|
|
|
|
|
|
| In the book, "A Beautiful Delusion," I
listed some of the reasons why I believe the Virgin Birth Doctrine is a false doctrine based on pagan myths. The scriptures show that the
first Adam
possessed an immortal body. He did not have to die. Yet, neither did he
reach out and eat from the tree of life and gain eternal life.
Instead, he and his wife introduced sin into their immortal beings and
became mortal. They; "...changed the glory of the uncorruptible Mighty One (Yahuah Ul) into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Rom 1:23 (KJV) In the process of time, and by means of a natural birth, Yahuahshua (the 2nd Adam) inherited the same proprietary gene sequence that enabled his ancestor (the first Adam) to possess an immortal body. He did not have to be born in the manner of a Greek demi-god, as most theologians teach today. This is why Yahuahshua referred to himself as the "son of Adam (man)." He was able to reverse the law of sin and death; by subjecting his own sinless and immortal body to death. He then rose from the dead. "Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. "No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father." John 10:17-18 (NKJ) In the book, I stated that the genealogy of Yahuahshua from Matthew's gospel was a forgery. Not only do the two separate genealogies that appear in Matthew and Luke's gospel not line up, they actually contradict each other. Luke's genealogy is linked to David's son Nathan, and Matthew record's Yahuahshua's lineage from Solomon. However, the Messiah could not come through Solomon's lineage because of the curse of Jeconiah, which precludes anyone from the line of Solomon (after Jeconiah*) from sitting on the throne of David. [*After Jeconiah is a key point. There could be another line from Solomon through his Idumean wife, that could be connected to Doris (Herod's first wife) who was from Idumean royalty. She was Antipater III's mother.] Because of the discrepancies in Matthew and Luke's gospel (and others I listed previously in the book) there is good cause to believe that the scriptures have been tampered with. In fact, once you weigh all of the evidence, it should become apparent that the religious and political rulers that persecuted and then murdered Yahuahshua HaMashiyach; deliberately maligned His true nature and personhood for the purpose of deleting him from World History. In the years following, they replaced him with a semi-fictitious character created from a conglomeration of Greco-Roman and Eastern mythology. All of this is not coincidental. He was written out of the history books for a reason. We are left piecing together bits of information about the circumstances surrounding his life. If you have ever served on a Civil Jury, you know that once the case has been presented, the jurors consider the facts and arrive at a verdict based on a preponderance of the evidence (its probable truth and accuracy). This is in contrast to a Criminal Case, where the jury must be convinced "beyond a reasonable doubt" of the truth, based on the evidence. In searching the scriptures for truth, you will have to consider the written facts based on a preponderance of the evidence; then let the Spirit guide you into all truth. Ezekiel's prophecy of the "two sticks" (the two Houses) being joined together in the person of the Messiah must be fulfilled; so does Joseph's dream of the Sun, Moon, and the 11 stars bowing before him (which is another dynamic messianic prophecy). In this supplemental, I want to go into more detail regarding other possible historic combinations to Yahuahshua's ancestry. Of course, all of this is speculative. When I performed Internet searches of the names listed in Luke's genealogy of Yahuahshua, the name Jannai stood out. This person is most likely Alexander Jannai, the 7th Hasmonean King (and High Priest) of Judea. There were other names that pointed to a possible connection between Yahuahshua and the Hasmoneans. [Please note: The website biblesearchers.com contains a detailed list of genealogies, but I could not find any research references to back up their claims. They also cite the findings of Davidian Genealogist David Hughes, but once again, without any references or other documentation. On the other hand, author JJ. Raymond in his book "Herodian Messiah" gives a detailed accounting of his research, sources, and the logic he employed in arriving at his conclusions. He doesn't hesitate to inform the reader if a certain conclusion is based on speculation, though many times his speculations are based on a preponderance of certain historical evidence.] I cannot with certainty trace the ancestry of Yahuahshua to delineate which branches of his pedigree fulfilled the scriptural requirements that he be of the House of Judah and Israel (Joseph). However, there are many sayings, actions, inferences (through allegory) and implications that point to Yahuahshua as being the last (and 10th) Hasmonean King. (as shown in the chart below). Neither do I discount the fact that many of his Hebrew contemporaries received him as the promised Messiah of Yahuah. Not just carpenters and lay people, as the re-writers of the scriptures would have us believe; but also Hebrews of the ruling class (and the Sanhedrin). The mere fact alone that the Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, and members of Herod's court hounded him, intent on destroying him, should tell anyone serious student of the scriptures that Yahuahshua's presented a serous threat to the leaders and rulers of Israel during his life and ministry. All of Jerusalem was troubled when the Magi visited him after his birth (and rightly so). Because not only did his contemporaries see him for who he was, but the Parthian empire recognized his royalty. For this reason, I am lead to believe, that a significant number of people knew and understood that Yahuahshua fulfilled all of the requirements of King, High Priest, and the Messiah of Yahuah, during his day! A Brief History of the Maccabean Revolt and the
establishment of the Hasmonean Dynasty.
|
 |
| Notice first that one of the "Child -
Prince's"
grandfathers is King Antigonus (the other is Herod the Great). It was
Antigonus who entered into an alliance
with King Orodes II who ruled the Parthian
Empire from 57 to 38 B.C. Together they defeated the Romans in 40 B.C. and
recaptured Jerusalem. From 40-37 B.C. Antigonus was King and High Priest
of Judea, until Herod the Great (with the help of Rome) defeated
Antigonus and recaptured Jerusalem. Antigonus had a brother named Alexander II, who had a daughter named Miriamne I (a Greek spelling for the Hebrew name Miriam, or Mary). She was Herod the Great's second wife. Miriamne I's granddaughter (an un-named Princess of Judea) was married to Orodes III, the King of Parthia. That means that she (the Princess) and the "Child - Prince" would have been second cousins. So, why did the Magi come to find the Child - Prince (Yahuahshua) in Bethlehem? Was it to bring a few trinkets to someone who was born the King of Heaven alone? Or, was it to pay homage to the one who was the rightful King and High Priest of Judea; an ally of Parthia; and the grandson of King Antigonus? No doubt the Parthian King and the Parthian Magistanes (Magi) would have known if Antigonus' daughter had a son. His existence would mean the Parthians could rekindle their alliance with the Hebrews and throw the Romans out of Palestine. Just who were the Magi? The following article presents a pretty good summary: Since the days of Daniel, the Persian and the Hebrew nations had been closely intertwined. Both nations had, in their turn, fallen under Seleucid (Greek) domination in the wake of Alexander's conquests. Subsequently, both had regained their independence: the Hebrews under Maccabean leadership, and the Persians as the dominating ruling group within the Parthian Empire. It was at this time that the Magi, in their dual priestly and governmental office, composed the upper house of the Council of the Megistanes (from which we get the term "magistrates"), whose duties included the absolute choice and election of the king of the realm. It was, therefore, a group of Persian--Parthian "king makers" who entered Jerusalem in the latter days of the reign of Herod. Herod's reaction was understandably one of fear when one considers the background of Roman-Parthian rivalry that prevailed during his lifetime. Obviously, as long as the Caesars wanted peace with Parthia, Roman officials along Parthia's border, such as King Herod and Pontius Pilate, knew they would risk their positions and lives if they entangled Rome in an unwanted war with Parthia. Without this period of Parthian-Roman detente, it would have been impossible for some of the events of Yahuahshua's life to have occurred. The first such event was the coming of the Magi, or "Wise Men" to pay Him homage (ref. Matthew 2:1-12). The Magi were powerful members of one of the two assemblies which elected Parthian monarchs and wielded great influence within the empire. One assembly was composed of members of the royal family (the Arsacids), and the other consisted of the priests (the Magi) and influential Parthians of non-royal blood (the Wise Men). The Magi and Wise Men were jointly known as the Megistanes.The Greek word translated "wise men" is "magian," literally meaning "Persian astronomer or priest." Parthia had long governed all Persian territory at the time of Yahuahshua, and the Wise Men cited in the Bible were clearly members of the Megistanes - very high Parthian officials. While traditional Christian accounts of this episode celebrate the coming of "the three wise men", the Bible does not state the number of visiting Magi/Wise Men. Indeed, Biblical events and the realities of that time argue for a much larger contingent of Parthian Magi. The Bible shows that the Magi did not visit the young Yahuahshua in the manger at Bethlehem, as most nativity scenes depict, but visited Yahuahshua in a house somewhat after His birth. Matthew 2.11 states that this visit of the Magi took place in a house when Yahuahshua was old enough to be called 'a young child' - no longer an infant in swaddling clothes. Luke 2:8-40 mentions the shepherds' arrival at the manger, but makes no mention of any Magi visiting Yahuahshua at that time. Matthew 2:8 adds that Herod sent the Magi 'to Bethlehem' after conferring with the Jewish hierarchy about the prophesied location of the Messiah's birth ... Herod then privately met with the Parthian delegation, and enquired when "the star" which they followed had first appeared. He apparently learned that this period of time was almost two years because he killed all the male children in Bethlehem under two years of age in an attempt to kill the Messiah, whom he regarded as a competitor for his position as king of the Jews (Judeans, and not "Jews"). Since the Wise Men were prominent people in Parthia at the time of the arrival of "the star", they had to make a time-consuming journey It took time to prepare the costly gifts to present to the Messiah, set their affairs in order for a long absence, organize a caravan and likely obtain an armed escort for protection, then make the lengthy journey to Judea, a journey which moved at the speed of the slowest pack animal in the caravan. Since the "star" may have appeared to the Wise Men prior to Jesus' birth He may have been a few months or even two years old at the time of the Magi's arrival in Judea. Consider also that Matthew 2:1.3 states:
This account does not indicate that three wise men from the east quietly visited Herod, then Yahuahshua, and then just as quietly left Judea to return to Parthia. Their arrival in Jerusalem was a very public affair because "all Jerusalem" was "troubled" by their arrival. This suggests that the Magi came to Jerusalem in a caravan with costly treasures and escorted by a strong force of armed Parthian soldiers!... These high officials would have traveled with a large entourage of servants, animal-handlers, cooks, etc., on such a long journey... There may have been thousands of Parthian soldiers escorting the caravan. This is not an overstatement. Josephus records that treasure caravans bringing expensive offerings to Jerusalem from Jews living in Parthian territory did so with "as many as ten thousand men" as escorts. In ancient times, traveling with expensive items was dangerous. There was danger not only from brigands, but also from local satraps (Warlords) who might use their armies to conquer a treasure train passing through their territories ... The Wise Men were not bringing just a few samples of gold and other precious things that they carried in their personal saddle bags. They were coming to worship a King. The caravan was so big that their arrival quickly stirred up Jerusalem. The whole city was in an uproar over their arrival, and that argues for a very visible and impressive Parthian caravan arriving in Jerusalern not long after Yahuahshua's birth in Bethlehem. The sheer size of the caravan and its escorts awed King Herod and the whole city to the point they were all "troubled"... It is clear that the Jewish hierarchy understood that the Parthians were looking for the Messiah as they quickly looked for Messianic prophecies to locate the city of His birth. After their consultations with Herod and Jewish officials, the Parthian delegation traveled to worship Yahuahshua and present their gifts to Him. [After this both the Magi and Joseph were warned by Yahuah in dreams to leave Judea secretly and quickly, to avoid Herod's jealous reaction.] History records that Roman-Parthian relations were peaceful at the time that Yahuashua was born, and the Bible confirms this as the Parthian Magi did not sneak into Roman territory to look for the Messiah, but rather came directly to King Herod, quite open about their reasons for being in Roman-occupied Palestine. They informed Herod they had come to worship Him "that is born king of the Jews (Judeans)"... There is no record that Herod made any attempt to overtake or punish the Magi when they left. As Parthian nobles, they had "diplomatic immunity" and Herod dared not anger Caesar by provoking the Parthians" [and thus create an incident]. The fact that some of the Parthian ruling classes were worshippers of the Ul of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is most revealing. That Yahuah Himself sent a "star" to lead them to Yahuahshua, and gave instructions to the Magi via dreams, is further revealing. Yahuah obviously considered these Parthians to be "righteous" men under the terms of His laws or He would not have been dealing with them so personally. That educated Parthians were ready to visit and worship the Messiah at the time of Yahuahshua's birth indicates they were also familiar with the prophecies of the Old Testament. Who but transplanted Israelites would have been looking for the Messiah at that time? ... In an earlier chapter it was shown that the Magi were loyal to one dynasty- Arsacids- whose members continuously ruled Parthia. It was shown that many rulers of Parthian (Saka) kingdoms had names incorporating the word "Phares" or the consonants of the Hebrew root word for that name (PH-R-S).This suggests that the Arsacids were descended from the seed of David, who was the first king of the Phares [Judah] family (Matthew 1:2-6). 1 Chronicles 3:17-24 reveals that the royal lineage continued to flourish after Judah's captivity. Indeed this dynasty was given high status in the Babylonian Empire (2 Kings25: 27-30).This post-exilic elevation of the Davidic dynasty in Asia likely led to their serving as vassal kings over captive Israelites under Babylonian and Persian masters ... With the Parthians being Israelites, and the Arsacids being descended from King David, the Arsacids were the only dynasty in Asia that was racially, historically and culturally related to the Parthian people. Since Matthew 1:3-17 tells us that Yahuahshua HaMashiyach was also a descendant of Phares and King David, Yahuahshua was a blood relative of the Parthian ruling dynasty which serves as a further explanation for the homage paid to Him by the Parthian Magi. We will now examine the possibility that the visit of influential Parthians to the young Yahuahshua almost led to a Parthian-Roman war. Recall that from 40-37 BC, Parthia had ruled Palestine and Syria before the Romans drove them back across the Euphrates River. That war ushered in a long period of Parthian-Roman detente which included the entire lifetime of Yahuahshua. However, a great Parthian-Roman war was barely averted in A.D.1, when a "summit conference" was held between the Parthian emperor, Phraataces, and Caius Caesar, the grandson of Augustus Caesar on an island in the Euphrates River (neutral territory). Roman sources record that:
This "summit conference" averted war, but how could the Magi's visit
have had a role in this crisis? Herod was justifiably fearful of Parthian
intentions in the area. Hadn't they come to anoint a replacement for him as "king
of the In 2 B.C. (most likely the year the Magi came to Judaea) Rome and Parthia were facing a possible conflict in Armenia over succession to the throne of Armenia. In both Armenia and Judea, the issue was whether Rome or Parthia would choose the kings of those nations. While Parthia had not forced the crisis in Armenia, Parthia's actions in Judea - the visit of the Magi - were provocative. Rome's response was to send a large army "to the east" to prepare for a possible Parthian-Roman war. Rawlinson records that the Roman army arrived in 1 B.C., delayed by the retirement of Augustus Caesar's preferred commander, and that the situation was further muddled by the death of Phraates IV, Parthia's emperor during the visit of the Magi to Jerusalem. Herod the Great had also died by the time Roman reinforcements arrived, so all the major principals had a fresh viewpoint by the time Rome and Parthia had their "summit conference" in the Euphrates River ... Although the historical accounts mention only the Armenian dispute, it is worth noting that the Parthian and Roman armies did not confront each other in the mountains of Armenia but along the Euphrates River - the invasion route to Syria and Palestine. Since the Roman army arrived in 1 B.C., and the Roman-Parthian peace conference did not defuse the situation until A.D.1, there was a two-year period of "war fever" in the Middle East. Everyone in the region breathed a huge sigh of relief when war was averted... If a war had been fought much of Yahuahshua's ministry in Judea [and the early spread of the Gospel] probably could not have occurred. http://www.ensignmessage.com/archives/moreaboutmagi.html |
| This article points out the considerable Political
and Military tensions involved in the region (especially between the
Roman and Parthian Empires); but there is no doubt, a religious battle
that was being waged behind the scenes by the Temple "power
elites." Antigonus' grandfather, King Alexander Jannai, favored the Sadducees. Even to the point of slaying many of the Pharisees. After his death, his wife Queen Salome (and her son Hyrcanus II) favored the Pharisees and put them in power. Hyrcanus II's brother, Aristobolus II (the father of Antigonus) favored the Sadducees. At play here is the rivalry between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Obviously, the Pharisees would have felt threatened if the grandson of Antigonus (Yahuahshua) rose to power in Judea. The tension that existed between Yahuahshua and the Pharisees is obvious in the scriptures. Not only did he openly (and strongly) rebuke the Pharisees, but many (if not most) of the parables were direct insults aimed at the Pharisees and their Mishpah (and Talmud). In fact, it was the Pharisees who were the main impetus behind the persecution and subsequent murder of the Messiah of Yahuah, his son Yahuahshua. On the other hand, there is nothing in the scripture record of a harsh word spoken to the Sadducess by the Messiah. There was the one disagreement they had regarding the interpretation of the resurrection. When Antigonus was defeated by the Romans in 37 B.C. he was sent to the Roman General Marc Antony in Damascus. Josephus reported in "Antiquities" that Herod the Great paid a huge bribe to have Antigonus put to death, even though Caesar's recommendation was to banish him. The Roman Historian Cassius Dio's records his demise [Book 49 22] : "These people [the Jews] Antony entrusted to a certain Herod to govern; but Antigonus he bound to a cross and scourged, a punishment no other king had suffered at the hands of the Romans, and so slew him." Sound familiar? Did Pontius Pilate do the same thing to Antigonus' grandson, Yahuahshua? Ask yourself this question, when the disciples were assembled together in Jerusalem, what did they mean when they asked the resurrected Messiah: "....Master, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? Acts 1:6 (KJV) Which kingdom were they referring to? A heavenly kingdom or the Hasmonean kingdom that was once here on earth? In considering the likely possibility that Yahuahshua's father was Antipater III, this would have made him a Roman citizen. Very few Hebrews were Roman citizens, but Herod the Great (and his descendants) were granted Roman citizenship by Julius Caesar. As the scriptures indicate, the Pharisees could pronounce the death sentence upon a Hebrew man and have him killed, but only Pontius Pilate could execute a Roman citizen. There would be no other reason besides this, for the Sanhedrin to send Yahuahshua to Pontius Pilate. When Pilate asked Yahuahshua, "Are you the King of Judaea?" He answered him, "It is as you say." [Luke 23:3 NKJV] There are several historical reasons (which I won't go into in detail about right now) to date the execution of Yahuahshua at 37 A.D. Coincidentally (but I think not) it was in this same year that Pontius Pilate, the Procurator of Judea, was banished (by Rome) to Gaul (Spain) where he died in 41 A.D. Around the year 39 A.D., Herod Antipas was also banished to Gaul where he died in 40 A.D. Could it be they were both punished by the Roman Senate (and/or Emperor) for executing the rightful King and High Priest of Judea, without Rome's permission? And by doing so, risked involving Rome in another war with the Parthians? How am I to interpret New Testament writings? Let me make myself perfectly clear. I look at the
written record of New Testament events as real life occurrences that had an additional meaning applied through
allegory. By no means do I think the N.T. is meant to be read as pure
allegory. This next example of allegory points to Yahuahshua being
the true King of Judea, the last Hasmonean; All of this (and much more) makes me think about the
alternative to what is taught by Christian theologians. Was Yahuahshua really just a peasant
carpenter, even a peasant King, or did He give up
everything he could have had in this world, including His rightful place
as an earthly King - all for the sake of his brethren.
* Philo's "Rules for the Allegorical
Interpretation of Scripture." |
