gilius

Caldrail, 1. Yes, I'm trying to show that one book is based on another, but I haven't got to the "why" part yet, other than concluding that it was the Flavians who authored the books, invented Christianity. So you believe the similarities are there simply by chance? The comparisons do not appear too unique by your judgement? 2. I agree that oral histories could explain why the gospels share similarities with each other, but it doesn't explain why they share such unique similarities with Josephus' Wars of the Jews, since this is a different kind of book. 3. So 40 parallels is only a limited sample? There's a lot more, but I haven't bothered including them because I thought 40 would be more than enough to demonstrate this, and pretty much every chapter of the synoptics contains a parallel matching Wars of the Jews (in sequence). What more would you want? There's enough proof here to show that one book is based on another, but you don't appear to be seeing the unique patterns. Maladict, Sound promising, so you agree that Typology is at work here, which explains all the parallels, akin to the similar examples of typological works that you provide? No, virgil did not invent the Homeric epics. Likewise, Typology is also at work between the Old Testament and the New Testament, but that doesn't mean the Flavians invented both the new and the old. Again, I can prove this in 3 steps/stages with more evidence to come of a Flavian invention, but we are still at phase 1 because nobody can see the patterns between the gospels and Wars of the Jews here--except perhaps Maladict? That's stopping me from progressing. So just to recap: you agree Jesus is a "type" for Titus, hence sent by father to preach good news proving the parallels are there by typological design?

Its as clear as mud without needing to go into such unnecessary detail like I am writing a book. I am not here at this forum, where I can't even use html/tables or external links, to meticulously document the theory, but am here to prove it with minimal effort. I'm waiting for you guys to confirm if you agree with part 1 before I continue: 1) You agree one book is based on another or lost 3rd source or common source, i.e. by design? 2) you think the gospel writers happened to write the same stuff in the same order without a connection, i.e. by chance? So if I open another book I could easily find the same thing by coincidence: good news, sent by father, human Passover lamb, woe saying jesus, signs before temple destructions, four winds, bridegroom and bride, etc. 3) I have not gone through Luke and Josephus fairly, simply quoting the similarities in order, but am somehow fabricating the data?

You can compare all the English translations of the bible at Biblegateway or Biblehub. The information content is the same regardless: experts at Greek to English translations mostly use the same Verbatim/near-verbatim words for each of their translations, but may have a slightly different grammar connecting them, hence the words, names, locations are the same (or mean the same thing) and all the chapters make perfect logical sense when read in combination with Wars of the Jews (translated by Whiston I think in the 19th century). For example, the Greek word for Good News is ("euaggelion"). I could probably get you the original Greek characters to confirm visually, since Josephus and NT are online in Greek as well. Like most uniqe words/phrases, there's few ways of accurately translating them, leaving no room for error. More parallels can be spotted in the original Greek (not less). In other words, faulty Greek translations could not be responsible for 80+ parallels/satire existing between NT and Josephus because 2 books with independent translations are being compared for their matching parallels and satire within the same contexts, so we are not laughing at bad English grammar derived from lousy Greek translations. I'm not presenting this for peer review (it's not my discovery), so if anyone else would like to gather up the technical information regarding the translations they are welcome to: this information is available online like everything else.

I put all the Luke references on the left hand side; all the Wars of the Jews references on the right-hand side, so that you can see that all parallels are occuring in sequence and roughly in the "same spots". Where I've linked parallels to other books is simply for knowledge/customs of the times or a reminder about a particular attribute of Jesus that applies to the parallel in question, hence those linked references are not actually part of the parallels, and could all be placed in a separate "knowledge" chart. However, just to make it simple, I placed them directly below the Lukes and Wars of the Jews for those who haven't read the entire books. You see, the way typology works is that you are meant to read one book, note down certain things in your mind, and then read the 2nd book and realise that there is a connection together with the satire. For example, sombody with good memory who reads Luke knows that Jesus was sent by his father to preach the good news. When that same reader moves onto the Wars of the Jews, he will read about Titus with the same characteristics and instantly recognise Jesus as being the achetype. The next scene is when Jesus goes fishing, so when the reader is at the same place in Wars of the Jews he knows that the Romans fish for men, and will notice the satire, etc. It's all really quite simple and straightforward. By the time they get to the end, Jesus is mistaken for Titus (the Lord Christians actually workship but without knowing it), but Part 1 of my proof alone doesn't show that because I haven't yet listed all the satire nor the conundrums, nor Titus' complete pre-configuration including the scores of prophecies that Jesus predicts and Titus fulfills.

The problem with the Parallelmania theory (or design on the part of the interpreter or person making the comparison) is that, in the case of Caesar's Messiah, the parallels are occurring in sequence: (1-5, say = beginning, quarter-way, halfway, three quarter-way, end) 1. Good news, sent by father 2. loose and bound, divide 3 against 2, cut down fruit trees 3. Human Passover Lamb 4. Woe saying Jesus who gave up the ghost and was crucified 5. Doubt in their Lord's identity What would you expect a Typologist, who was writing both the gospels and Josephus (or one book based on another), to do differently in order to inform the more logical readers that there is a connection between both works? Now you know that the following example of Typology I actually designed myself: MOVIE A 16:00 - A Westerner travels to North Korea and is wearing factor 3 sun cream 33:00 - The Westerner takes off a pair of trousers 62:00 - The Westerner walks past a department store and sees luxuries 73:00 - The Westerner is told by the tour guide about the leaders of the country 84:00 - The Westerner travels back to the US MOVIE B 16:00 - A native visits a capital city and sees 3 giant posters of men 33:00 - The native is told by a police officer to change one item of their clothing 62:00 - The native enters a shop but is told nothing is for sale to anyone but they are only there for show, for sake of the foreign media. 73:00 - The native makes a gibe about one of the men in the posters 84:00 - The native is not allowed to return home and is instead taken to a prison camp How can you detect that mine is designed and authored by a common source (me) or that I got Movie A from somewhere else and did my own Movie B? Understanding this, i.e. Patterns, Probability and Typology is all related to Part 1 of the proof that the Flavians invented Christianity. But in Parts 2 and 3 I can show that it's possible to know that the Flavians actually wrote both the gospels and Wars of the Jews or that I did both Movies A and Movies B (I didn't just do one of them).

Does that mean you think I've listed 40-50 coincidences then? What other choices are there besides coincidence and design? You can check I haven't quoted them in error by verifying at Bible Gateway or Bible Hub. There is also several websites with Josephus' works to check the validity. So which one is it - coincidence/chance/parallelomania - or design?

No? Caldrail, which one do you believe: that all those parallels I listed - 40-50 between both works - are there by coincidence or design?

That's only the beginning of the proof, but thanks for your feedback. You seem to be improving yourself!

Proof is divided into 3 parts (only Part 1 is covered in my opening post): 1) Proof that one book is based on another, a common source, or a lost third source 2) Proof that the parallels were designed for presenting satire and historical information beyond the surface level narration 3) Proof that the books are actually of a common Flavian source (eliminating the other two possibilities) 1) Do you at least agree from the below analysis that the gospels are based heavily on Josephus

Is it possible to use tables on this forum? Testing 123 testing 321 testing 321 Testing

One does not need to study, grow or mature to demonstrate or realise something as basic as the Flavian invention of Christianity. I will post a new topic, but will leave out the links, so we can start afresh with our kids' spot the difference colouring book exercises - without offending the moderators.

Thank you for explaining your definition of spam. So why not just edit out the links but keep the topic and warn the offender? Other topics you've locked have not been deleted. My only observation was that the topic started to take a turn for the better after members finally began to analyse the evidence being presented, which was the whole point of the topic from page 1. UNRV does not usually have a problem with discussions relating to all types of religions here; it seems the real reason is that you don't want the general public or visitors to this forum knowing that the Flavians invented Christianity - perhaps due to your own personal views - or potential repercussions for UNRV. Anyway, I'm not trying to start an argument here, but just wanted to express my feelings about your decision to close and delete the topic, which I don't agree with: I find it unfortunate to say the least and a backwards step in the development of reason. However, I respect your wishes and authority here as a moderator.

The gospels and Josephus both build up an image of a human Passover lamb, and the initial points of reference occur at the same place within the dual allegorical storyline of Jesus' ministry and Titus' military campaign. One of the human Passover lambs is Jesus, so the sick joke is that Jesus gets eaten by his mother, Mary, but that is only the start of the satire. Oh, and Titus gets told about the story afterwards! http://www.caesarsmessiahproven.com/conceptual.htm GOSPELS And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Luke 22:19 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them and said,

Nope. Pair up any 2 books in the history of literature and you will not find any human passover lamb. Group up the gospels with Josephus and suddenly you have not one but TWO human passover lambs. And the 2 human passover lambs occur at the same point within the dual allegorical storyline, proving that one book is based on another or there is a common source for both. Simple logic. Can't get your head around that one?

They go together to provide an additional layer of information - by design. The texts are not random, but appear in sequence as unique parallels between 2 movies, hence proving they are not there by accident. They were designed, in this case - by me - in about 10 minutes. You haven't answered any questions, but my exercise in recreating typology is there to test and confirm that everyone reaches the same conclusions - providing they know a bit about the geography of North Korea, or in the case of the New Testament, some knowledge of Jewish customs and about things like generations and demons/spirits who can't travel in water. The only information coming from Atwill is that he's discovered a proven typological system between the New Testament and Josephus indicating a common authorship with a different agenda to what's on the surface. You can then choose to go away and research this yourself coming to the same conclusions as Atwill, or you can read his book and be spoon fed all the satires and other information that the Flavians wanted us to know. All the academic mysticism you've learnt doesn't count for anything when it comes to typology and common sense. Your country has been fooled just like North Korea, but you can't see it.

Here's a typology example based on the New Testament's system of parallels uncovered by Joseph Atwill's Caesar's Messiah: MOVIE A 16:00 - A Westerner travels to North Korea and is wearing factor 3 sun cream 33:00 - The Westerner takes off a pair of trousers 62:00 - The Westerner walks past a department store and sees luxuries 73:00 - The Westerner is told by the tour guide about the leaders of the country 84:00 - The Westerner travels back to the US MOVIE B 16:00 - A native visits a capital city and sees 3 giant posters of men 33:00 - The native is told by a police officer to change one item of their clothing 62:00 - The native enters a shop but is told nothing is for sale to anyone but they are only there for show, for sake of the foreign media. 73:00 - The native makes a gibe about one of the men in the posters 84:00 - The native is not allowed to return home and is instead taken to a prison camp What does this tell you about: 1) The country that the native is in? 2) The sex of the westerner? 3) Trousers in North Korea? 4) Who are the men in the posters? 5) What is the name of the city? 6) Did the westerner buy any luxuries? 7) What happens to those who oppose the regime? 8) Is North Korea really a nice place to go? 9) What does it tell you about someone who watches only MOVIE A but not MOVIE B? This is how much additional information (subtext) can be gleaned from such a short text and understanding the context. The point is: it seems like the westerner on vacation in a nice country somewhere, but this is not true. Don't just read the bible, but read other books also to find out the truth.

This method can only be used in typological literature where the authors have designed a system of parallels to provide additional information beyond the surface narration. This was a special government project, and I've never researched the genre to find out what else exists, and if they can contribute to our understanding of history.

About the Mathematics: One equation in maths reveals the value of the constant Pi: A= pr2. Pi (3.142) can then be used to test other things in the model of the universe (laws of physics) to confirm there is a pattern to it's usage, and indeed a pattern to reality at the macro level. Simultaneous equations in the Flavian model reveals the patterns or underlining mathematics used by the authors regarding names: -John... has a demon (Luke 7:33-35) vs. John was beginning to tyrannize (Wars of the Jews, 4, 7, 389) -Joseph of "Arimathea" takes down a crucified man (Luke 23:50-53) vs. Josephus bar Matthias takes down a crucified man (Life of Flavius Josephus, 75, 417, 420-421) -Certain young man, armour on, mount of olives, carried away, wall (Wars of the Jews, 6, 2, 157-158. 161-163) -Certain young man named Eleazar, armour on, mount of olives, carried away, siege/raising of the banks (Wars of the Jews, 7, 6, 194-206) -Certain young man, naked, mount of olives, escaped (Mark 14:26, 32, 35, 51-53) -Titus, no head-piece or breastplate, mount of olives, escaped (Wars of the Jews, 5, 2, 54-61) Therefore, Certain young man = Eleazar/Lazarus who gets captured Titus = big man who escapes without wearing any armour! This can then be used to test other things in the same model: -certain young man, naked, mount of olives, escaped, linen cloth (Mark 14:26, 32, 35, 51-53) -Lazarus, dead man in tomb, wrapped in cloth (John 11:1-48) Therefore, this is confirmation that "certain young man" with a cloth = Lazarus (a mathematical constant in the Flavian model like pi is in the universe model) It also tells you that the 4 gospels and Josephus work like jigsaw puzzle based on countless examples like the above! And they all reveal additional information that the Flavians wanted us to know as a subtext.

Good question! Joseph Atwill does a better job of explaining the system than I do, and since very few people have read the book or even the first page of the website, I have no feedback in order to improve my explanations and make them as clear as possible for everyone to understand. Therefore, without discussion of the evidence to check we are on the same page you cannot blame your logic. I'm sure if I could guide people through it, it would be easier to understand. But then they have to have an interest; most people don't care. You seem to be making some progress. The parallels are indeed being placed in solid contexts as the "trees amongst the forest". If you fail to see the link then you need to say which page/line you get stuck on, in case I haven't explained it clearly. Remember also, the site is not completed yet. Jesus makes about 50 prophecies and Titus fulfils all of them as I will show, focusing on his doomsday ones in particular and the "astronomical alignments" (for want of a better description) regarding Daniel's prophesies--even went as far as falsifying dates of Jerusalem's destruction and the fall of Masada (probably happened the year after AD 73). Also want to cover the blunders of Josephus not having much to say about Jesus as well as prophesying Zacharias in the past (getting fulfilled twice)! This will all get morphed into the story of the Flavians, Herods, Alexanders, Maccabees. A lot of the stories in NT do not have any theological or moral meaning/purpose except when compared to their counterpart in Josephus, hence the gospels were built on the back of the much larger historical work of Josephus as a new religion, piece of satiric literature, and a way of bigging up Titus. I use minimal data, so I've only covered about half the parallels that Joe and other people have now discovered--there are many more revealing things like Nazareth not really existing--archaeologists found no Roman town there--the Flavians were really referring to Japha. Since the Flavians obviously embedded this information by design, uncovering it is a very simple exercise once you realise a system is there. A few of the parallels are out of sequence as it would have made it too obvious for even the hoi polloi to spot early on. For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be ... And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other ... Then will the kingdom of heaven be likened to ten maidens who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom and the bride. Matt 24:27, 31, 25:1 began on a sudden to cry aloud, "A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house, a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against this whole people!" Wars of the Jews, 6, 5, 301

Thanks for your response. How about Ostia, Paestum? Have Impluvia been found there? I'm checking a book on Roman Antioch, but the houses don't seem to have them...

Apparently, parts of Campania were "controlled by alliance"; what exactly does that mean? Is it the same as ruling via client king/proxy? Apparently, Latin did not replace Oscan as the official language of that part of Italy until after the Social War.

Sorry, "Independent" was the wrong word. What I really meant was it seems that a lot of these tribal regions were not properly conquered or held client king status until much later?

Hi guy, thanks for your reply! Nice map of the Italian tribes... would appreciate your help with another of my posts: http://www.unrv.com/forum/topic/16213-roman-italy-before-the-social-war-91-88-bc/ Can't say I've found a satisfactory answer for this yet.

I thought it was going to be complete rubbish, but it was actually superb! I hope you haven't researched it or checked any youtube videos, so I won't spoil it for you, as the context of the whole exhibition came as quite a surprise to me. Like waking up and realising I'm in a virtual reality show. They've done a very good job gathering together all the relevant objects for the exhibition. It seems inspired/based on a 2009/2011 documentary, which they sell at the museum shop. The only disappointment was the lack of the Alexander the Great mosaic and the lack of any fountains, though the water engineering artifacts were very impressive. Just a shame you will not find many parallels with Roman Britain or probably even Gaul. The ending to the exhibition is quite sad, but the whole thing is well thought out. I can see why they've extended the friday opening times to 2200 and the reason its so popular. My favourite artifact was the spiked chest or the sun god statue with 4 horses. Summary: if you're mainly a fan of architecture like me, you will have a new appreciation of small finds and household objects!

The only reason I ever read the bible was to educate myself more about the Roman Empire! Nice to read about Paul travelling around all these different provinces... This Bilbical-Roman scholar Joseph Atwill could be a Jesuit Whistleblower for all we know? I guess they thought now was a good time to reveal this 2000 year old mystery, since even the best scholars seem trapped in a world of biblical characters, not knowing they were fictitious characters. Nobody seemed to have even got close to figuring out the origin of Christianity, until now. 2,000 years.... quite disgusting really.... people and belief systems.