Ancient History
posted by ASI on Fri, 08/03/2012 – 10:39
| Background to the New Testament
Friends: This is an excellent capsule summary of how the Judahites of Judah were invaded by the Greeks and Romans and how they tried to maintain their nationality and religion (the Mosaic Law) against these invaders. Invariably, historians and Bible commentators fail to distinguish between the indigenous Judahites versus the Edomite Jews who did not come on the scene until 150 BC. The rabbis of Judaism are most happy to let these deceived academics unwittingly promote Judaism as if it were the religion of the land before the arrival of the Pharisees. This idea, dear friends, is the biggest lie of history, even bigger than the hoaxacaust, because this lie has given the Jews standing in the eyes of the world as “God’s chosen people,” which is another Jewish lie. My comments in red designed to clarify and distinguish Jews from Judahites — Eli
Enjoy!
BACKGROUND TO THE NEW TESTAMENT
 1. Alexander the Great and the Period of the Successors
Alexander
 the Great died in 323 BCE. After his death, there was a period of intense political infighting among the possible successors of Alexander, who did not name a successor before his death nor did he have a son who was a viable candidate for king. The period after Alexander’s death is known as the Diadochan period (Greek diadochos = successor). Eventually Alexander’s unified empire was broken into , two of which were the Seleucid kingdom—stretching from Asia Minor eastward—and the Ptolemaic kingdom, which was centered in Egypt. Judea was orginally a part of the Ptolemaic kingdom, but was incorporated into the Seleucid kingdom c. 198 BCE under Antiochus III, after one of many armed conflicts between the two kingdoms. Succeeding Antiochus III was Seleucus IV Eupator and then Antiochus IV Epiphanes. About this time Rome was beginning to make its presence felt in the eastern Mediterranean.
2. The Beginnings of the Rise of Rome as a World Power
Rome had taken control of Italy by the middle of the third century BCE. During the latter half of the third century BCE, Rome engaged in a conflict for supremacy with Carthage; the resulting wars were known as the Punic wars. (Punic was the word that the Romans used for the Cathaginians.) In the First Punic War (264-41 BCE), Rome fought Carthage for control of Sicily and won. In the Second Punic War (218-201 BCE), Rome and Carthage fought again, and Hannibal invaded Italy, fighting the Romans on their own territory. The Romans eventually prevailed, and in 201 BCE, Carthage surrendered to Rome and was forced to give over Spain to Roman control. In 151-146 BCE, Rome fought with Carthage again, and this time Rome devastated Carthage, eliminating it as a world power.
In the second century BCE, Rome also came into conflict with the Macedonian (or Antigonid) kingdom, which eventually led to its conquest by Rome. The Macedonian Kingdom had allied itself with Carthage during the First Punic War, thereby making enemies of the Romans. Between 215-206 BCE, Rome, allied with the Aetolian League, Sparta, and Pergamum, defeated Philip V, king of the Macedonian kingdom, and his ally, the Achaian League, forcing Philip to agree to peace on terms favorable to the Romans and its allies (First Macedonian War). The enemies of Philip V complained to Rome that Philip was infringing on their territory; the senate declared war, and Rome defeated Philip’s forces (Second Macedonian War) (200-196 BCE). The decisive battle was at Cunoscephalae in Thessaly in 196 BCE. Philip was to pay indemnity and divest himself of all Greek territory; the Greeks were granted freedom but allied themselves with Rome, following Rome’s direction. After the Second Macedonian War, the Seleucid kingdom, ruled by Antiochus III, taking advantage of the confusion in Macedonia/Greece, sought to take control of parts of Asia Minor and Thrace that once belonged to the Macedonian kingdom. In 190 BCE, however, at the battle of Magnesia, the Romans defeated the Seleucid kingdom. This was a foreshadowing of a greater Roman presence in the eastern Mediterranean.
3. Judea From the Early Second Century BCE to 67 BCE
Judea as part of the Seleucid kingdom existed in an uneasy relationship with its overlord. A major source of tension was the issue of Hellenism, which was the state-supported culture of the Seleucid kingdom; the Seleucid rulers encouraged Hellenism among their subject peoples in hope of unifying them into a single culture, thereby lessening the possibility of dissension and revolt. There was a political faction of Jews [Correction. There were no Jews yet in Judea. These were hereditary Judahites who still practiced the Levitcal/Mosaic Law. Jews have never practiced the Law of Moses, despite theri claims. The Judahites, the people of Judah, never referred to themselves as “Jews.” Given the fact that the Jewish people have always practiced miscegenation (race-mixing, forbidden by Yahweh), they cannot possibly be equated with the hereditary Judahites of Judah. The first Jews were Idumeans, not Judahites. This false equation of Judahites with Jews is the begining of a historical pretense that is assumed to be true by the authors. — Eli] in Judea that was in favor of the Hellenization of Jewish [Correction, JUDAHITE society — Eli] society, to whom 1 & 2 Maccabees refer in unfavorable terms (These men are called “men outside the law” or “the lawless men”). [This is proof that these were Judahites who practiced the Mosaic Law, for they were trying to remain true to their separate and distinct heritage as Judahites of Judea. Jewish exclusivism, to the contrary, is based solely on their practice of the false religion of Judaism, since it matters not of what race the father is. Judaism teaches that ONLY THE MOTHER must be Jewish for the child to be considered Jewish. This is the standard of the Israeli State today, and it is based on their Talmud, not on the Bible. Contrary to the clear Law of Scripture (“No mongrel shall enter the congregation of Yahweh.” Deut. 23:2) , Jews have historically intermarried with any and all races. — Eli] Under Antiochus IV in 174 BCE Onias III, the High Priest, was deposed by Antiochus IV in favor of his brother Joshua, who went by the Hellenistic name of Jason. Joshua (Jason) offered Antiochus IV money and cooperation in the process of Hellenization, if he made him High Priest; Antiochus accepted the offer. Joshua (Jason) was High Priest for three years (174-171 BCE), during which time he built a in Jerusalem, a cultural institution instrumental in the promotion of Hellenistic culture and established an ep
hebic organization for Jewish [Sic. Judahite — Eli] adolescent males (ephebes). It would seem that the goal of Joshua (Jason) was to convert Jerusalem into a Hellenistic city (polis) within the Seleucid kingdom. [Now, here is historical insight on how the High Priesthood began to be corrupted; yet Jason was still a hereditary Judahite, not a Jew, who usurped the position of High Priest on behalf of the Greeks. In essence, Jason had bribed the Greeks in order to assume a position of authority. — Eli]
After three years, in 171 BCE, a rival to Joshua (Jason) named Menelaus made a better offer to Antiochus IV; as a result, Joshua (Jason) was deposed as High Priest and was replaced by Menelaus, who arranged to have Onias III murdered. In 170 BCE, Joshua (Jason) and his followers attacked Jerusalem, and forced his rival, Menelaus, to take refuge in the citadel in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV used this incident as a pretense to intervene militarily in the affairs of Judea. At the time he was involved in a successful campaign against the Ptolemaic kingdom to the south of Judea; on his return to Syria in 169 BCE, he invaded Jerusalem, slaughtered many Jews [Correction: Judahites. This simple device of calling Judahites by the NEW NAME, \’Jew\’, is how the rabbis of Judaism have equated their people, the Idumean Canaanites, with the True Judahites of that time. There were NO JEWS in Judea at that time, despite what these deceived historians say. If you cannot distinguish between a hereditary Judahite priesthood that included no Idumeans from the later Pharisaic priesthood (which was composed almost exclusively of Idumeans), then you cannot distinguish between natives and foreigners. The trick that the Jewish invaders have employed is to name the Judahites with their own, similar-sounding name, \’Jew\’, so as to fool the world into believing that they are the Judahites of old, thus causing us to confuse the invaders with the natives. — Eli] who opposed him, and plundered the Temple. He was aided in all this by Menelaus and his supporters.
In 168 BCE, Antiochus began another campaign against the Ptolemaic kingdom in order to consolidate his previous gains, but this time, before he could carry out his intentions, the Roman general Popilius Laeneas sent an ultimatum to Antiochus ordering him to withdraw from Egypt or else be considered an enemy of Rome (The Ptolemaic kingdom had become an ally of Rome). Antiochus withdrew unwillingly; instead of attacking Egypt, he ordered that Jerusalem become a Hellenistic city and that Judaism [Correction. Judaism did not exist yet as a religion. Even the Jews themselves admit that Judaism is to be equated with Pharisaism; and Pharisaism did not become the official religion of the land until after 150 BC, as the Pharisees were in the process of displacing the hereditary Judahites. What was outlawed was the Mosaic Law, not Judaism. — Eli] become an outlawed religion and way of life. (Exactly why Antiochus IV began a religious persecution against the Jews is not clear.) Those Jews [Sic. Judahites] who would not cooperate would be killed and their wives and children sold into slavery. The Jews [Sic. Judahites] were forbidden to circumcise their children, observe the Sabbath, in short, to do anything that would mark them off as Jews. [Correction, Judahites. The interesting thing here is that the Idumeans who eventually formed the bulk of the Pharisaic priesthood did not accept circumcision until 140 BC, thus proving that Pharisaism was an invading religion. Just as Jews surreptitiously (“Judeo-Christianity”) impose their religion on the cultures they invade today, they did exactly the same thing then. — Eli] A pagan altar was placed upon the altar in the Temple and animals—including pigs—were sacrificed to the Olympic Zeus. The worship of the other Greek gods was also introduced in Jerusalem and other parts of Judea; pagan altars were built and Jews [sic] were encourage to participate in sacrifices at these altars. There were Jews [Correction, opportunistic Judahites who sided with the Hellenes. These became known as the Sadducees. — Eli] who welcomed the policy of forced Hellenization and cooperated with Antiochus; there were also those who opposed the policy and refused to abandon the Law, the conformity to which made the Jews [sic] distinctive as a people. [This statement is actually proof that the Judahites of that day were still trying to preserve their Mosaic tradition, as I have stated many times. The question, then, is: “When did the Mosaic Law transition into Judaism?” The answer is: “When John Hyrcanus made a pact with the Idumeans, Antipater and Herod, and shared power with them in Judea. In other words, the non-Judahite Idumeans were given power over a people that were not their kin, the Judahites of Judah (Judea). — Eli]
In a town called Modein, near Jerusalem, an officer of the king required that the people of the town sacrifice at a pagan altar. A man named Matthatias, a priest who had five sons, was present, and when a Jew [sic] went forward to offer the sacrifice, Matthatias killed him and the officer, and fled to the mountains with his family and some supporters. [This incident clearly describes the fact that Mattathias was trying to preserve the Mosaic Law against the Hellenistic intrusion. — Eli] This began the Maccabean revolt in 167 BCE. Matthatias died later that year, and was succeeded by his son Judas, who was knicknamed “Maccabee,” probably meaning “hammer”; his family was also known as the Hasmoneans. Judas rallied to himself many Jews [Sic. Judahites. Do you see how easy it is to impersonate another people when you repeat this lie a million times? Of course, this process has taken centuries to ingrain in our minds. It is, nevertheless, still a lie. — Eli] who in 1 Maccabees are called the Chasidim (“the pious ones”) and together they won battle after battle [The Jewish people have NEVER been a military people. The Jewish people are not even athletic!! How did these athletic and brave Judahites become a race of merchants, bankers and lying priests? The latest Jewish invasion of Lebanon proved what poor soldiers they are. They got their butts kicked by Lebanese citizens\’ militia, losing over 90 tanks, 3 aircraft and at least one ship! Jews are very brave when they excute unarmed men, women and children, but as warriors, they are the world’s worst examples. As always, the Jews hire mercenary armies with their money or arrange for wars to be fought by opposing camps while they make profits on these wars. This is the type of war they are good at. — Eli] against the Seleucid armies until Judas established himself and his followers as the de facto ruling force in Jerusalem and Judea. Judas set out to reverse the effects of the policy of forced Hellenization, and in 165 BCE purified and rededicated the Temple. Judas met his end on the battlefield in 160 BCE. This event became the reason and basis of a new, post-biblical festival called Chanukkah (\’Dedication\’). [The Jews have very cleverly appropriated this holiday and claim it for themselves, even though no Jew was even involved in it. They have done the same thing with our other traditions, such as the Egyptian and Babylonian Captivities, displacing our Israelite ancestors from the pages of history and inserting themselves into those pages. — Eli]
The period of time from Judas\’ victory until the conquest of Judea by the Roman general Pompey saw the expansion of the Jewish [Sic. Judean. — Eli] state through conquest under the leaders
hip of the Hasmoneans (the Maccabeans) and their descendants, though they continued to fight with the Seleucids and with Jews [sic] who opposed them. A series of Hasmonean rulers emerged during this period, brothers or Hasmonean descendants: Judas (165-60 BCE); Jonathan (160-142 BCE); Simon (142-134 BCE); John Hyrcanus (son of Simon 134-104 BCE); Aristobolus (son of John Hyrcanus 104-103 BCE); Alexander Jannaeus (son of John Hyrcanus 103-76 BCE). [And all of these men were hereditary Judahites, not Jews. — Eli]
By 76 BCE under , the [SIC] were expanded mostly through conquest to include all of Palestine. The Jewish [Sic, Judean — Eli] people during this period made the Hasmoneans both a ruling dynasty as well as High Priests. [These authors seem totally unaware of the fact that, by 76 BC, the land of Judea had absorbed many Idumean invaders (mostly Idumean merchants and priests in the city of Jerusalem), and these Idumean invaders were actively masquerading as Judahites. Obvioiusly the Romans did not care with whom they were fighting, Judahite or Idumean; and they did not bother making this distinction. — Eli] A woman, Salome Alexandra, the wife of Alexander Jannaeus, succeeded her husband in 76 BCE, and ruled in alliance with the Pharisees. [Now, a very important question is in order here, folks. “Who are these Pharisees and where did they come from?” Note that there has been no mention of them previous to 76 BC. Also, the question of their origin is completely avoided. The Pharisees were POSING as Judahites. — Eli] Her son Hyrcanus II served as High Priest during this period. [So, we have a Judahite High Priest over a bunch of Edomite Jew Pharisees. Either Hyrcanus II didn’t know or didn’t care about their ethnic background. How long before the High Priest would be a Jew as well? — Eli]
4. Pompey and the End of Jewish Independence When Salome died in 67 BCE, there arose a conflict between Hyrcanus II and his brother Aristobolus II over who would succeed their mother as both High Priest and king. The people opted for Aristobolus II, but the matter did not end there. Antipater, an Idumean, [Note that these authors completely fail to point out the signifance of this fact. Note also the people of Judea wanted Aristobulus II, not Hyrcanus II. — Eli] took up the cause of Hyrcanus II and with the military support of the Nabatean king Aretas—who had lost much territory to the Jews [Sic. Judahites — Eli] — marched to Jerusalem, laid siege to the city and demanded that Hyrcanus II be reinstated as High Priest and be appointed king. [Here, Aristobulus was perceived by the Pharisees as their enemy. They obviously sided with the Judahite who would do business with them, Hyrcanus II. So Hyrcanus II, also known as John Hyrcanus, was temporarily made High Priest, but he was acting in concert with the Idumean, Antipater. Is there any doubt that John Hyrcanus was acting as a traitor to his own people by siding with the Idumeans? As reported above, the Pharisees, a group of Idumean priests posing as Judahites, had assumed control of the High Priesthood under Salome Alexandra, although the High Priest was a Judahite. No, look at the parallel situation we have today with the Neo-Kahns and Zionists, who are in total control of our Presidency. Bush may look like an American, and he may claim to be an American, but he is most defintiely an agent for the Jews, just as John Hyrcanus was in Judea. — Eli]
Meanwhile, the Roman general Pompey by the authority of the Roman senate went to Asia Minor in order to put down a rebellion by Mithridates VI Eupator, the king of Pontus.
 Pompey defeated Mithridates in 66 BCE in what is called the Third Mithridatic War (74-63 BCE). While in Asia Minor, Pompey heard of the dispute going on in Jerusalem between Hyrcanus II and Aristobolus II from one of his generals, Scaurus, who had been sent to Syria. Scaurus began to travel to Judea to capitalize politically on this internal crisis of the Jews. [Sic. Judeans. Here, this crisis is misrepresented as an “internal crisis.” No recognition of the Idueman usurpation is even hinted at. The reality was that the Idumeans were attempting a coup d\’etat within Judea. We have the same misrepresentation of history with regard to the Bolshevik Revolution, which is portrayed in our history books as being merely an ideological conflict between Russians. The glaring fact is that the Bolshevik Revolution was, in reality, another coup d\’etat. The “Revolution” was financed by the Jewish International: Jewish Bankers (Rothschild, Schiff and Warburg), promoted by Jewish politicos, supported by the international Jewish Press, and prosecuted by Jewish agitators, both communists and anarchists, most of whom were not even Russian citizens (Trotsky, Lenin, Stalin, etc.). — Eli] Hearing that the Roman general was on his way to Judea, both Aristobolus II and Hyrcanus II sent emissaries to him in order to gain his support for their respective causes; this was the beginning of the end of the Hasmonean dynasty. [This was a dynasty of HEREDITARY JUDAHITES. Even though some of these leaders had made deals with the Idumean Jews, the leadership was still in the hands of hereditary Judahites…until Herod. — Eli] Scaurus decided in favor of Aristobolus II and ordered Aretas to withdraw, which he did. In the meantime, Pompey conquered Syria, and Syria was made into a Roman province with a proconsul; this was the end of the Seleucid kingdom. [Aristobulus had decided to side with Scaurus; but Hyrcanus II was in league with Pompey and Antipater, who had just as much influence in Rome with Julius Caesar. (Antipater was to Julius Caesar as Colonel Edward Mandel House was to Woodrow Wilson, as Bernard Baruch was to Federal Dictator Roosenfeldt, as Kissinger was to Nixon and Carter: in short, a conniving Jewish advisor.) Hyrcanus was in the driver’s seat militarily. — Eli]
In 63 BCE, because he justifiably suspected Aristobolus II to be disloyal, Pompey marched on Jerusalem; Aristobolus II met him at Jericho and capitulated. In the meantime, the people of Jerusalem shut the gates of the city against Pompey […proving again that Aristobulus was the People’s Choice, but Hyrcanus had the backing of the Idumean Jews and Pompey. — Eli]; Pompey marched on the city and the gates were opened to him by the followers of Hyrcanus II. The supporters of Aristobolus II were forced to take refuge in the Temple. [Now, folks, here is the million dollar question: Who still had control of the Temple, the Judahites under Aristobulus or the Idumeans who were supporting Hyrcanus? If you answer this question correctly, you know the difference between a Judahite and a Jew. You see, the Jews and their court historians try to portray these events as though this was a “civil war” among “Jews.” Far from it! It was the Judahites fighting for their very existence against two foes: Rome and the Idumean usurpers who had their own designs on Judea, using the Roman army to destroy True Judah. (I know this is complicated history, but you have to know these things in order to understand that a coup had taken place, not a civil war.) These Idumean usurpers are the very E
domite/Canaanite Jews that had been the enemies of Israel and Judah for centuries. If you have understood what I have said thus far, you understand that this was the time and place when the Pharisees began to usurp BOTH OUR RELIGION AND OUR NAME. From the standpoint of history, by referring to BOTH the hereditary Judahites and the Idumean Jew usurpers as “Jews,” this chapter of history has become “Jewish history,” when it is in fact Jewish VERSUS Judahite history, with Hyrcanus II on the side of the Edomite Jews and Aristobulus II on the side of his own people, Judah. The Jews have done everything in their power to obscure this transitional phase of OUR history. As long as the deceiving Jews can posture as Judah, they have the world’s respect as the “Jews of the Bible.” But the Jews were never a part of either Israel or Judah. They are liars and deceivers who have been impersonating us for 2,150 years.– Eli] Pompey besieged the Temple, and within three months broke through the walls and allegedly killed about 12,000 Jews. [Sic. You can bet that the vast majority of people who lost their lives in this battle were hereditary Judahites who were set up to die by Hyrcanus and the Edomite Jews. — Eli] (This is according to Josephus [Who was a Judahite, not a Jew. — Eli], who tends to exaggerate when it comes to numbers. [This is a ridiculous statement that the author should have left out. I have found Josephus to be a very reliable historian. — Eli]) The borders of the former Jewish [Sic. Judean. — Eli] state were greatly reduced; what remained was Judea, Idumea, Perea and Galilee. Pompey installed Hyrcanus II as High Priest, but did not give him the title of king; Pompey took Aristobolus II and many other Jewish [Sic. You should understand this game by now! — Eli] prisoners of war to Rome where they were resettled. A few years later Hyrcanus II was stripped of all political power [This is what Hyrcanus II got for siding with the Edomite Jews! I guarantee you that George Bush will be thrown away like a dirty rag when he is no longer useful to the International Jew. — Eli], and Gabinius, the proconsul of Syria, divided what territory remained of the Hasmonean state into five regions, under his immediate control. This was the end of an independent Jewish [Sic. Judean. Although Judea was technically an independent State, its infiltration and usurpation by Idumean Jews into positions of power had guaranteed its collapse, just as America is today collapsing under the weight of Jewish treachery, treason, sabotage, culture distortion, moral subversion, intrigue and tyranny.– Eli] state. 5. The Rise of Herod the Great
In Rome, a civil war erupted between Pompey and Julius Caesar in 49 BCE, former members of the first triumvirate,
 the other being Crassus, who had died. (The first triumvirate was formed in 59 BCE in response to the crisis in the Roman republic caused by the social unrest in Rome and Italy.) At first Hyrcanus II and Antipater, who was the real power behind Hyrcanus II, supported Pompey, as most from the east did, but quickly switched allegiances when it was discovered that Caesar and his allies had been victorious over Pompey, who had fled to Egypt and was killed in 48 BCE in Egypt by Caesar’s allies there. Caesar was given autocratic powers by the Roman senate to carry through the necessary reforms to bring stability to the Roman empire; he was proclaimed dictator (an ancient political position of absolute power in times of crisis) in 46 BCE for ten years and in 45 BCE it became a life appointment; he held the consulship several times and was the pontifex maximus. He also took the title imperator, a military position of “commander-in-chief.” The Roman republic had come to an end. In gratitude for the help given to him, Caesar appointed Hyrcanus II as ethnarch of the Jews [Sic. Judeans. — Eli] , but it was Antipater, not Hyrcanus II, who actually ruled in Jerusalem. [Now, folks, are you beginning to understand what I am trying to explain to you, that Judea was sabotaged by non-Judahite Idumeans? — Pastor Eli] (Antipater was not ethnically a Jew but an Idumean). [This is a total admission that Antipater was a non-Judahite invader from Idumea, but by this confusing and surreptitious usage of the word \’Jew,\’ we are misled to believe that Antipater’s Judahite predecessors were also “Jews.” This is how this historical charade has been fabricated and how it is being perpetuated, Christian Israel. WAKE UP! — PASTOR ELI] Antipater had two sons, Phasael and Herod, both of whom were quite active militarily and politically in various capacities in Palestine and Syria.
Julius Caesar was murdered in 44 BCE by
 Brutus and Cassius, part of a conspiracy to restore the Roman republic; Marcus Antonius, a consul and supporter of Caesar sought to avenge the death of Caesar, with the result that another civil war broke out in the empire. Antipater and Hyrcanus II allied themselves with Cassius. Marcus Antonius with Octavius, however, defeated the supporters of Brutus and Cassius in 42 BCE. [Isn’t it interesting that whenever we Judahites/Israelites ally ourselves with Jews, we come out on the losing end? — Eli] This began the time of the second triumvirate composed of Marcus Antonius, Octavius and Lepidus. Antipater was murdered in 43 BCE. Although they, like their father, had supported Cassius, after the death of Cassius, Herod and Phasael along with Hyrcanus II quickly changed their allegiance and managed to convince Marcus Antonius (by means of a bribe) that they would be loyal to him. In 40 BCE Antigonus, the son of Aristobulus II, allied with the Parthians, gained control of Jerusalem; a Hasmonean was once again king. Antigonus took Hyrcanus II and Phasael prisoners. Herod escaped to Masada, but Phasael killed himself. Antigonus had the ears of his uncle Hyrcanus II cut off in order to disqualify him as High Priest, a position that he then assumed. Meanwhile, Herod fled from Masada and arrived in Rome in 40 BCE. He gained the confidence of Marcus Antonius and Octavius (Lepidus no longer shared power with the other two triumvirs at this point). The Roman senate granted Herod the title of king of the Jews [Sic. Judeans. — Eli], and in 37 BCE he marched to Jerusalem with Roman military help and regained the city.
From 37 until 4 BCE, Herod reigned in Jerusalem and gradually with the approval of the Romans expanded his kingdom to include most of Palestine; his kingdom included both Jews and gentiles, but he did not follow the Hasmonean policy of forcibly converting Gentiles to Judaism. [This is more confusion perpetuated by those who are ignorant of the distinctions between Jews and Judahites. The Hasmoneans DID NOT forcibly convert non-Israelites. That is a lie. If this author had any understanding of the Jewish impersanation of Israel/Judah, he would understand that ANY conversions to the Mosaic Law would have been for ethnic Israelites ONLY. This held true even up to th
e time of Peter and Paul at Pentecost in the Book of Acts. Any “conversions/baptisms” of non-Israelites were conducted by the Pharisees and Sadducees, who were either Idumeans or Hellenizing/Romanizing traitors of Judahite stock. John the Baptist REFUSED to baptize these priests, whom he denounced as “a generation (Strong’s #1081, meaning “offspring,” both literally and figuratively) of vipers.” (Matt. 3:7) — Eli] It is at this point that the events described in the New Testament begin to take place. [See my additional comments at the end of this article. — Eli]
In spite of tumultous familial relations and a certain amount of unpopularity among his subjects,
 Herod maintained tight control of Palestine. Early in Herod’s reign, Marcus Antonius and Octavius had a falling out, which led to another civil war. They had agreed to share power in the empire, Marcus Antonius the east and Ocatvius the west. Marcus Antonius became involved with Cleopatra VII, of Ptolemaic royal lineage, and began to behave as an oriental despot rather than as a Roman. As a result, Octavius, with the support of the Roman senate, fought and defeated him at the battle of Actium in Greece in 31 BCE. Although they managed to escape to Alexandria, Marcus Antonius and Cleopatra VII realized that there was no way of eluding Octavius, so that both committed suicide. In all this upheaval, Herod had supported Octavius, so his position was secure at the end of the civil war. The senate changed Octavius\’ name to and gave him the title of princeps (“leader”) and imperator (“commander-in-chief”); although officially the senate had all authority, in actuality a dyarchy was in place. It is customary to called this form of government the principate.
The emperors beginning with Augustus that are relevant to the events described in or presupposed by the books of the New Testament are as follows: 1. Augustus (27 BCE – 14); Tiberius (14-37); Gaius (Caligula) (37-41); Claudius (41-54); Nero (54-68); Galba (69); Vitellius (69); Vespasian (69-79); Titus (79-81); Domitian (81-96).
6. Jewish History from Herod’s Death to the Jewish War
Herod died of an illness in 4 BCE, and he bequeathed his kingdom to three of his sons, Archelaus, Herod Antipas and Philip; Herod’s kingdom was to be divided among them. These three traveled to Rome to petition Augustus to ratify Herod’s last will. The majority of Jews in Jerusalem also sent a delegation to Augustus asking him to abolish the Herodian dynasty and to place the region under direct Roman rule. Augustus decided in favor Herod’s last will. He divided Herod’s kingdom into three smaller territories.
Herod Antipas was the ruler of Perea and Galilee, when Jesus was growing up and during his public ministry (see Josephus, Ant. 18; War 2. 167-68; Life 9, 12, 54).
Philip the tetrarch ruled a territory that consisted of several regions, including the north eastern part of the sea of Galilee, where the town of Bethsaida was located (see Josephus, Ant. 18.26-27; 18.106-108; War 2.167-68; 2.181). He is not referred to directly in the New Testament, but reference is made to the city Caesarea Philippi. The name derives from “Caesar Augustus” and Philip’s own name; it had a double name to distinguish it from the other Caesarea, the harbor city built by Herod the Great.
Archelaus was granted the authority to rule over Judea and Samaria, but lasted only a few years in his position, owing primarily to Jewish complaints against him; he was removed from power in 6 and exiled to Gaul.
In 6 Archelaus\’ territory was placed under the direct control of the Romans under the authority of a procurator (or praefectus); one of the more historically notable of these procurators was , who was the fifth to assume the post in 26.
For a brief time Palestine was again under the rule of a single king. Herod Agrippa I, a grandson of Herod the Great, resided in Rome and there gained the confidence and favor of Gaius (Caligula), the Roman emperor (Agrippa was Caligula’s tutor in his youth). In 37 Herod Agrippa I was given the territory that Philip ruled, and in 39 he assumed the former kingdom of Herod Antipas; in 41, he was granted the rest of Palestine (Judea, Samaria, and Idumea) by Claudius who succeeded the murdered Gaius (Caligula) (see Josephus, Ant. 18.143-256; 19.274-366; War 2.178-220). Herod Agrippa I ruled during the earliest period of the history of the church; not surprisingly, he appears in the Book of Acts. The following are references to Herod Agrippa I in the Book of Acts, where he is called simply “Herod.”
Under Claudius\’ reign in 50, Herod Agrippa II, the son of Herod Agrippa I, received the territory that Philip, the son of Herod the Great, had ruled as well as control of the Temple. The emperor Nero confirmed this appointment when he came to power, and even expanded it in 54. (Herod Agrippa II is called Agrippa in the Book of Acts.)
In 66 a war broke out between rebellious factions of Jews and culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70. The Roman procurators\’ corruption and ineptitude fueled the Zealot independence movement in those regions of Palestine heavily populated by Jews. Years of tension came to a head in 66. The illegal appropriation of funds from the Temple treasury actions by Florus, the last Roman procurator, sparked a riot, which culminated in the storming of the Antonia citadel and the slaughter of the unarmed Roman cohorts (one tenth of a legion) stationed there; this was a declaration of war against the Romans. Those favoring the political alternative of suing the Romans for peace were driven from the city, leaving it to the rebels, many of whom belonged to the group known as the Zealots.
The emperor Nero responded to the
 uprising by sending Vespasian with 60,000 legionaries, auxillaries and allies under his charge. Departing from Antioch in Syria, Vespasian retook Galilee between 66 and 68; he then moved south to Judea, and besieged Jerusalem in 68. Nero died, however, in 68, and there erupted chaos in Rome over who would succeed him as emperor. Vespasian lifted his siege of Jerusalem until political stability in Rome was re-established. Galba was acclaimed emperor, and Vespasian sent his son Titus to Rome to convey a greeting to him; but before he arrived, he heard in Corinth that Galba had been murdered. After Galba, Vitellius was proclaimed emperor. Titus returned to his father in Caesarea. In 69, the legions under Vespasian’s command acclaimed him as a rival emperor to Vitellius. Since Vitellius was murdered in 69, Vespasian encountered little opposition when returned to Rome to make good on his claim to being the new Roman emperor. Vespasian left Titus in Palestine in charge of the army consisting of four legions; Titus then resumed the siege of Jerusalem. In 70, after many successful campaigns at taking regions of the city, Titus succeeded in breaking into the Temple where many of the Jewish rebels and the remaining civilian population had retreated. The Romans killed almost all the Jews in the Temple area and burned or otherwise destroyed the Temple structures. There remained only the upper city of Jerusalem to take, which the Romans soon did. The Romans kept alive a select few to march in a triumphal procession in Rome; after the
 procession the prisoners were executed. With the destruction of Jerusalem there remained three fortresses still held by the Zealots, one of which was Masada; by 73 these had also been taken (see Tacitus, Histories, 5.1-13 for a Roman perspective on Jewish history, including the destruction of the Temple [5.10-13]; other sources for this period in Roman history include Tacitus, Histories, 2.1-4, 79-93; 4.81; 5.12-26; Suetonius, Vespasian 5-6; Titus, 4-5; Dio Cassius, Roman History 66.1, 4-7, 15). Nero succeeded the murdered Claudius as emperor in 54. Although he is not mentioned by name in the New Testament, he is the Caesar referred to in Acts 25-28 and Phil 4:2. By all accounts, in the latter part of his reign Nero was a moral degenerate and madman, who abused his power as emperor, being responsible for many murders. Because of the certain threat of imminent revolt, Nero had no choice but to commit suicide in 68.
On July 19, 64 a fire began in Rome that would burn for five days; the fire began in the circus maximus, and eventually spread to ten of the fourteen districts in which the city was divided. Nero was in Antium when the fire broke out, and then returned to Rome. In spite of his relief efforts, rumor abounded that Nero was responsible for the fire;
 his purpose in arranging for the burning of Rome, according to Suetonius, was to be able to rebuild the city on a grander scale (see Tacitus, Annals 15.38-43; Suetonius, Nero 38). In order to quell such a rumor, Nero blamed the Christians for the fire, who, known for their anti-social attitude (odium humani generis), made perfect scapegoats. Beginning probably in 65, Nero ordered that confessed Christians be arrested and interrogated; then on their disclosures (of the existence of others who were Christians, presumably) vast numbers of Christians were convicted and executed in cruel and unusual ways: “They were covered with the skins of wild beasts and torn to death by dogs; or they were fastened on crosses, and, when daylight failed, were burned to serve as lamps by night” (Tacitus, Annals, 15.44; see Suetonius, Nero, 16.2; 1 Clement 6). According to early and reliable tradition, among the Christians who died during Nero’s persecution were the apostles Peter and Paul (Eusebius, H.E. 2.25; 3.1); Paul was beheaded, whereas Peter was crucified. (According to Origen, Peter was crucified upside down at his own request.) Tacitus reports that those who witnessed the public execution of Christians took pity on them, contrary to Nero’s intention, because they believed that they were merely victims of one man’s cruelty. There is no clear indication how long the persecution lasted or whether it was continuous or intermittent. Nevertheless, with Nero’s death in 68, the pogrom against the Roman Christians came to an end, for Vespasian did not have the same hostile designs towards the church. [Friends of Christian Israel, as I have been trying to explain to my People, Israel, there can be no adequate understanding of the transition from Mosaism to Judaism without the knowledge of how the Idumeans invaded, usurped and distorted Judahite culture during this period, known as the “Intertestamental Period.” The entire world of Christian scholarship, EXCEPT FOR YOURS TRULY, assumes that the people who called themselves “Judah” should be equated with the Jews. Yet, it is patently obvious that the Judahites before the Pharisaic imposition NEVER PRACTICED THE RELIGION CALLED JUDAISM and they NEVER MADE COMMON CAUSE WITH EDOMITES UNTIL THE DAYS OF JOHN HYRCANUS. It is this transitional period, from 150 BC to 70 AD, when the Edomite Jews began impersonating Judah/Israel and when the religion called Judaism replaced — began to be confused with — the Law of Moses.
This is why Yahshua Messiah said to the Judahites of Judea about these scribes and Pharisees: “The scribes and Pharisees SIT IN MOSES\’ SEAT: All therefore that they bid you observe, that observe and do [because they were teaching the Law of Moses, not sincerely, but only to establish themselves as the authorities over the native Judahites. Now here comes the condemnation:] BUT DO NOT YE AFTER THEIR WORKS, FOR THEY SAY AND DO NOT.” (Matt. 23:2,3.) In other words, the scribes and Pharisees are hypocrites, par excellence!! Please read the entire Chapter 23. This is nothing but one long diatribe against the scribes and Pharisees for their hypocrisy, lies and deceit — and impersonation — which is the essence of their religion, Pharisaism. Or, in other words, Matthew 23, and the entirety of the New Testament, is a very early denunciation of the religion that we know today as “Judaism.”
Christian Israel, If you do not understand what I am saying, please email me with any questions. If you do not understand how the Jews have been impersonating us for the last 2,150 years, then you do not understand who you are and why you are here!
Yours in the Service of Yahweh, My Creator,
Pastor Eli James.]
|
Bronze Prutah (63-40 BCE)
Group: