Their picture of Jesus then became the most successful among the competing varieties of Christianity over the ensuing generations, and the eventually triumphant sects only created and preserved documents supporting their view, and very little supporting any other.

To date the best case presented for this hypothesis is by amateur historian and classics graduate Earl Doherty (in his two books, The Jesus Puzzle and Jesus: Neither God Nor Man). My own forthcoming book, probably titled On the Historicity of Jesus, inspired by his work, will be the first making the case for this hypothesis to pass academic peer review. It will be published this February by the publishing house of the University of Sheffield.


Moving on, if you would have mentioned the title of the article and the journal, I could have been on my way to Dallas Theological Seminary or Bridwell after work or on a weekend to do some reading. Your comment 145.1 does not give me and other readers that information. So your criticism is premature. I REALLY WANT TO READ WHAT YOU’VE WRITTEN ON THIS TOPIC.

Now, I want to clash directly with what you’ve written: “Josephus is just listing disasters that increased tensions between the Romans and the Jews. None of those disasters are commentaries on Christianity. They are simply things that happened that increased tensions between the Romans and the Jews.”

My reply, the Decius Mundus passage is a story about a believer in Isis. The Decius Mundus passage did not make the zealots and rebels more angry at Rome! You are mistaken. ON page 226, Mason even relates this not to an expulsion of Jews from Rome but an expulsion of Egyptians from Rome. I direct the readers of this post to score this point to me.

What Mason does say about the Isis Decius Mundus incident is this: it shows both that the Jews are no worse than other national groups and, second, and more important: Jews share the morals of the Romans.

Steve Mason does not catch the connection of Jesus appearing to believers on the third day and Decius Mundus appearing to a believer on the third day. So, your claim, Richard Carrier, is wrong: the Decius Mundus – Isis passage was not written to give a count of incidents that fueled the rebels, bandits, and zealots. So, while you thought you scored a point on me, I’ve justified my statement, and on top of that, I’ve proven your reading comprehension of page 226 of Mason’s book is in error.

Jesus Loses Points for the Exorcism at Gadara

This is what I read earlier today:

Joseph Atwill, the author of Caesar’s Messiah looked at the story of the man possessed by Legion.

The man was possessed by Legion in the city of Gadara.
Jesus got rid of the demons.
The demons took possession of pigs/swine.
The swine started running. They ran into water and drowned.

Jesus was not a great exorcist in this instance because this is a spiritual analogy of an history event. Here’s the history that actually happened.

By this time John was beginning to tyrannize. Now, some submitted to his tyranny out of fear and some out of goodwill. All of their reasons for militant action against Rome was now being reduced to one head, one leader, John.

John and his men were too small to be an army but too many to be just a gang of troublemakers. A legion (an ancient army term) is not an army and a legion has more members than just a gang of troublemakers. John and his followers are Legion.

Let’s say, Gadara was a community with some sense of peacefulness. They had their rich members in the community. Gadara wasn’t looking for trouble with Rome.

John comes to Gadara and he’s more militant than the Sicarii. He recruits men. Some recruits are made recruits by force. John is the possessor. John and his men are Legion.

Well, who is Jesus? Jesus is the Roman general who becomes Caesar, or emperor: Vespasian.

Vespasian comes to Gadara and sends John and his Sicarii running. They ran away from the power of Christ Vespasian. Many ran into the Jordan like the swine in the bible story. The Sicarii were deemed swine because Jews do not like swine (pork) and the Jews of Gadara didn’t appreciate John coming into the city causing trouble, recruiting their sons to their death. The only thing they got for going against the powerful Romans was a split-second of courage before getting stabbed through their guts or through their chest with a Roman sword or chopped in the face with a Roman sword or have their heads cut off at the neck by Roman sword or killed by Roman darts.

Main article: Plumbata

Late infantrymen often carried half a dozen lead-weighted throwing-darts called plumbatae (from plumbum = “lead”), with an effective range of c. 30 m, well beyond that of a javelin. The darts were carried clipped to the back of the shield.

So, the New Testament account is nothing more than a spiritual analogy of what actually happened at Gadara.

Jesus is not Jesus: Jesus is Rome, Jesus is Vespasian.

Mentioning a Book to Read

I’m reading Herodian Messiah by Joseph J. Raymond and I like it.

Steefen, author of
The Greatest Bible Study in Historical Accuracy
Insights on the Exodus, King David, and Jesus
Water Bearing Fish, Part I

17 Crucified Saviors, 1700 B.C. – 75 C.E.)

01. Thulis of Egypt, 1700 B.C.
02. Chrisna of India, 1200 B.C.
03. Crite of Chaldea, 1200 B.C.
04. Atys of Phrygia, 1170 B.C.
05. Thammuz of Syria, 1160 B.C.
06. Hesus of the Celtic Druids, 834 B.C.
07. Bali of Orissa, 725 B.C.
08. Indra of Thibet, 725 B.C.
09. Iao of Nepaul, 622 B.C.
10. Alcestos of Euripides, 600 B.C.
11. Mithra of Persia, 600 B.C.
12. Sakia, the Hindoo, 600 B.C.
13. Quexalcote of Mexico, 587 B.C.
14. Prometheus of AEschylus, 547 B.C.
15. Wittoba of the Telingonese, 552 B.C.
16. Quirinus of Rome, 506 B.C.
17. Jesus, 69-70 C.E.

(The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors by Kersey Graves is the source for all but the 17th.)

December 25th

Merry Christmas and a Merry Winter Solstice. – Steefen