Chapter
21 - The Eulogy of James : The Epicenter of the Fictional Jesus Conspiracy
From the previous chapter, the
epistemological formula is derived: (HOSEA 6:1-3 and Matthew 27:51-54). These are
the "saints" mentioned by Paul, John, James and others in the New
Testament Canon: Matthew 27:52, Revelation 8:3, and Jude 1:3 are just a small percentage.
The connection to the "saints" means that the prophecies and
predictions contained in the New Testament were intended to be fulfilled seven
decades after the Temple was destroyed by the Romans (The Gospel of John 19:34
and Revelation 1:7). The last Gospel intended to address and answer the many
questions concerning Jesus. The reason for this is John's attack on those who
doubted the existence of Jesus (1st John 4:3 and 2nd John 1:7). John attacks
the doubters because the disbelievers of the Christian message may have
utilized the false prediction by Paul earlier to attack the early Christian
community. The non-believers strongly pointed to the various false predictions
located in the Gospel of Matthew and Paul's own letters then they concluded that
Jesus never existed since he never showed up when the Temple was destroyed by
the Romans.
Before concluding the hypothesis
that the Gospel of John was the last Gospel or rather a document highlighting
the deeds of a supposedly supernatural Jesus, Paul simply repeated the behavior
from his teacher and leader - James. Acts 21:18-25 is proof of James
leadership. There is also evidence from the Talmud itself describing James as
leader of the early Christians:
Avodah Zarah,Fol.17,col. 1 - Rahsi
says heresy here refers to the "heresy of James," or, in other words,
Christianity.
Therefore, the Gospel of John was a
document with a multipurpose role: an explanation to the reason of why the
"saints" were dispatched by James into the city of Jerusalem while it
was recovering from a massive earthquake, and a fictional description of a
supposedly superhuman Jesus. Let me first submit the possible scenarios not
mentioned in the Gospels but hinted within the Gospels:
(1) These three: Matthew, Peter, and
another unnamed disciple took the body of Jesus out of the tomb of Joseph of
Arimathea. So; it would appear hours later, in front of the followers of Jesus,
he resurrected himself.
(2) They transferred the body out of
the tomb after the Sabbath observation which is Saturday evening sunset. The
hint is stated in Matthew 24:20 concerning the prohibition of travelling during
the Sabbath.
(3) They then traveled to a location
several distance past Mount Nebo in Jordan. These actions would explain why
Peter and the other two disciples were absent Sunday morning. Hints are the
three wise kings from the East located only in the Gospel of Matthew 2:1-12.
These hints which are also textual errors implicates the author of the Gospel
of Matthew in a conspiracy.
Let us review the information:
The Gospel of John, the last Gospel,
hints of Peter and another disciple in the tomb before the Eulogy (Gospel of
John 20:3-10). The composition of the Gospel of John was to address many
questions which had arisen after the failed materialization of Jesus because of
the connected earlier "dispensationalist" predictions stated by Paul
and the Gospels of Matthew. The reason is because both writers described a
desecration of the Temple. However, when the Temple was destroyed many people doubted
the validity of not only the predictions but also the Christian movement.
The proposed interjected theory:
It is very possible that John, in
the Book of Revelation, hinted this in symbolic language in Revelation chapter
five. This theory could be true based on the fact that "Armageddon"
in Revelation chapter sixteen is describing the crucifixion of Jesus (rather
than a future event). Also, Revelation chapter eleven describes the symbolic
two witnesses which are actually describing the loyal "body of
Christ": Gentile Christian and Jewish-Christians. The previous evidence
shows that John followed Paul's "gospel" in conflict with Matthew
10:5-15. The hint connecting both Revelation chapter five and sixteen is
Revelation 11:13. The verse Revelation 11:13 is describing two events: the
chaos of the massive earthquake after the crucifixion of Jesus and the Temple’s
destruction by Vespasian. Therefore, the body of work contained in the Book of
Revelation was presenting past events and justifying the reasons for Christianity.
John utilized symbolic language directed for the early Christians and to keep
their faith in the midst of the Roman onslaught. The conclusion is obvious, the
book of Revelation was written for a particular time and purpose. It was not
written as a prediction for distant future events. It was also written by
someone who was involved in the cover-up of the real events surrounding the
resurrection of Jesus. Supporting evidence is Jude 1:8-11. Jude is speaking
about some Jews and followers who have used psychics or psychic energy to see
what really happened to the body of Jesus. These psychics existed among the
Jewish community and some were healers as is noted by a modern author. The
Jewish group involved in the previous activity are called the Essenes a fact
which Josephus mentions in his well-known treatise. The modern author which has
reviewed his claim is Rebecca Gray and she gives several evidence of the
ability of some Jews during the era of Jesus who healed, predicted possible
future events and looked back into the past to get information. Furthermore;
the statement by Peter, in the collection attributed to him, is also a cover-up
(2nd Peter 1:16-21) and a support of moving “the goalpost” (2nd
Peter 3:8).
Before the document was produced by
Matthew - The Gospel of Matthew - James told Peter and the two other disciples
to take Jesus body out of the tomb. He then prepared himself to give a speech Sunday
morning using Hosea 6:1-3. The other unmentioned "disciple" is Matthew.
James was approached by the real doubters and early skeptics of the faith. They
were pointed out by Paul (2nd Timothy 2:17). This is central because Matthew
27:52-53 is connected with the behavior of Hymenaeus and Philetus who expressed
the earlier idea of James (Hosea 6:1-3 and Matthew 27:52-53). It is very
possible that these two individuals, or a group of doubters like
"Thomas", were at the eulogy and gave a set of questions to James as
to the whereabouts of three individuals: Matthew, Peter and another unnamed
disciple. The set of questions by the doubters and the authorities created the
need to construct a document called the Gospel of Matthew. After the Temple’s
destruction, the writer of the last Gospel, John defends the previous subject
located in the Gospel of Matthew and defends the failed prediction by
describing the supposed resurrection of Jesus. Furthermore; the mention of
Thomas, the doubting Thomas, is very peculiar. The reason for this observation
is because of the absence of a document from this disciple who doubted Jesus'
resurrection (John 20:26-31). For some odd reason the only document we have
using his name is a "Gnostic Gospel" which is known in academic
circles to be not written by him. There is also missing a document from Lazarus
(John 12:1-19) which could have explained the detail of his own miracle and
verified it for all times. The Gospel of John was written after the three
epistles of John and the epistles of John were written some days after the
Temple's destruction. These doubts were created because of the failed
materialization of Jesus returning after the Temple's destruction which created
a crisis within the Christian movement. Hence, the reason of why the three
epistles of John addressed the issue of those doubting the existence of Jesus
(1st Epistle of John 2:18-22, 4:3; 2nd Epistle of John 1:7). However, the
Gospel of John was a Gospel reacting to the doubts after the Temple’s
destruction which also addressed another concern surrounding another set of
questions created concerning Jesus' burial. In the 1st Epistle, John, attacks
the Roman philosophers (Stoics and Epicureans) questioning the existence of
Jesus because Jesus did not show up during the Temple's destruction (1st
Epistle of John 2:16). The reasons is because the earlier source, Matthew 24:20
and 2nd Thessalonians 2:1-7, hinted of a desecration of the Temple which did
not materialize and plus Jesus did not show up even when the Temple was being
destroyed by the Romans. Therefore, the three Gospels which were formed before
the destruction of the Temple by Vespasian: Matthew, Luke and Mark. The two
Gospels written before the execution of Paul by Nero: Matthew and Luke. The
Gospel written after Paul's execution: The Gospel of Mark. These four were
created after an important event threatened the validity of the movement
starting with the crucifixion of Jesus which created the “The Testament of
Jesus” (The Gospel of Matthew).
Therefore, the Gospel of John was
the second Millennialist document or Book written by John. Furthermore, the
first set of collections written as Millennialist documents and second composed
work, after the Book of Hebrews, were the Epistles of John. The Book of Hebrews
is the only document written by John to be a Dispensationalistic document or a
document written before the Temple’s destruction. John then produced a document
that would convince Jews and non-Jews of the life, death and resurrection of
Jesus because many questioned the validity of the predictions in the earlier
documents. In other words, the predictions within the previous documents failed
to materialize even after the Temple’s destruction. Furthermore, it was
directed in the beginning towards the Greeks versus the Romans of the city of
Jerusalem (The Gospel of John chapter one and the Gospel of John 12:20). The
previous evidence may have been one of the many factors which lead to John’s
arrest and exile by the Roman authorities. Hence, one of the possible reasons
to produce such a document which would have covered two things:
(1) To present a document defending
the Christian doctrine after the Temple's destruction. To also explain the
location and reaction of Peter and Matthew while visiting the tomb (The Gospel
of John 20:1-10). The truth is that James told a group of disciples to take the
body out of the tomb before Sunday morning. The previous observation had to be
the situation because many people seen the failure of the desecration prophecy
and then doubted the existence of Jesus.
(2) A document written by John to
address the various questions by the mourning citizens of Jerusalem (Revelation
chapter ten and Revelation 11:13). The following verses are an expression of
the followers after the Temple's destruction. The verse, Revelation 10:11
is presenting to the reader the "Book of Revelation" after the
author years earlier had written down the "Gospel of John". In other
words, John was saying, that right now I am writing down and composing the Book
of Revelation (Revelation 10:11). However, he had written down something previously
(Revelation 11:13) after the destruction of the Temple: It is the Gospel of
John. Therefore; it is known that the Gospel of John, mentioned in Revelation
chapter five, may have been the catalyst of John's arrest and exile.
The first Gospel to be produced is
the Gospel of Matthew or “The Testament of Jesus” (Hebrews 9:15-20). The Gospel
of Matthew is Jewish-Christian in orientation because of Matthew 24:20. This
verse states a regulation for travelling during the Sabbath. The obvious
conclusion:
(1) The Sabbath regulation noted in
the Gospel of Matthew presents the problem that this document was written in
haste. There are several verses within the Gospel of Matthew which supports
this theory. Most importantly, the Gospel of Matthew has expressed the idea
that the Temple was not going to be destroyed but rather desecrated by the
Romans. There are parts in other Gospels which presents that the writers
predicted its destruction but this will be shown to be a contradiction because
at times the Gospels show both the desecration and destruction of the Temple.
The previous was questioned by all within and without the Christian movement
because Jesus failed to materialize or return when the Temple was destroyed.
Hence, the previous events forced John to move “the goalpost” in the Book of
Revelation.
(2) The Gospel of Matthew was
written to address the deeds of the "saints" in Matthew 27:52-53. It
stated their efforts and this may have satisfied most of the followers of James
(followers of Jesus) who attended the Sunday morning eulogy. Then it attacked
the doubters within the city by saying they tried to bribe witnesses in Matthew
28:11-15 concerning the supposed resurrection of Jesus.
(3) The Gospel of Matthew was a
motivational document addressing to those who participated in the "Good
News" operation after the eulogy of James on Sunday morning after Jesus’
burial. Obviously, the doubters within the camp subsided. Therefore, the Gospel
of Matthew successfully strengthened James' leadership years before the Temple’s
destruction. The Gospel of Matthew motivated the followers and it keeped them
loyal after the negative responses by the inhabitants of the city of Jerusalem.
However; the last Gospel, the Gospel of John, had to be composed to address the
failed predictions concerning the Temple's predicted desecration and evident destruction.
The evidence of this is noted in the Epistles of John. The epistles are
evidence that the Gospels were rewritten to address the Temples destruction in
the face of many doubters inside and outside of the Christian movement.
(4) It also exposes the fact that
they thought something would happen soon concerning the Temple during the Roman
occupation. This could be sensed throughout Matthew chapter twenty-four.
Matthew 24:20, in reality, simply allows the reader to observe that the
predictions were intended to keep the followers of Jesus loyal to diminish the
doubters and skeptics within the movement from creating further doubts
concerning the agreed doctrine (read the chapter on "Armageddon and the
Breastplates" of Revelation chapter nine). The truth is that this
particular verse is an outlier because it also exposes that the predictions and
prophecies within the New Testament Canon are false. The reason, to make this
very clear, is that the Sabbath regulation for traveling is not followed today
by Christians and was only followed by observant Jews. Moreover, the context
within the chapter is saying that the return of Jesus would happen during those
conditions stated in Matthew 24:30 and 24:36. These two previous verses are
mutually tied with Matthew 24:20. Therefore, the Gospel of Matthew was
primarily a motivational document against the doubters and skeptics within the
early Jewish-Christian movement before the Gentile Christians outnumbered them and
before the destruction of the Temple. The previous destruction of the Temple
created the conditions for the creation of the Gospel of John which addressed
the groups which attacked the validity of the predictions and the Christian
movement itself. Paul's role was proven crucial to motivate the Gentile
Christians and this initiated another cover into the conspiracy: The Gospel of
Luke and the Gospel of Mark (2nd Timothy 4:11-13). The reason for the Gospel of
Mark is based on Paul’s martyrdom or execution by Nero and to counter the theme
of Matthew 10:5-10 which went against the proposed Paul’s inclusion principle.
The writer of the Book of Revelation, John's last document, expresses the
growth of the Gentile Christians but falsely predicted that the
Jewish-Christians would see the return of Jesus. Obviously, there are no
Jewish-Christians from the era of John which exist today or in the modern era.
If John lived longer then when the seven decades expired, John would have
produced another document moving the goalpost to another objective. Therefore,
the real objective is the installment of a theocracy (Revelation 2:27 and
Revelation 19:15).
It could be concluded that the
Gospel of Matthew satisfied most of the followers because of Matthew 27:52-53.
Peter was left out until years later when he addressed some issues from Rome
(1st Peter 4:13) but this was enacted because of the controversial opinion of
Paul (Romans 11:23-26 versus Matthew 10:5-15). All of the documents highlight
the importance of one thing: The inclusion principle of accepting someone
outside of our local tribe (Romans 11:23-25). In other words, the evolution of
the local tribe affiliation into the Human or universi tribe described
and adopted by Paul in Romans chapter eleven in conflict with Matthew 10:5-15.
Is it important to present later
additions (suspected verses) as a factor to determine the validity of my thesis?
No.
If we were to observe the evidence
submitted: Matthew 24:20, Matthew 27:52-53, Matthew 10:5-15 and the verses used
in the Gospel of John the conclusion would still be the same. These verses were
never in question concerning the later additions. Also, Shem Tov's Hebrew of
the Gospel of Matthew was composed several hundred years later. The verses in
question would not be affected to form the previous conclusion. The words of
the main scholar and leaders of the church year after the first generation:
"Matthew also issued a written Gospel among
the Hebrews in their own dialect while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome
and laying the foundations of the church." - Irenaeus, Adv. Haer.
3.1.1
The above evidence is the reason why later additions
(verses) are in dispute in both Gospels. It is quite possible that when
conditions changed all four Gospels added more verses to reflect the
preconceived inherited belief: Of a "man" that is part god and man.
This particular strand of belief was later intertwined in later editions and
revisions to be read among the growing Greek/Gentile Christian members within
the "Body of Christ". Therefore, the theory is strong because it is
rational and reasonable that the Gospel writers edited their story (Gospels),
much later, to fit a changing audience. The litmus test, is to abrogate or
leave out the disputed verses and still it would not change the proposed
theory. The above historical saying actually supports the proposed theory
because of the evidence located in the Book of Revelation showing that John
implied of authorship of another book - The Gospel of John. The above also
exposes another observation: The Gospels of Matthew has predicted a false
“prophecy” based on the information given by Irenaeus. Matthew chapter twenty-four
falsely predicted the desecration of the Temple and Jesus’ physical return. The
reason is because the Temple was destroyed and Jesus did not return. Two other
Gospels follow the same pattern: The Gospel of Luke and the Gospel of Mark.
Only one Gospel mentions the destruction of the Temple: The Gospel of John.
This would explain why John was detailing the destruction of the Temple and
defending the resurrection of Jesus within the Gospel of John because many
people during the era was criticizing the predictions within the previous three
Gospels.
The next two evidence
is presented:
"Matthew collected the oracles (ta logia)
in the Hebrew language, and each interpreted them as best he could." - Papias
(Eusebius, H.E. 3.39.16)
"As having learnt by tradition concerning
the four Gospels, which alone are unquestionable in the Church of God under
heaven, that first was written according to Matthew, who was once a tax
collector but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, who published it for those
who from Judaism came to believe, composed as it was in the Hebrew
language." - Origen (Eusebius, H.E. 6.25.4)
Simply, the evidence above supports
the theory again. Matthew 24:20 mentions one key term: "Sabbath".
This is the reason why two things are apparent:
(1) The intent of the writer was for
the first group of "saints": The Jewish-Christians who were directed
and dispatched by James to proclaim the "Good News" into the city of
Jerusalem after the massive Earthquake which occurred naturally after Jesus'
death.
(2) The prediction, concerning the desecration of the
Temple, is proven false because the "Sabbath" regulation for
traveling is obviously irrelevant and conflicts with Paul's own winning
doctrine. The triumph of Paul's interpretation was inclusion of Gentile
Christians in opposition to Matthew 10:5-15. The previous observation is supported
by the compromise concerning foods (Acts 21:18-25) and the behavior of the
Christian leadership (Galatians 2:7-12). Nevertheless, it is understood that
Paul was expected to become the next important player in the cover-up and
conspiracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment