I think we are talking historically about Izates vs Apollonius. Izates is a king of the fourth Assyrian Empire. The Jews are not Assyrian and thus want to downplay the Assyrian/Babylonian influence in Judea (nearly eliminating their sense of sovereignty, considering the amount of times they were conquered and enslaved). The Romans had a more tactical approach because these problems started beneath their radar. They cared about the influence that Izates' ideology had on the rebellious Judeans (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish%E2%80%93Roman_wars), so they wanted to soften that. They also cared about the effect that Apollonius had on the governability of Romans and others throughout the empire.So, those are the major perspectives that write the texts we read today as "fact". Let's try to unpack some of the official narrative of the Bible and the characters in it.- I think John the Baptist is Oannes the King of Babylon. This is Izates. Izates is killed (beheaded) in 30 AD, and this is part of the rallying cry for the later Judean wars. This spurs the Sicari as well. The Essenes are involved, but there's less of a 1:1 relationship there. Not all Essenes are part of it.- Apollonius also has a noble pedigree, although I haven't worked out exactly what it is or how important it is. If "John blessed Jesus", this is really saying the Babylonian king blessed or named his high priest, which historically meant the high priest of th e world. This is because the lineage doesn't just go back to Babylon — it actually goes back to Egypt, where the Pharaoh was the FIRST of this entire model. It was the first place that Atlanteans set up shop after the flood.This will be part 1 of several.
>>41010323- Apollonius is well-traveled and highly intelligent and knowledgable. His vision is that the path of spiritual enlightenment (aka knowledge, wisdom, gnosis) is for EVERYONE. Some people have interpreted Paul's Christianity as just "Judaism for Goys", but I think it's more like "Buddhism but made accessible to a western audience". Christianity wasn't based on Judaism. Rather, Christianity was later rewritten to be about Judaism. They took the story of Apollonius, and they fit it onto the life of Izates around 325 AD. So, we think the significance of Christianity is the Jewish frame of mind, the chosen king who redeems the world and brings his nation out of the ashes. However, I think Apollonius' Christianity is about the "christ" within everyone. He comes back from India and teaches about Christna/Krishna, and people share Chrishna teachings for a few hundred years, as part of their participation in the refrigerium and a variety of practices. THEN, Rome retrofitted all of these texts (probably through changing some names and omitting parts) to Izates.
>>41010341- I don't think Apollonius and Izates really opposed each other. After all, "John" blesses "Jesus". I don't think there's strictly anything in Apollonius' ideas that Izates would oppose either. Is he against sharing wisdom? Doesn't seem like it, as Helena of Adiabene was very giving throughout her life, and Izates seemed to have fought righteous revolts too, such as the 6 AD one, although that could have been Izates' father. Now, could Apollonius have learned something from Izates and then used it to reframe his teachings? I could absolutely believe that. We're told that Paul started out a "Jew" and was converted to Christianity. We know Apollonius was first educated in Phoenician religion/knowledge in Tyana, before he set off and became worldly knowledgeable, so if Phoenician is translated as Jew in this context, then that matches. In short, I think the conflict between the "church of Jesus and James in Jerusalem" and "the church of Peter and Paul in Rome" didn't fight over ideas. Rather, later people set these groups against each other for the sake of their own power.
>>41010347The actual reason I created this thread (before working backwards and seeing there's a lot more to say) is that I realized it's not entirely clear if it was Jesus or Paul who went to India. People sometimes seem to even refer to "secret knowledge about Jesus" that is actually about Paul/Apollonius, which complicates things.So, the story by Philostratus is that Apollonius traveled the world and went to India. The thing is, I've read that _Jesus_ went to India, and Izates is closer to "Jesus". Unless, it was "Christ" who went to India, and Apollonius is "Chrishna/Christ". Then, "Jesus Christ" is the compound name of these two people, which only happened after the fact because it didn't play out that way while they were alive.Anyway, I just read someone claim that it was Izates or Monobazus II (his brother) that actually went to India. Is this a thing that Babylonian kings do? I know he spent time in Charax Spasinu, which is Babylon, but not further west. HOWEVER, I also read that Apollonius left for India from Babylon (unclear if it means by land or by sea, but presumably by land if the goal was the Himalayans).That's one of my questions: could they have both made this pilgrimmage, is it more likely that one or the other hand, and might there be more evidence in India that suggests one or the other?My other question is the association with Macedonian (Ptolemaic), Roman (Julii/Ascanius) nobility, or Jerusalemite (Herod, whatever he is) nobility is important. Every story about Apollonius starts with that he came from a well-off situation, but no names are mentioned, so he has no direct association with these bloodlines.Unless... Apollonius could be the grandson of Julius Caesar and/or Cleopatra VII (or Cleopatra Selene II for that matter — her death and Apollonius' birth lines up).A lot of people have tried to imagine how these bloodlines got into Izates, who's surely an important person in the story. Yet, maybe it's not about him.
>>41010323How does any of this speculation help you get closer to the Christ in your heart?
>>41010323I think Paul would fucking batter Jesus. KO in 3rd round.
>>41010403Truth integrates my heart.>>41010390Maybe Juba II of Mauretania is connected to Judea by way of being of ancient Phoenician stock. He's of the tribe of Judah, the Davidic ruler. So, Juba II and Cleopatra Selene combine Judean Davidic blood and Ptolemaic-Egyptian blood. I think the queen of Egypt was the head priestess of Isis, which was the Egyptian equivalent of the major priestess cults throughout the ancient world. For example, Artemis at Ephesus, and we DO know Apollonius was initiated into the Asclepius cult at Aegae (wrong spelling), which is connected to Ephesus via the Jason and the Argonauts story — Jason is Asclepius, and the fleece is the medical record.So, Apollonius was born in Mauretania, then shipped off to be raised in Cappadocia (Tyana), under the watchful eye of a relative or ally. This might make some sense if he was a target for political assassination, or maybe it was simply because his parents died.This also implies Ptolemy of Mauretania would be Apollonius' older brother.It's not clear how any of this would relate to Adiabene, nor does it necessarily HAVE to. Some speculate Ptolemaic line -> Musa of Parthia -> Helena of Adiabene. This would just mean that Apollonius and Ptolemy of Mauretania are related to the sons and daughters of Musa, which might even include Izates himself (I've read that the Parthian king Phraates V married his mother).To get even more speculative, some say Selene II had twins (and twin genetics _were_ part of the Ptolemaic line). This means Apollonius was sent to Cappadocia, and his sister could have been sent somewhere else and turn up in this story. Timeline-wise, it couldn't be Cleopatra of Jerusalem or Musa (both of whom married around 20-25 BC), but we don't know Helena of Adiabene's age exactly. It does seem to potentially fit Helena. This would require us to break the mother/daughter connection from Musa to Helena though.Izates married Apollonius' sister and then baptized Apollonius?
>>41010520>Truth integrates my heart.You've strayed quite a ways from the real Truth, which is Christ.
>>41010520I also wonder if Simon of Cyrene is Apollonius. If Apollonius is actually from Mauretania, that's close to Cyrene. Simon and Paul would then be the same guy, and Simon the Black Magician is Apollonius too.>>41010533Or I've already gone there and want more? You want me to do less? Maybe we should all just sit around and wait till death then, huh? Something better you want me to do?
>>41010520Truth tongues my anus
>>41010429Jesus never met Paul but op still connects unconnected dotsPeter was the rock and next in linePaul only hallucinated meeting jesus(literally from Paul himself)James was his brother but also more jewishI think the truth is (I’m not a Christian by the way) Jesus was real and advanced but couldn’t openly rebel again Rome like John the Baptist (John lost his head, literally)Jesus survived the crucifixation and went to Europe Paul was a Roman agent (admittedly) his vision was faked and he never stuck up for James or Peter
>>41010533Piss off worm.
>>41010615That's the asseorms, faggot.
>>41012170>Paul only hallucinated meeting jesus(literally from Paul himself)He was most likely a practicing merkavah mystic.
>>41010341Aurelian had correctly appreciated the importance of a solar theology of monotheistic structure for ensuring the unity of the Empire. He reintroduced the Emesan god to Rome, but radically modified his structure and cult. The Syrian elements were carefully eliminated, and the service was entrusted to Roman senators. The anniversary date of Dens Sol Invictus was fixed at December 25, the "birthday" of all the Eastern solar deities.The universalistic character of the cult and solar theology was recognized or anticipated by the Greek and Roman believers of Apollo-Helios, as well as by the worshipers of Mithra and the Syrian Baals; moreover, philosophers and theosophists were, for the most part, adherents of a monotheism of solar structure; indeed, the monotheistic and universalistic tendencies that characterize the end of the third century become dominant in the fourth century. The numerous religious syncretisms, the mysteries, the rise of the Christian theology of the Logos, the solar symbolism applied to both the emperor and the Imperium illustrate the fascination exercised by the notion of the One and by the mythology of Unity.Before his conversion, Constantine (306-337) was a believer in solar worship and saw in Sol Invictus the foundation of his Empire. But, unlike Aurelian, for whom Sol Invictus was the supreme god, Constantine considered the Sun as the most perfect symbol of God. The subordination of the Sun to the Supreme God was very likely the first consequence of his conversion to Christianity.In fact, Christianity had demonstrated its strength and vitality before Constantine's conversion. By the year 300, in Antioch and Alexandria, the Christian community was the largest and best organized religious group, and the Church-Empire antagonism was gradually losing its intransigence. The last apologists, Lactantius (240-ca. 320) and Eusebius of Caesarea (263-ca. 339), affirmed that Christianity was the only hope for the salvation of the Empire.
>>41010323>>41010341>>41010390I’m mainly lurking here but wanted to say that this thread is probably too good for /x/ in its current ‘shitty frog poster says dumb larp statement’ form.We probably don’t have enough info really. I think too much on Apollonius was lost or destroyed by the early Christian church as he was too similar to Jesus.
