Tuesday, September 09, 2008

Jesus and Barabbas III

Further, it is reasonable to deduct that the Jews may very well have adopted this 'custom' and made it made it to their suiting by masking it with elements of their own history. In the book of Esther we have the origins of the feast of Purim which occurs yearly about 1 month before the Passover. In the story we have Haman (royal vizier to King Ahasuerus/Xerxes) who conspires to kill the Jews and has set up the gallows to execute Mordecai (Esther's Cousin). Ultimately, Mordecai is exonerated and Haman himself is hanged in his stead in the very gallows that he set up.

In accordance with numerous similar antiquitious traditions from that region the Jews seem to have adopted a ceremony which was symbolically used to denote the end or passing of the previous year with the coming of a new, represented in the New Testament by making Jesus as the Haman (passing) and Barabbas as the Mordecai (beginning) of the year.
customs include drinking wine, wearing of masks and costumes, and public celebration.

In Babylon it was called the Feast of the Sakeas, to the Romans it was Saturnalia. It was ostensibly a memorial of the inroad of the Scythian Sakes into Nearer Asia, and was identical with the very ancient new year's festival of the Babylonians, the Zakmuk. A mock king, a criminal condemned to death, was here also the central figure -- an unhappy being, to whom for a few days was given absolute freedom and every kind of pleasure, even to the using of the royal harem, until on the last day he was divested of his borrowed dignity, stripped naked, scourged, and then burnt. The Jews of the Southern Kingdom gained knowledge of this 'custom' during the Babylonian captivity, borrowed it from their oppressors, and Incorporated its traditions shortly before their Pasch under the name of the Feast of Purim.


Barabbas126 said...

"Jesus [Barabbas]" is who He is.
"Jesus Christ", on the other hand, is as a result of Saul of Tarsus aka the Apostle and eventual Saint Paul's immaculately conceived epiphany or apparition of the crucified 'descendant of David' and 'messiah', -whose actual name is "Judas the Galilean" or, "Judas bar Judas".

No Jew, during the crucifixion, knew or saw or even heard of "Christ", -which, is an invented
Greek word without etymological basis or foundation in fact.

See: http://www.jesusbarabbas.info
for complete disclosure.

Ominous said...

Interesting, are you suggesting then that "Jesus" was never crucified? After all 'Barabbas' is said to have been released. If not, then what is this "time of the crucifixion" that you are referring to?

I have news for you too, no Jew at the time of the crucifixion ever heard of "Jesus" either, that is another Greek word.

Christ is "Christos" or "Cristo" a Greek rendering of the Hebrew word Mashiach, meaning anointed. 'Jesus' is the English transliteration of Iesvs, which is the Greek transliteration of Yeshua or Yehoshua.


Roland E Bouchard said...

Yes, that is exactly what I am 'suggesting'... "Jesus" or "Yeshua" (or whatever His name was) was the 'Son of God' and Not the alleged "notorious robber, murderer and insurrectionist" as Saul of Tarsus aka the Apostle and eventual Saint Paul and his cohorts (Mark and Luke) contrived.

At issue and stake, was not the life of this man or that man rather, a non-threatening Holy man (come to teach the esoteric way of personal salvation) versus a 'descendant of David' and Jewish 'messiah' come to overthrow Herod's secular governance and replace it with that of his forefather's theocratic government (which had been rejected since the days of Rehoboam, -900 hundred yrs earlier).

The ancestry of Saul of Tarsus reveals the 'real' story as it concerns the 'descendant of David' and Jewish 'messiah'.

But as matters relating to Jesus Barabbas, we know nothing... I merely wonder.