Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About gilius

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

9,386 profile views
  • Dib

  1. 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?
  2. 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?
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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).
  6. 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?
  7. No? Caldrail, which one do you believe: that all those parallels I listed - 40-50 between both works - are there by coincidence or design?
  8. That's only the beginning of the proof, but thanks for your feedback. You seem to be improving yourself!
  9. 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
  10. Is it possible to use tables on this forum? Testing 123 testing 321 testing 321 Testing
  11. gilius

    Spam weblink posting removed

    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.
  12. gilius

    Spam weblink posting removed

    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.
  13. 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,
  14. 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?
  15. 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.