The passage makes clear the logic behind the New Testament authors’ decision to establish the precise forty-year interval between Jesus’ death and the destruction of the Judean fortress Masada. They wished to show not only that Christianity’s origin paralleled Judaism’s, which proved it had replaced Judaism’s special relationship with God, but also that the 70 C.E. destruction of Jerusalem had been divinely ordained. The “men of war were consumed because they obeyed not the voice of the Lord”—exactly as had happened after the original Passover.
For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people that were men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed not the voice of the Lord: unto whom the Lord sware that he would not shew them the land, which the Lord sware unto their fathers that he would give us, a land that floweth with milk and honey.189
Forty years is the traditional period of penance for the Israelites as well as the length of a generation. This tradition stems, of course, from the original forty years of wandering. By giving Christianity a forty-year cycle, the Romans were “proving” that their conquest of Judea was merely another case of God’s wrath for Jewish wickedness, as had often been recorded by the Jews’ own religious literature.
And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord; and the Lord delivered them into the hand of the Philistines forty years.190
I want to underscore how important this forty-year period after Jesus’ death is for the theory of there being a single source for the New Testament and the works of Josephus. In the Gospel of John, Jesus’ ministry is described as having encompassed three Passovers. These three Passovers are not mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels. The author of John consciously establishes the date of Christ’s death as occurring in the year 33 C.E. He does this because this is the only way possible, arithmetically, to create the correct alignment with the prophecies of Daniel and also to create a forty-year cycle between Jesus’ resurrection and the end of the Jewish war.
The works of Josephus have been deliberately configured to demonstrate that the prophecies of Daniel culminate in the 70 C.E. destruction of Jerusalem—an understanding he shared with the writers of the Gospels.
In order to prove that Rome had God’s divine providence, the creators of Christianity provided “evidence” that the 70 C.E. sacking of Jerusalem was foreseen by Daniel, the evidence being the “histories” of Josephus. In this way, all the important dates of Jesus’ life were back-calculated to be in alignment with the destruction of Jerusalem. This is completely clear with regard to the beginning of his ministry and his resurrection. My conjecture is that Jesus’ birth was also established at exactly seventy years before the siege of Jerusalem. Though scholars have given a number of explanations of how the year of Christ’s birth was exactly seventy years from the destruction of Jerusalem, my analysis suggests that it was done to mimic the seventy years “in the desolations of Jerusalem” described in the Book of Daniel.
In the first year of his reign Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.191
The dates of Jesus’ life were simply more “pieces” of Judaism chosen by the creators of Christianity to meet its logical and theological requirements. The central events of Christianity—the birth of Christ, the beginning of his ministry, and his death, are 1 C.E., 30 C.E., and 33 C.E. All these dates were calculated backward from the destruction of Jerusalem. They were chosen to fit into a pattern that combined the prophecies of Daniel and the life of Moses.
The beginning of Jesus’ ministry in 30 C.E. was calculated to be exactly forty years from the day that the Romans under Titus pitched camp outside Jerusalem, the “Second Coming.” This dating system is not based upon the birth of a world-historical religious leader, but orients itself from the destruction of a city.
Thus, the theological chronology created by the inventors of Christianity ran in a forty-year cycle between Jesus’ resurrection and the fall of Masada. While this forty-year cycle was in motion, the other template for Christianity, the prophecies of Daniel, ran concurrently.
In fact, Christianity’s version of the prophecies of Daniel was heading for its conclusion on the same day as its forty-year cycle of “wandering”.
In the following passage, notice that the day the Romans pitched camp at Jerusalem was the fourteenth of Nisan. Josephus is falsifying history once again to create both a parallel between Jesus’ ministry and Titus’ campaign and a point of orientation for the prophecies of Daniel.
The date Josephus gives for when the Romans first pitched camp outside Jerusalem was exactly forty years from the first of the three Passovers used by John to date Jesus’ ministry—the day that Jesus first came to Jerusalem.192 Josephus wishes us to believe that Jesus came to Jerusalem forty years before Titus began his siege of Jerusalem, a siege that Jesus predicted would occur before his generation had passed away. He also wishes us to believe that Masada fell forty years to the day from Jesus’ resurrection. These two perfect forty-year cycles are, of course, absurd and, in and of themselves, show the planned relationship between the New Testament and Wars of the Jews.
I have included the entire passage, because it shows the brutality of the destruction. Notice the use of the word “repent” in conjunction with the Jewish rebels.
And, indeed, why do I relate these particular calamities? While Manneus, the son of Lazarus, came running to Titus at this very time, and told him that there had been carried out through that one gate, which was intrusted to his care, no fewer than a hundred and fifteen thousand eight hundred and eighty dead bodies, in the interval between the fourteenth day of the month Xanthicus [Nisan], when the Romans pitched their camp by the city, and the first day of the month Panemus [Tammuz].
This was itself a prodigious multitude; and though this man was not himself set as a governor at that gate, yet was he appointed to pay the public stipend for carrying these bodies out, and so was obliged of necessity to number them, while the rest were buried by their relations; though all their burial was but this, to bring them away, and cast them out of the city.
After this man there ran away to Titus many of the eminent citizens, and told him the entire number of the poor that were dead, and that no fewer than six hundred thousand were thrown out at the gates, though still the number of the rest could not be discovered;
and they told him further, that when they were no longer able to carry out the dead bodies of the poor, they laid their corpses on heaps in very large houses, and shut them up therein;
as also that a medimnus of wheat was sold for a talent; and that when, a while afterward, it was not possible to gather herbs, by reason the city was all walled about, some persons were driven to that terrible distress as to search the common sewers and old dunghills of cattle, and to eat the dung which they got there; and what they of old could not endure so much as to see they now used for food.
When the Romans barely heard all this, they commiserated their case; while the seditious, who saw it also, did not repent, but suffered the same distress to come upon themselves; for they were blinded by that fate which was already coming upon the city, and upon themselves also.193
It is important to bear in mind that because Josephus’ time sequences are fiction, there is no real way to know when Jerusalem was destroyed or when Masada fell. In fact, if we conclude that all the dates in Josephus are untrustworthy, we lose our entire chronological understanding of the first century. But this is beside the point with regard to this work. All we need to know is whether Josephus was intentionally creating the impression that it was seven years from the beginning of the war until the fall of Masada. And of this we can be certain, because the precise alignment of the dates required to “prove” that Daniel’s prophecies were coming to pass, could only have been evidence of God’s hand on earth or – have been created intentionally.
In f
act, all the dates Josephus mentions that are in alignment with the New Testament are to be expected. Once Josephus has linked events from the war to Daniel’s prophecies, he cannot stop until the conclusion of the “week”—that is, three and a half years from when the “daily sacrifice” ended. Just as, once the New Testament began the forty-year cycle of the Exodus with the establishment of its Passover Lamb, there could be no stopping until the “men of war were consumed because they obeyed not the voice of the Lord.”
The Book of Daniel states:
Then he shall confirm a covenant for one week; but in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering, and on the wing of one abomination shall be the one who makes desolate …194
Once Josephus has shown that the end of the daily sacrifice occurs exactly three and a half years from the beginning of the “week,” that is, from the beginning of the war, he must stay within the confines of Daniel’s prophecies in order to prove that they have “come to pass.” He must conclude the seven-year “week” three and a half years from the date he gives for the end of the daily sacrifice. He orients the reader to this time structure with the title he creates for the chapter of Wars of the Jews that describes the destruction of Masada:
CONTAINING THE INTERVAL OF ABOUT THREE YEARS. FROM THE TAKING OF JERUSALEM BY TITUS, TO THE SEDITION OF THE JEWS AT CYRENE.
Notice that this chapter’s title uses the same device that the author used to orient the fall of Masada to the forty-year cycle. The two streams of theological support for Christianity, Moses and Daniel, have been fused. They are heading for a simultaneous conclusion at Masada on the day Christianity replaces Judaism.
Josephus outlines the symbolic landscape of his theological coup by recording that the leader of the Jewish rebels at Masada was another Eleazar—who, as noted above, was a descendant of Judas the Galilean, and, like his ancestor, a leader of the Sicarii.
The New Testament and Josephus work together to create a subtle but clear relationship between the families of Judas the Galilean, their Sicarii followers, and Jesus and his family and followers.
This relationship has three central points. First, the New Testament records that Jesus’ family agreed to pay the Roman tax by going to Bethlehem to register in the census of Quirinus. This places Jesus’ family in direct opposition to Judas the Galilean because Josephus records that:
a certain Galilean named Judas prevailed with his countrymen to revolt; and said they were cowards if they would endure to pay a tax to the Romans and submit to mortal men as their lords …195
Second, the New Testament records that Judas the Iscariot (Sicarii), son of Simon the Iscariot, was responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion, thereby showing that the Sicarii are responsible for Jesus’ death.
He alluded to Judas, the son of Simon the Iscariot. For he it was who, though one of the Twelve, was afterwards to betray Him.
John 6:72
While supper was proceeding, the Devil having by this time suggested to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, the thought of betraying Him …
John 13:2
Finally, Josephus records that Eleazar, Judas the Galilean’s descendant, and his Sicarii followers destroyed themselves at Masada forty years to the day from Jesus’ resurrection. This perfectly identifies the Sicarii as members of the “wicked generation” who Jesus warned would be destroyed before the generation passed away.
The fall of Masada brings an end to what Josephus describes as the “fourth philosophy,” a synonym for the Sicarii, the messianic movement founded by Judas the Galilean. The suicide of the Sicarii on this date was meant to represent “atonement” for their role in crucifying Jesus forty years ago. By simultaneously concluding Christianity’s forty years of “wandering” and the end of the “fourth philosophy,” the messianic movement Christianity replaced, Josephus is making the point that the future belongs to Christianity.
And he was correct of course: the future did belong to Christianity. By the midpoint of the second century C.E., Judaism had been driven from its homeland and would never again be a significant threat to Rome.
Josephus’ recording of the fall of Masada contains many telling points: He reiterates that John, the Sicarii leader who was lampooned as the Apostle John, like the man from Gadara with the unclean spirit in the New Testament, filled the countryside with wickedness.
Yet did John demonstrate by his actions that these Sicarii were more moderate than he was himself, for he not only slew all such as gave him good counsel to do what was right, but treated them worst of all, as the most bitter enemies that he had among all the Citizens; nay, he filled his entire country with ten thousand instances of wickedness …
Wars of the Jews, 7, 8, 263
Josephus records Eleazar’s belief that God has condemned the Jewish nation. The unspoken point, since God has condemned Judaism, is that Christianity is its replacement.
It had been proper indeed for us to have conjectured at the purpose of God much sooner, and at the very first, when we were so desirous of defending our liberty, and when we received such sore treatment from one another, and worse treatment from our enemies, and to have been sensible that the same God, who had of old taken the Jewish nation into his favor, had now condemned them to destruction …
Wars of the Jews, 7, 8, 327
Josephus makes Eleazar repeat time and again that God has turned against the Jews.
“… we are openly deprived by God himself of all hope of deliverance;
“for that fire which was driven upon our enemies did not of its own accord turn back upon the wall which we had built; this was the effect of God’s anger against us for our manifold sins, which we have been guilty of in a most insolent and extravagant manner with regard to our own countrymen;
“the punishments of which let us not receive from the Romans, but from God himself …
“… however, the circumstances we are now in ought to be an inducement to us to bear such calamity courageously, since it is by the will of God, and by necessity, that we are to die;
“for it now appears that God hath made such a decree against the whole Jewish nation, that we are to be deprived of this life which [he knew] we would not make a due use of.
“This it is that our laws command us to do this; it is that our wives and children crave at our hands; nay, God himself hath brought this necessity upon us; while the Romans desire the contrary, and are afraid lest any of us should die before we are taken.
“Let us therefore make haste, and instead of affording them so much pleasure, as they hope for in getting us under their power, let us leave them an example which shall at once cause their astonishment at our death, and their admiration of our hardiness therein.” 196
The suspicion scholars have regarding the accuracy of Eleazar’s speech is well-founded. They should also question Josephus’ dates for the siege and the fall of Masada, which are no more historical than his descriptions of either the siege or Eleazar’s speech. The dates have been invented to provide support for Christianity. Readers who wish to confirm my findings for themselves may simply take the dates of Jesus’ ministry and crucifixion as found in the Gospel of John and compare them with the dates Josephus gives for the events of the war and his use of phrases from the Book of Daniel. The truth will be visible.
When Josephus ends the war on the day following Passover in 73 C.E., he unifies the two “principles” that Christianity was based on—Exodus and the Book of Daniel. Only the day Josephus records for the conclusion of the siege of Masada would simultaneously complete the seven-year week that concludes the prophecies of Daniel and the end of the symbolic forty-year “wandering” of Christianity after the resurrection of Jesus. Such a miraculous occurrence could not happen by chance and supports the theory that Josephus has falsified history to show that Christianity was God’s replacement for Judaism. Notice that the technique the authors of Christianity used is consistent throughout. Simon and John are transformed into Christian Apostles. The story of the
Passover and Exodus becomes the first forty years of Christianity. Titus becomes the Messiah.
One must admire the craftsmanship of the intellectuals who produced the works of Josephus and the New Testament. Though the method they used, the fusing of Daniel’s prophecies with a new forty-year Exodus, was utterly preposterous from both a historical and a theological perspective, with it they were able to neatly remove from history a religious movement that opposed them militarily and replace it with one aligned to their interests. In doing so, they were able to conform history to theology to such an extent that one movement ended and the other came forth on the same day.
It is interesting that the creators of Christianity did not pass along this theological fusion to the early Church fathers. There is no evidence that any of the early church fathers, with the possible exception of Eusebius, understood that the destruction of Masada represented the simultaneous conclusion of Christianity’s forty-year “wandering” and the prophecies of Daniel. The intellectuals who produced Christianity were not to have their work appreciated for 2,000 years.
This disconnect between the creators of Christianity and its implementers is fascinating because it suggests that its first bishops did not need to understand a key element of Christianity. This may have some bearing on a subject of interest but one that I will not cover in this work—this being, at what point did Christianity lose the memory of its Roman origins? The first church scholars’ lack of awareness of this key theological element perhaps suggests that this disconnect may have occurred very early. An example of an early Christian scholar who did not understand the New Testament’s original intent was Origen, who was troubled by the name “Jesus Barabbas.” On the other hand, Cesare Borgia, a fifteenth century Roman Catholic cardinal and a son of Pope Alexander VI (Rodrigo Borgia) was quoted as saying, “It has served us well, this myth of Jesus.”
Caesar's Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus:Flavian Signature Edition Page 39