Barbelo:The Story of Jesus Christ by Riaan Booysen pdf

click the images to enlarge

Click to access Barbelo-RiaanBooysen.pdf

Related “A Simonian Origin for Christianity” – by Roger Parvus

To comply with the wishes of  vridar

…please make it clear that I may not personally endorse other views on the site or blog where it is posted.

See also “The Great Declaration of Simon Magus” Introduction and Translation by Robert Price at thegodabovegod.com

The Works of Philo Judaeus, The Contemporary of Josephus

Available to read online here:
https://archive.org/details/worksphilojudaeu01philuoft

or in PDF if you prefer.

 

screen-shot-2016-12-12-at-10-33-28

Vol. 1. On the creation of the world; On the allegories of the sacred laws; On the cherubim, and On the flaming sword, and On the first-born child of man, Cain; Of Cain and his birth; On the sacrifices of Abel and Cain; On the principle that the worse is accustomed to be always plotting against the better; On the posterity of Cain; On the giants; On the unchangeableness of God; On the tilling of the earth by Noah; About the planting of Noah; On drunkenness; On sobriety.

Vol. 2. On the confusion of languages; On the migration of Abraham; On the question, Who is the heir of divine things; On the meeting for the sake of receiving instruction; On fugitives; On the question why certain names in the Holy Scriptures are changed; On the doctrine that dreams are sent from God, Books I [and] II; On the life of the wise man made perfect by instruction, or, On the unwritten law, that is to say, on Abraham; On the life of a man occupied with affairs of state, or, On Joseph.

Vol. 3. On the life of Moses, that is to say, on the theology and prophetic office of Moses, Books I-III; Concerning the Ten Commandments, which are the heads of the Law; On circumcision; On monarchy, Books I [and] II; On the question, What the rewards and honours are which belong to the priests; On animals fit for sacrifice, or, On victims; On those who offer sacrifice; On the Commandment that the wages of a harlot are not to be received in the sacred treasury; On the special laws which are referred to three articles of the Decalogue, namely, the third, fourth and fifth: about oaths, and the reverence due to them, about the holy Sabbath, about the honour to be paid to parents; To show that the Festivals are ten in number; On the festival of the basket of first-fruits; On the honour commanded to be paid to parents; On those special laws which are referrible to two commandments in the Decalogue, the sixth and seventh, against adulterers and all lewd persons, and against murderers and all violence; On those special laws which are contained under and have reference to the eighth ninth, and tenth commandments; On justice; On the creation of magistrates; On three virtues, that is to say, on courage, humanity and repentance; On rewards and punishments; On curses; On nobility; To prove that every man who is virtuous is also free.

Vol. 4. On a contemplative life, or, On the virtues of suppliants; On the incorruptibility of the world; Against Flaccus; On the virtues and on the office of ambassadors, addressed to Caius; Concerning the world; The fragments of the lost works; Fragments extracted from the Parallels of John of Damascus; Fragments from a monkish manuscript; Fragments preserved by Antonius; Fragments from an anonymous collection in the Bodleian Library at Oxford; Fragments from an unpublished manuscript in the library of the French king; A volume of questions, and solutions to those questions, which arise in Genesis; Index to the four volumes

 

Forbidden Fruit in the Midst of the Garden – Alex Rivera

In five parts:

 

Forbidden Fruit in the Midst of the Garden (Part 1)
Forbidden Fruit in the Midst of the Garden (Part 2)
Forbidden Fruit in the Midst of the Garden (Part 3)
Forbidden Fruit in the Midst of the Garden (Part 4)
Forbidden Fruit in the Midst of the Garden (Part 5)

Gnosis and Christianity: Jesus-Logos-Christos

THEOSOPHY, Vol. 56, No. 11, September, 1968
(Pages 334-344; Size: 32K)
(Number 11 of a 36-part series)
THE CHRISTIAN SCHEME(4)

GNOSIS AND CHRISTIANITY: Jesus-Logos-Christos

http://www.wisdomworld.org/additional/christianity/Jesus-Logos-Christos.html

Joseph Atwill on Red Ice Radio

Joseph Atwill Hour 1 ~ Caesar’s Messiah, The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus

 

 

Uploaded on Feb 20, 2012
Joseph Atwill is an independent scholar who has set the world of New Testament scholarship in a new direction. In his book “Caesar’s Messiah – The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus”, Atwill outlines the series of events in Jesus’ ministry that are parallels with the events of the battle campaign of Titus Flavius as recorded by Josephus Flavius in “War of the Jews”. Numerous scholars had noticed the parallels between the Gospels and Josephus’ work before, but Atwill is the first to notice that all the parallels take place in exact sequence and draw a revolutionary conclusion. Follow along in this program as Atwill contends these correlations, talks about linguistic typology and the reasons why the imperial Cult of Rome, with the Flavians at the center, wanted to invent the story of Jesus Christ for their own benefit.

http://www.redicecreations.com/
Category
Education
License
Standard YouTube License

Non-Christian Testimony for Jesus? Josephus, Tacitus and other Frauds ~ by Kenneth Humphreys

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html

Christianity has no part in Tacitus’s history of the Caesars. Except for one questionable reference in the Annals he records nothing of a cult marginal even in his own day.

Sometime before 117 AD, the Roman historian apparently wrote:

“Nero looked around for a scapegoat, and inflicted the most fiendish tortures on a group of persons already hated for their crimes. This was the sect known as Christians. Their founder, one Christus, had been put to death by the procurator, Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius. This checked the abominable superstition for a while, but it broke out again and spread, not merely through Judea, where it originated, but even to Rome itself, the great reservoir and collecting ground for every kind of depravity and filth. Those who confessed to being Christians were at once arrested, but on their testimony a great crowd of people were convicted, not so much on the charge of arson, but of hatred of the entire human race.

Their deaths were made farcical. Dressed in wild animals’ skins , they were torn to pieces by dogs, or crucified, or made into torches to be ignited after dark as substitutes for daylight.”

– Tacitus (Book 15, chapter 44):

As we have seen, the term ‘Christian’ was not in use during the reign of Nero and there would not have been ‘a great crowd’ unless we are speaking of Jews, not Christians. ‘Jewish/Christians’ – being perceived by Roman authorities (and the populace at large) simply as Jews meant that early Christ-followers also got caught up in general attacks upon the Jews.

“Their effects to dissemble their Jewish origins were detected by the decisive test of circumcision; nor were the Roman magistrates at leisure to enquire into the difference of their religious tenets.”

– Edward Gibbon (Decline and Fall)

One consequence of the fire which destroyed much of Rome in 64 AD was a capitation tax levied on the Jews and it was the Jews – throughout the empire – who were required to pay for the city’s rebuilding – a factor which helped to radicalise many Jews in the late 60s AD.

Not for the first time would Christian scribes expropriated the real suffering of a whole people to create an heroic ‘origins’ fable…

No Christian apologist for centuries ever quoted the passage of Tacitus – not in fact, until it had appeared almost word-for-word in the writings of Sulpicius Severus, in the early fifth century, where it is mixed in with other myths. Sulpicius’s contemporaries credited him with a skill in the ‘antique’ hand. He put it to good use and fantasy was his forte: his Life of St. Martin is replete with numerous ‘miracles’, including raising of the dead and personal appearances by Jesus and Satan.

His dastardly story of Nero was embellished during the Renaissance into a fantastic fable with Nero ‘fiddling while Rome burned’. Nero took advantage of the destruction to build his ‘Golden House’ though no serious scholar believes anymore that he started the fire (we now know Nero was in his hometown of Antium – Anzio – when the blaze started.) Indeed, Nero opened his palace garden for temporary shelter to those made homeless.

In short, the passage in Tacitus is a fraud and adds no evidence for a historic Jesus.

Update: The probing eye of science

11th century monk corrects Tacitus: “Goodies” to read “Christians”!

Ultraviolet photo of a critical word from the earliest known extant manuscript of Tacitus (second Medicean, Laurentian library, Italy).

The photograph reveals that the word purportedly used by Tacitus in Annals 15.44, chrestianos (“the good”), has been overwritten as christianos (“the Christians”) by a later hand, a deceit which explains the excessive space between the letters and the exaggerated “dot” (dash) above the new “i”. The entire “torched Christians” passage of Tacitus is not only fake, it has been repeatedly “worked over” by fraudsters to improve its value as evidence for the Jesus myth.

The truth may be that there was an original gnostic cult following a personified virtue, “Jesus Chrestos” (Jesus the Good). Consequently, they were called Chrestians, an appellation which seems to have attached itself at an early date to the sectarians of the “heretic” Marcion. Support for this possibility comes from the earliest known “Christian” inscription, found in the 19th century on a Marcionite church at Deir Ali, three miles south of Damascus. Dated to circa 318, the inscription reads “The meeting-house of the Marcionists, in the village of Lebaba, of the Lord and Saviour Jesus the Good”, using the word Chrestos, not Christos.

As a flesh-and-blood, “historical” Jesus gradually eclipsed the allegorical Jesus so, too, did “goodness” get eclipsed by “Messiahship”. Justin, in his First Apology (4), about thirty years after the death of Tacitus, plays on the similarity in sound of the two words Χριστὸς (Christ) and χρηστὸς (good, excellent) to argue for the wholesome, commendable character of Jesus followers.

The Chrestianos Issue in Tacitus Reinvestigated by Erík Zara © 2009

see more at the link above.

Part 1/7 – Roman Dogma v History – Piero Scaruffi

http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/jesus.html

The Roman dogma vs history

The history of Jesus and the history of Christianity that we know today is the dogma that the Roman empire forced on all its provinces. When Constantine converted to Christianity, Rome became the center of power also for Christianity and any challenging center was wiped out. What Jesus really said and meant will probably never be known.
A new wave of “Historical Jesus” research has emerged in the wake of the discovery in 1947 in Egypt of the ancient manuscripts that are known today as the “Nag Hammadi library” and as “Gnostic Gospels”, and of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947. Until then, little was known about the early Christians known as the Gnostics. “We’ve listened to the winners, and their story doesn’t make any sense. So let’s listen to the losers and see if their story makes more sense” (Freke).
The other gospels

Many gospels were written, including and besides the four official ones. The four official gospels were written in Greece in Greek, the earliest (Marks’) dating from the year 70 and the last one (John’s) dating from the second century after Christ. (The oldest manuscript of the gospels that we found dates from the fourth century, but we have fragments that have been dated from the mid second century and we can deduct the date of composition from references in the texts). There is general agreement that three of the official ones (the “synoptic” gospels) derive from a common source (or Luke’s and Matthew’s simply derive from Mark’s), whereas John’s is inherently different. One hypothesis is that John’s and this common source derive, in turn, from a pre-existing text, called “Q”, that has never been found. One of the banned gospels, the gospel of Judas Thomas, has been considered a potential candidate for “Q” or for something closer to “Q” than anything else we have found. Note that the very first gospel (70AD) was written when Christianity had already spread throughout the Roman Empire, and emperor Nero had already started persecuting Christians (64AD).
John’s gospel is markedly different from the other three gospels: it names many people who are anonymous in the other three gospels and it includes two episodes (the wedding at Cana and the raising of Lazarus) that the other gospels seem curiously unaware of. It “sounds” more knowledgeable: it provides details about the early proselytizing of Jesus and the rivalry between Jesus’ sect and John the Baptist’s sect. The account of Jesus’ trial and crucifixion is more credible. Yet, John’s gospel is unquestionably a later work than the other three official gospels.
It is also likely that the gospels as we know them have been heavily rewritten after they were originally written. Papias of Hierapolis in 110 talks of the gospel of St Matthew as a collections of oracles, not of miracles.

All four official gospels were written after Paul wrote his letters. Paul’s letters are the oldest Christian documents. But Paul admits he never met Jesus and, in fact, his letters contain almost no reference at all to Jesus’ lives.
Irenaeus (at the end of the second century) is the first Christian writer who mentions the dogma of the four gospels. Before him there is no mention of those gospels as being the only “good” ones. Justin Martyr (150) does not mention a New Testament, does not mention Mark, Matthew, Luke or John. On the other hand, he mentions the “memoirs” of the apostles, which could be the letters and the “gospels” attributed to Peter and others (mostly not recognized by the Church) besides the letters of Paul and the acts of the Apostles. In 170 Tatian admits he was working on a new gospel that would summarize all the other ones, thereby implying that Christians were still writing and rewriting gospels based on their own assumptions and preferences, not on historical facts. Also in the second century, Clement of Alexandria admits that two versions of Mark’s gospel existed but one was being suppressed because it contained two passages that should not be viewed by average Christians (both passages could be interpreted as Lazarus being Jesus’ lover and his “resurrection” as being an “initiation” to some kind of sexual rite, the way most pagan “mysteries” implied a death and a rebirth). Thus, the texts were being chosen, edited and purged for the first two centuries of the Christian era. That process had solidified by the time Irenaeus wrote that there were only four gospels.
Irenaeus’ choice was formalized in 325 at the council of Nicaea, where those four gospels became the official dogma of the Roman Church and all other histories of Jesus were banned.
Irenaeus picked only a fraction of the available literature on Jesus. He excluded some of the most popular texts, such as the gospel of Thomas and the gospel of the Hebrews (by far the two most popular texts among early Christians). Either the memory was lost of what was old and what was new (Irenaeus claims that Mark and Luke were eyewitness which of course they were not) or the Church was already at work to completely reinvent the story of Jesus to suit whatever ideology. For example, if one wanted people to believe in Paul’s letters, then he would probably choose those four gospels over all the other ones. The fact is that the dogma immediately ignited a very contentious issue.
Texts outlawed by Rome paint a very different picture of Jesus’ teaching, especially the ones written by the “gnostic” Christians. Sometimes Jesus appears as a sort of communist revolutionary, sometimes as a sort of Buddhist thinker. In the most ancient texts he rarely appears as the Jesus who makes miracles and ascended to heaven, and sometimes does not appear at all. Sometimes he barely appears at all, while others (James, Paul) are the predominant characters. Peter, the most famous of Jesus’ followers, is actually a very minor figure in early Christian documents.
Today, it is sometimes difficult to understand why some gospels were banned. Several of the banned gospels are apparently consistent with the dogma: why ban them? The devil is probably in the details: in 325 Christianity had become the religion of the Roman empire and it was not nice to emphasize that it was the Romans who had killed Jesus; in 325 Christianity had taken the beliefs that would become the Catholic dogma, and it was not nice to emphasize that Jesus had brothers (although even the official gospels say so) or that Mary Magdalene was always with him (although even the official gospels say so) and it was nice to undermine Jesus’ miracles. Most of the gospels may have been considered redundant (they didn’t add anything meaningful to the story) and dangerous (they could stress aspects of Jesus’ story that the Church would rather downplay).
The gnostic Christians were persecuted after Rome converted to Christianity and most of their texts were burned. The church also outlawed all other histories of Jesus but the four official ones.

The councils

Initially, there was strong disagreement among Christians about what Christianity was all about. The Christian dogma was formalized by a series of councils, whose conclusions were largely arbitrary. The council of Nicaea (325) mandated that only four gospels were true: the others were heretic. The council of Ephesus (431) sanctioned that the divine nature of Jesus was superior to his human nature. The council of Calcedonia (451) accepted pope Leone I’s theory that Jesus was both human and divine (and this was based on Greek philosophy, not on historical evidence or on the gospels’ testimony).
The historians

Other than the gospels, we know of early Christianity mainly through the Jewish historian Josephus (37-96 AD), but he himself became a Roman citizen and even an advisor to two emperors. Two centuries later, Eusebius and Irenaeus wrote about the origins of the Christian religion. Both of them basically codified Christianity as we know it. Irenaeus makes the oldest known claim that there are only four official gospels and the others are work of the devil. Eusebius (who was working for Constantine and even wrote his biography) compiled a history of the Roman church from Peter on (Eusebius wrote that the emperor is the vehicle of God on earth).

Josephus on Jesus/Forgery and Fraud?/Flavius Testimonium

The Jesus Forgery: Josephus Untangled

by Acharya S/D.M. Murdock

When addressing the mythical nature of Jesus Christ, one issue repeatedly raised is the purported “evidence” of his existence to be found in the writings of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from about 37 to 100 CE. In Josephus’s Antiquities of the Jews appears the notorious passage regarding Christ called the “Testimonium Flavianum” (“TF”):

 

“Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,–a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.” (Whitson, 379)

 

This surprisingly brief and simplistic passage constitutes the “best proof” of Jesus’s existence in the entire ancient non-Christian library comprising the works of dozens of historians, writers, philosophers, politicians and others who never mentioned the great sage and wonderworker Jesus Christ, even though they lived contemporaneously with or shortly after the Christian savior’s purported advent.

 

A False Witness

Despite the best wishes of sincere believers and the erroneous claims of truculent apologists, the Testimonium Flavianum has been demonstrated continually over the centuries to be a forgery, likely interpolated by Catholic Church historian Eusebius in the fourth century. So thorough and universal has been this debunking that very few scholars of repute continued to cite the passage after the turn of the 19th century. Indeed, the TF was rarely mentioned, except to note that it was a forgery, and numerous books by a variety of authorities over a period of 200 or so years basically took it for granted that the Testimonium Flavianum in its entirety was spurious, an interpolation and a forgery. As Dr. Gordon Stein relates:

“…the vast majority of scholars since the early 1800s have said that this quotation is not by Josephus, but rather is a later Christian insertion in his works. In other words, it is a forgery, rejected by scholars.”

continued here

http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

Related:

https://think-and-discern.com/2014/12/12/atwill-interview-on-talk-now-radio-caesars-messiah/