My Confession.

This short thread below is taken from a recent YouTube post by Blackstone Intelligence where I succinctly (as is possible) outline a brief synopsis of my thoughts on Christianity, as far as the historicity of Jesus is concerned.


Truth is, I doubt that the NT Jesus ever existed. Personally, I’ll only go so far as to permit that his character possibly could have been modeled by some real person at some time in the first Century B.C.E., however, his story has been liberally embellished IMO.


The Tube video was concerning the Tuber’s (Jake Morphonios) ideas about the recent war build up by the USA in and around Syria, as war with Iran seems imminent. Jake and I see that situation alike, but I take issue with his insistence that the world history he tells his audience is FACTUAL, and that no one can deny the facts.


The problem I have with his making that statement is that his historical account of things is largely based upon Biblical texts (both Old and New Testament), to which he tends to find inerrant. I firmly disagree with this misconception.


To be sure, there are many historical nuggets of truth to be found in both the Old and New Testaments. But, it is not even close to being infallible. Any student of history understands that politics has skewed the historical narrative on many levels and throughout most of written history.


Truth depends on a unique perspective where our knowledge of history is concerned. After all, history is largely written by a narrow frame of reference. The winners.


Tauta panta perilabon en hepta bibliois kai medemian tois epistamenois ta pragmata kai paratuchousi toi polemoi katalipon e mempseos aphormen e kategorias, tois ge ten aletheian agaposin, alia me pros hedonen anegrapsa. Poie-somai de tauten tes exegeseos archen, hen kai ton kepha- laion epoiesamen.”

I have comprehended all these things in seven books, and
have left no occasion for complaint or accusation to such as
have been acquainted with this war; and I have written it
down for the sake of those that love truth, but not for those
that please themselves with registering names. And I will
begin my account of these things with what I call my First

-Josephus Flavius, beginning paragraph in War of the Jews, circa: 70-75 B.C.E.


Jake, I have a question for you to consider. If you believe the New Testament (and NO, it is NOT fact), Jesus says that he’ll return and destroy the Second Temple while his followers are alive (or within their generation), not leaving one stone upon another.
Of course, the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. In that very fashion, however… it WAS DESTROYED BY TITUS FLAVIUS, not Jesus.
Did he lie, or is it more likely that the NT was written after 70 A.D. by the Romans, for the Empire’s geo-political reasons?


(Occam’s razor anyone?)
Not Jake, but there were many judgements in the old Testament in which it was prophesied that God would come riding a swift cloud, stars falling from heaven, mountains boiled down with blood etc. The actual judgement would then always come by way of enemy forces in earthly fashion.


Jesus said that he would judge the same way that the Father had. Therefor, apocalyptic language aside, Titus destroying Jerusalem was no different than any other prophesied judgement in the Bible.


most diggity
Which means it was textualized in the typology of the day, and which includes writing “history” after the fact, and/or… making the present conform to the Biblical record, which is what the Zionists are attempting to do with “their apocalypse” plans.


Any other interpretation is a ridiculous over-stretch.


I’m not sure I’m following the “writing history after the fact” point, but I agree that Zionists are taking advantage of the Christian misunderstanding of the “end times” and performing a prophecy play that attracts the support of the mostly ignorant Christian masses.


Not meaning ignorant in the derogatory way, but rather the lack of understanding way. Hundreds of scriptures point to the “end times” being in the generation that saw the fall of the Temple and the sacking of Jerusalem. Somehow, most Christians just skip right over those verses and keep right on waiting to be raptured.


Most Diggity, just to clarify my position. We see Moses speak of the last days of Israel in Deuteronomy, saying they would be a crooked a perverse generation. Jesus quotes Moses while speaking to his contemporaries, saying they were that crooked and perverse generation. Then in Daniel 12 we see this same “end time” and the angel tells Daniel that when the power of the Holy (set apart) people is completely broken, all these things will be finished. The power of the Holy (set apart) people was their covenant with God through the Temple and all that it entailed.


When the Temple fell and the city was destroyed, all prophecy was fulfilled. We do not live in a prophetic era in 2018! Another proof is that the angel tells Daniel to seal up the words of his prophecy because the time was still far off.


However, at the end of Revelation, the angel tells John not to seal up the book because the time was at hand. Anyway, I get it if you don’t believe the Bible. I just think we can all look at it as a piece of literature that has a story it’s trying to tell. We should at least let the book tell it’s own story and not try and twist it into a story that it is not… and never intended to be.
Nice chatting with you!


most diggity


Well, it is my opinion after having done considerable research over many years that it is likely that the NT (or, the four Gospels we have accepted as such) were written after 70 A.D., and is loosely based on Josephus’ historical (but sometimes hyperbolic) writings in “The War of The Jews” and “The History of the Jews” which were written sometime between 70-80 A.D.


That means that the stories of Jesus are fictionalized in many, or possibly every way. The suggestion is that it was done for political reasons by the Roman elite. The Jews had been a thorn in their side ever since they were conquered (63ish B.C.E.), mostly due to their religious practices and beliefs and refusal to pay homage to Rome. After Vespasian, then Titus led the Roman military’s destruction of the Temple, Josephus (who was a prisoner/traitor to Jews) was freed and became part of the Flavian dynastic family and named Rome’s historian.


Possibly around then (or it could have been in the early 2nd Century B.C.E.) when it appears that Rome cultivated a plan to marginalize a chance of Jewish resurgence.


The plan was to replace the strict Jewish religion with a more relaxed, peaceful and pacifist outlook on Rome. Thus, they ordered the creation, in part or from whole cloth, the NT. Think of “Give unto Caesar, what is Caesar’s” as a psyop for both haters and tax evaders, etc. of course, this is a highly condensed description of what I believe to be more likely than NOT.


History written AFTER the supposed fact. Peace.

Read more



Okay, I see what you’re saying now. I spent most of my life as a non-believer, so I get it. One fly I think I see in the ointment is that Jesus and the New Testament apostles were teaching nothing but the Law and the Prophets of the Old Testament.


In other words, the destruction of Jerusalem was according to Old Testament prophecies. Jesus and the apostles were constantly quoting the prophets as they went around teaching the time was at hand. So the Old Testament would also need to be written post 70 ad in order to follow along with the point you were making.

Show less

Blackstone Intelligence Network


+most diggity Jesus never said that he was going to destroy the temple. He said to the Jews, that when his body was destroyed, he would raise it up again on the third day. The Pharisees twisted the meaning of his words to suggest that he had threatened to destroy the temple built by Herod.


most diggity


Shimatoree66 and Jake. To both of you, I will try to make this as succinct as I can.


1). Yes, according to the Jews the destruction of the Temple came as prophesied by Daniel, so I am in agreement with this much. And yes, remember, the Jews and Christians follow the same Bible in this sense.


2). Jesus (NT) accurately describes the destruction of the Temple in Luke 19:37-43 vs. with the same description being in “The War of the Jews” regarding Titus; Jesus adding that, “you do not know the time of your visitation”. That “visitation” he referred to as being by “The Son of Man” (referencing himself in 3rd person), and the title to whom Daniel had prophesied to as well.


3). Matt. 24:42-4- Jesus tells them they, “do not know the day your Lord is coming”, and they must, “be ready; for it is at a time when you do not expect Him that the Son of Man will come.


Matt. 25:13– And again, “Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming”.


Matt. 24:33-34- “… the present generation will certainly not pass away without all these things having first taken place”. And, of course the “visitation” that Jesus warned of came not by himself but by Titus Flavius, whom Josephus described in Wars as having carefully planned a surprise attack, or seige of the walls of Jerusalem, after having surrounded the City with a earthen wall and having encamped outside for months.


There are a number of other events described by Josephus which were paralleled much like they are portrayed in the NT, but with some clever literary tricks to disguise it. This subject is documented in full by Joseph Atwill in his groundbreaking book, Caesar’s Messiah.


Coincidence or prophesy?
most diggity


Also, it is helpful to remember that Josephus Flavius was a Jewish scholar and that the Flavians had a personal relationship with the Alexanders and Herod’s, the two wealthiest Jewish families who had a stake in calming the Jewish insurrectionists.


That the Romans confiscated all of the Jewish literature from the Temple allowed them the necessary means to provide an almost seamless story which would fit with Old Testament prophecy.


most diggity
Shimatoree66, Ok. I agree that to each your own, and i hope I don’t sound like I’m trying to convert… if only to have you see my perspective.


As to the end of Revelation statement regarding the angel telling John that, “the time was at hand” etc… one must consider when Revelation was written and by whom. My feeling is that it too coincides with the method I’ve described above. That is that they were most likely written during the reign of Domitian (another Flavian) circa: 90-100 A.D. and perhaps by the same people who I think likely wrote the Gospels.


In that time period they would have understood Jewish prophesy and the Temple destruction and easily provided a story to further quell the messianic movement of the day. There were other political reasons as well. Now, what kind of hallucinogens they were using is another story. Cheers!

Read more

Most diggity, even though we may disagree, your posts are awesome.


I’ve had a theory that the early church wandered away from the truth so quickly due to Jewish influence. Without going into it too deep, the Catholic Church is nothing but re-branded Judaism. So I figured that Rome had to be heavily influenced by a Pharisee somewhere down the line.


We are approaching this from opposite ends of the spectrum, but noticing many of the same things. What made me believe that the Bible must be true, is because so much effort and intrigue has gone into misrepresenting what it says… and quite effectively.


Why not just change the words to what you want them to say, instead of leading people to think it says what it doesn’t… if that makes sense.

Read more

most diggity
Thanks, and the same to you. It’s enjoyable when folks can discuss without too much emotional baggage. You fit that description well. I’m not exactly sure about what you mean in your last paragraph. Do you have an example?




What I mean is this. Most every Christian I know has the Bible totally backwards, because of commentaries, creeds and early church fathers. It would be difficult to explain in a short space, but I see modern christianity as an adversary to the Bible. They have been tricked into waiting for a Messiah (just like the Jews) to set up an earthly Kingdom (just like the Jews), and in that way they are denying Christ in the same way the 1st century Jews did. I


n my view, Jesus kept all the promises that he said he would. The so-called 2nd coming already happened when Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed, bringing an end to the old covenant and ushering in the new. That is the whole story of the Bible in a nutshell. People don’t get it because they are expecting a paradise here on earth. However, if you look at the last few verses of revelation, there are still murderers and liars in the outer courtyard (or whatever).


The Jews denied Jesus because he didn’t bring the Kingdom they wanted. Christians today have been Judaized into doing the exact same thing. Check out a guy named Don K Preston on Youtube. I discovered him when I thought I must be crazy because I was reading everything the opposite of what everyone was teaching.


I haven’t got it all figured out, but I know for sure the Bible has been totally misrepresented, and if I can see it… anyone can see it that actually takes the time to read and think.

Show less