Synagogue Jew of long standing was converted to Jesus Christ after reading Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53

 

 

 

“A Jewish man, devoted to synagogue and tradition, 

read Psalm 22, Isaiah 53, and … everything changed”.

 

𝚕𝚒𝚝𝚝𝚕𝚎 𝚘𝚗𝚎 †

 

 

Jewish Man Reads His Own Scriptures… and Finds Christ ✡️✝️ #shorts

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0c-HqrAu5ec

bearfruitwithchrist

 

Jewish man Stan Telchin Finds Jesus after reading The Old Testament – Powerful Testimony of truth #testimonial #jesussaves
#christian #jesus #messiah

 

And Jews for Jesus write (2018):

The Messiah would be forsaken and pierced, but vindicated - Jews for Jesus

 

The Messiah would be forsaken and pierced, but vindicated

 

The similarities between Jesus’ death and Psalm 22 are remarkable.

by Jews for Jesus | January 01 2018

 

Reference: Psalms 22:1–31 [Hebrew, 1–32]
Fulfillment: Matthew 27:35, 39, 43–44, 46; Mark 15:34; John 19:23–24, 30; Hebrews 2:11–12

 

The first half of Psalm 22 is the psalm of a righteous sufferer, derided by his enemies and feeling forsaken by God. From verse 22 (Hebrew, 23) on, the tone changes radically as the sufferer is vindicated by God and the Lord reigns over all the earth. Beginning with a despondent tone, the psalm ends on a note of triumph.

 

The New Testament shows Jesus as the ultimate fulfillment of this psalm. In Matthew 27:46 we read, “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, ‘Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?’ that is, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’” (See also Mark 15:34.) Jesus is not crying out spontaneously in despair, nor was he calling out for Elijah to come and rescue him, as some bystanders thought; he is actually quoting the beginning of Psalm 22. This is for several reasons: (1) many understand that on the cross, as Jesus took on the sins of all humanity, he was momentarily abandoned by God, who cannot look on sin. This is possible, though the text does not say so directly. (2) He was identifying as the righteous sufferer of Psalm 22.

Matthew 27:39 and 43 also uses the language of Psalm 22 to describe the reactions of those standing around:

 

And those who passed by derided him, wagging their heads… (Matthew 27:39)

All who see me mock me; they make mouths at me; they wag their heads… (Psalm 22:7 [Hebrew, 8])

“He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he desires him. For he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’” (Matthew 27:43)

“He trusts in the Lord; let him deliver him; let him rescue him, for he delights in him!” (Psalm 22:8 [Hebrew, 9])

 

The Psalm goes on to describe graphically the sufferings of this righteous person:

I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is like wax; it is melted within my breast; my strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to my jaws; you lay me in the dust of death. For dogs encompass me; a company of evildoers encircles me; they have pierced my hands and feet—I can count all my bones—they stare and gloat over me; (Psalm 22:14–17 [Hebrew, 15–18]

 

Commentators have noted the resemblance of this description of what takes place during crucifixion: the perspiration, the bones being pulled out of joint as the body fatigues on the cross; the possible rupture of the heart; the extreme dehydration. Verse 16 [Hebrew, 17] has been controversial: Most English translations say, “they have pierced my hands and feet,” while the Jewish Publication Society translation reads, “Like a lion, [they maul] my hands and feet”—literally, “like a lion, my hands and feet.”

 

However, the Septuagint—the Greek translation of the Old Testament made in the first few centuries before Jesus—has “pierced.” And the Hebrew words for “they have pierced” (kaaru) and “like a lion” (kaari) differ by one letter, both similar to the other, so that a scribe could easily have made a mistake in copying the passage.

 

Psalm 22:18 (Hebrew, 19), includes this: “they divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.”

 

Matthew 27:35 says about the Roman soldiers, “And when they had crucified him, they divided his garments among them by casting lots.” Similarly, John 19:23–24 reads:

 

When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom, so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.” So the soldiers did these things…

 

The correspondences between Jesus’ crucifixion and Psalm 22 are remarkable. Either this was a direct prophetic inspiration on the part of David, or if he was referring in an exaggerated way to his own sufferings, his words went far beyond his own situation to be fulfilled in a very literal and exact way in the events surrounding Jesus’ crucifixion.

 

Moving to the second part of the psalm showing how God vindicated the sufferer, in verse 22 (Hebrew, 23) the psalmist says, “I will tell of your name to my brothers; in the midst of the congregation I will praise you…” Hebrews 2:11–12 refers this to Jesus: “That is why he is not ashamed to call them brothers, saying, ‘I will tell of your name to my brothers; in the midst of the congregation I will sing your praise.’” In Hebrews 2:9–10, he refers to Jesus’ suffering and death; now he uses the vindication portion of the psalm to explain that Jesus shares our humanity, calls us his brothers, and stands vindicated by God. As verses 14–15 of Hebrews says, Jesus took on our humanity “that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery.” It is the same story as Psalm 22—suffering and death, then vindication and victory.

 

Finally, in John 19:30 we read, “When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, ‘It is finished,’ and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.”

 

This could allude to the final verse of Psalm 22: “They shall come and proclaim his righteousness to a people yet unborn, that he has done it.” He has done it—it is finished—the crucifixion gives way to the victory of the Resurrection!

 

Forbidden Chapter of the Tanakh

June 02, 2016

 

Forbidden Chapter of the Tanakh | Jewish Voice

 

….

 

The Tanakh, (Old Testament) is highly esteemed in Judaism as it contains the Word of God, the history of Israel, and God’s prophecy for the future. Yet, one chapter is ignored to the point of being considered forbidden by rabbis. This chapter used to be read in synagogues as part of the Haftarah, readings from the Prophets after the Torah reading in a Jewish service.

 

Highly respected Jewish writings view this single chapter as a prophecy of the coming Messiah, but it has been removed from the Haftarah.

Why?

When Israel is still waiting for their Messiah, why would a prominent chapter prophesying about Him be excised from the Jewish faith?

 

What is the Forbidden Chapter of the Tanakh?

 

Isaiah 53.

 

One of the mistakes Believers make about Jewish people is presuming they have extensive knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures. However, the average Jewish person may know little more than what they hear in synagogue each Sabbath. Some, like many Christians, only attend services on the two major holidays in the year, which for Jewish people are Passover and Yom Kippur.

 

See what happens when Jewish people on the street hear the prophecies of Isaiah 53 and come to understand that the Messiah would suffer, be rejected, and killed. The interviewer does a beautiful job of getting some interviewees to explain in their own words the meaning of Isaiah 53’s passages. He goes on to present Scriptures from all over the Tanakh that reveal not only prophecies of the Messiah, but each person’s individual need for what the Messiah offers.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXSBR047MMk

 

You’ll be surprised at the responses when people are finally asked, “Do you know anyone in history who fulfills these prophecies?”

 

Key passages mentioned in this video can help you share the Gospel through the Old Testament. Aside from Isaiah 53, some of them include: Ezekiel 18:4, Daniel 12:2, Daniel 9, Micah 5, and Isaiah 49.

 

Watch this inspiring video, and please, continue to pray for the Jewish people to come to know their Messiah.

 

Book of Revelation written before 70 AD

 

 by

 Damien F. Mackey

 

 

“… if the Book of Revelation was in fact written in AD 96, only twenty-six years after the destruction of the Temple and the Holy City, it is shocking that John

didn’t mention the recent massacre of the city and Temple”.

 

Jonathan Welton

  

Evidence for date of John's exile on Patmos | Christian Forums

 

Taken from the book, Raptureless, by Jonathan Welton, with some comments added:

 

The following are proofs to show that the book of Revelation was written prior to AD 70

Proof #1: The Syriac

 

The first proof for an earlier dating of Revelation is the witness of one of the most ancient versions of the New Testament, called The Syriac. The title page of the fourth-century Syriac Version, called the Peshitto, says this: Again the revelation, which was upon the holy John the Evangelist from God when he was on the island of Patmos where he was thrown by the emperor Nero.

 

Nero Caesar ruled over the Roman Empire from AD 54 to AD 68. This means John had to have been on the island of Patmos during this earlier time period. One of the oldest versions of the Bible tells us that Revelation was written before AD 70! This alone is a very compelling argument.

 

Damien Mackey’s comment: Nero may have, in fact, ruled much earlier than this, disqualifying him chronologically from any action against Saint John:

 

Nero, though intensely wicked, was not St. John's beastly 666

 

(4) Nero, though intensely wicked, was not St. John's beastly 666

Proof #2: Revelation 17:10

 

Second, when we look at the internal evidence, we find a very clear indicator of the date of authorship in Revelation 17:10: “They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while.” This passage, which speaks of the line of rulers in Rome, tells us exactly how many rulers had already come, which one was currently in power, and that the next one would only last a short while. This accurately identifies the rule of Nero and gives an outline of the Roman Empire of the first century. The succession of the first seven Roman Emperors went like this: “Five have fallen ...” Julius Caesar (49–44 BC) Augustus (27 BC–AD 14) Tiberius (AD 14–37) Caligula (AD 37–41) Claudius (AD 41–54) “One is ...” Nero (AD 54–68) “the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while.” Galba (June AD 68–January AD 69, a six-month rule). Of the first seven kings, five had come (Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius, and Claudius), one was currently in power (Nero), and one had not yet come (Galba), but would only remain for a short time (six months). From this we can clearly see that the current Caesar at the time of John’s writing was the sixth Caesar, Nero.

 

Damien Mackey’s comment: If my “Nero” article above is on the right track, then it makes a nonsense of this standard imperial sequence, and thus of this Proof #2.

 

Proof #3: Those Who Pierced Him

 

Our third proof is found in the Hebrew idiom “coming on clouds,” … which speaks of God coming to bring judgment on a city or nation.

 

That is what Jesus came to do in AD 70. Revelation 1:7 tells us the target of God’s judgment: Lo, he doth come with the clouds, and see him shall every eye, even those who did pierce him, and wail because of him shall all the tribes of the land. Yes! Amen (Revelation 1:7 YLT). Here, the phrase “those who did pierce him” refers to the people of the first century. At any later time in history, these people would be deceased. Yet, according to this passage, they were expected to be alive at the time of this verse’s fulfillment. This tells us that the prophecy of Revelation 1:7 had to be fulfilled within a short time after Jesus’ death, while His accusers were still alive on earth. In other words, it was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem that happened in AD 70. For this to be true, the Book of Revelation must have been written before AD 70.

Proof #4: Influence of the Jews and Judaizing Heretics

 

Our fourth proof is found in the fact that the activity of the Jewish leaders and Judaizers in the Church is mentioned in the letters to the churches in Revelation. Jesus speaks of “those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9). This was a clear reference to the Jewish leaders who persecuted the Christians. Also, among the Christians existed a group called the … [Judaizers] who tried to turn Christians back to the old covenant Jewish Law. This was a major heresy in the first century church, and Paul wrote quite a bit against it. Prior to AD 70, both the Jewish leaders outside the church and the … [Judaizers] within the church had a strong negative impact upon believers. About them, Jesus says: I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you (Revelation 3:9).

 

Before the AD 70 destruction, it was advantageous to be a Jew. The Jewish people had a favored relationship with Rome. They were allowed to have their own police force and follow their own Temple system, so long as they continued in subservience to the empire. But all that changed in AD 70, when the Roman army destroyed Jerusalem and killed more than a million Jews. Ever since that time, history has not been particularly kind to the Jewish people, and I think it is safe to say that after AD 70 people were not touting their status as Jews. These verses about people who falsely claimed to be Jews only makes sense in the pre–AD 70 context. Since the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, it has not been advantageous to claim to be Jewish. In this way, these verses point to an earlier dating of the letter. The first century Jews and Judaizers lost a great deal of influence after the destruction of AD 70, because the Jewish religious system had been destroyed and the Jewish population significantly diminished. Only if we give the Book of Revelation an early date of authorship does the significant presence and threat of the Jews and … [Judaizers] make sense.

Proof #5: Existence of Jerusalem and the Temple

 

Along the same lines, the fifth proof of an earlier date is the existence and integrity of Jerusalem and the Temple in Revelation 11. This suggests that the book was written before the destruction of AD 70. On the other hand, if the Book of Revelation was in fact written in AD 96, only twenty-six years after the destruction of the Temple and the Holy City, it is shocking that John didn’t mention the recent massacre of the city and Temple. The sheer unlikeliness that John would omit such a crucial piece of Jewish history tells us that the book must have been written prior to AD 70.

Proof #6: Time-related Passages

 

Our sixth proof is in the time-related passages at both the beginning and end of Revelation. In Revelation 1:1 and 1:3, as well as 22:10 and 22:20, we find internal time indicators that declare “the time is near,” it is “shortly to come to pass,” “he is coming quickly,” and “behold, he comes speedily.” John clearly wrote that the time of judgment was close. This only fits if the book was written before the destruction of Jerusalem.

 

Proof #7: John’s Appearance in AD 96

 

A seventh reason to believe the Book of Revelation was written at the earlier date is the appearance of John in AD 96. Jerome noted in his writings that John was seen in AD 96, and he was so old and infirm that “he was with difficulty carried to the church, and could speak only a few words to the people.” …. We must put this fact together with Revelation 10:11, which says John must “prophesy again concerning many peoples and nations and tongues and kings.” It is difficult to imagine John would be able to speak to many nations and many kings at any date after AD 96 since he was already elderly and feeble.

Proof #8: Timetable Comparison with Daniel

 

Eighth, in Daniel’s prophesy about events that would happen hundreds of years later, he was told to “roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end,” because it was a long way off (Dan. 12:4ff). By contrast, John was told, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near” (Rev. 22:10).

 

While Daniel was told to seal the prophecy up because it was a long way off (about 500 years), John was told not to seal it up because it was about to come to pass. In other words, the prophetic events were closer than 500 years. This only makes sense if the book was written prior to AD 70 and the prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70.

Proof #9: Only Seven Churches

 

Our ninth proof for an early dating of the writing of Revelation is the existence of only seven churches in Asia Minor (see Rev. 1). This tells us that the book was written before the greater expansion of Christianity into that region, which occurred after the fall of Jerusalem.

These nine points strongly point to a dating of the writing of Revelation prior to AD 70. The debate continues in scholarly circles, yet I believe these points are convincing enough for us to move forward with the idea of a pre–AD 70 writing of Revelation.

 

 

Nero, though intensely wicked, was not St. John’s beastly 666

 

by

 Damien F. Mackey

  

 

Who, then, was Nero?

 

Where does Nero fit into this list of kings?

 

And can Nero be the man-beast numbered 666 in John’s Revelation 13:18?

 

  

Introduction 

The emperor Nero I have found extremely difficult to slot into an appropriate time frame in my revision of ancient history.

In this sense, Nero has been for me like - in the case of Assyrian history - the difficult Ashurnasirpal, or his presumed (but not actual) son-successor, Shalmaneser so-called III.

 

In earlier times I would simply have considered Nero as – just as the text books tell us – a Roman emperor who reigned in the era thereby assigned to him, after Claudius.

 

The conventional (or text book) succession of Roman rulers is given as follows:

 

1st century AD

 

• (Julius Caesar)
• Augustus (27 bce–14 ce)
• Tiberius (14–37 ce)
• Caligula (37–41 ce)
• Claudius (41–54 ce)
• Nero (54–68 ce)
• Galba (68–69 ce)
• Otho (January–April 69 ce)
• Aulus Vitellius (July–December 69 ce)
• Vespasian (69–79 ce)
• Titus (79–81 ce)
• Domitian (81–96 ce)
• Nerva (96–98 ce)

 

2nd century AD

 

• Trajan (98–117 ce)
• Hadrian (117–138 ce)
• Antoninus Pius (138–161 ce)

….

 

But my revision of these names – so far skirting around Nero (Galba, Otho, Vitellius) – has played havoc with this list, which mischief on my part accords with my view (focussing upon Assyro-Babylonia) that the:

 

Chaotic King Lists can conceal some sure historical sequences

 

(6) Chaotic King Lists can conceal some sure historical sequences

 

At my hands, the Egyptian, Assyrian and Chaldeo-Babylonian king lists have undergone major streamlining.

 

And so has the above ‘Roman’ list (still very much a work in progress, though).

Thus:

 

-         Julius Caesar is found to have been a fictitious composite, partly based upon Jesus Christ:

 

Julius Caesar legends borrowed, in part, from life of Jesus Christ

 

(6) Julius Caesar legends borrowed, in part, from life of Jesus Christ

 

-         Augustus is the Seleucid Greek king, Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ (re-dated to the Infancy of Jesus Christ):

 

Time to consider Hadrian, that ‘mirror-image’ of Antiochus Epiphanes, as also the census emperor Augustus

 

(6) Time to consider Hadrian, that 'mirror-image' of Antiochus Epiphanes, as also the census emperor Augustus

 

-         Tiberius. I have left the door open for the possibility of a merger of Tiberius with Claudius:

 

Tiberius – Claudius similarities

 

(8) Tiberius - Claudius similarities

 

-         Caligula, or Gaius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, is a crazier version of Augustus (the Greek Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ - also ‘Epimanes’, the “Madman”).

 

-         Trajan, Hadrian (Augustus, Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ above), Antoninus Pius, all these names belong to the one, same ruler:

 

Hadrianus Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian

 

(1)           Hadrianus Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian

 

No room for Antoninus Pius

 

(1) No room for Antoninus Pius

 

Who, then, was Nero?

 

Where does Nero fit into this list of kings?

 

And can Nero be the man-beast numbered 666 in John’s Revelation 13:18?

 

“This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate

the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666”.

 

 

Was Nero a primary ruler, or a secondary one?

 

The reason that I ask this is because Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, and the various alter egos whom I have assigned to him, all now to be recognised as Greek, had a notable second:

 

Herod, the emperor’s signet right-hand man

 

(3) Herod, the emperor's signet right-hand man

 

-         In the case of Antiochus himself, that man was Philip (I Maccabees 6:14-15):

 

“Then he called Philip, one of his most trusted advisers, and put him in charge of his whole empire. He gave him his crown, robe, and official ring, and authorized him to educate his son Antiochus the Fifth and bring him up to be king”. 

 

-         In the case of Augustus, that man was Marcus Agrippa, his right-hand man. He was also Herod ‘the Great’.

 

-         In the case of Caligula, it was, again, Marcus Agrippa:

 

Caligula exalts Marcus Agrippa

 

(3) Caligula exalts Marcus Agrippa

 

-         In the case of Hadrian, that man was Herodes [Herod] ‘Atticus’.

 

All of this is fully explained in my “Herod” article above.

 

Nero, I have ultimately concluded, was a primary ruler, an emperor, rather than a powerful second. For, so far I have found reason to consider:

 

Nero like an Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’

 

(2)  Nero like an Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’

 

like a Caligula:

Caligula and Nero

 

(3) Caligula and Nero

 

and like a philhellenic ‘Greekling’, namely Hadrian:

 

Bearded Nero and Hadrian

 

(3) Bearded Nero and Hadrian

 

If, then, Nero was a primary ruler, who could his powerful second have been, to equate with our composite second as presented above?:

 

Philip/Marcus Agrippa/Herod[es]/Atticus

 

Based on appearances, it would have to be – and this is a completely new idea for me – Ofonius Tigellinus of Greek descent:

 

Ofonius Tigellinus - Wikipedia

 

Ofonius Tigellinus …. (c. 10 – 69) was a prefect of the Roman imperial bodyguard, known as the Praetorian Guard, from 62 until 68, during the reign of Emperor Nero. Tigellinus gained imperial favour through his acquaintance with Nero's mother Agrippina the Younger, and was appointed prefect upon the death of his predecessor Sextus Afranius Burrus, a position Tigellinus held first with Faenius Rufus and then Nymphidius Sabinus.

….

 

Tigellinus was said by the Roman historian Tacitus to have had an immoral youth and a vicious old age. ….

 

As an adult, he first worked as a merchant in Greece. …. Later, he inherited a fortune, bought land in Apulia and Calabria on the Italian mainland and devoted himself to breeding racehorses. It was through this profession that he eventually gained the acquaintance and favor of Nero, whom he aided and abetted in his vices and cruelties. …. Settling in Rome in about 60, he became Urban Prefect of the three Urban Cohorts, the city's paramilitary police force. On the death of Sextus Afranius Burrus in 62, Tigellinus succeeded him as Prefect of the Praetorian Guard. …. He persecuted his successive co-prefects, Faenius Rufus and Nymphidius Sabinus, to secure his position as one of Nero's closest and most trusted advisors. He also fabricated evidence to justify the murder of Nero's first wife, Claudia Octavia. In 64, he made himself notorious for the orgies that he arranged in the Basin of Agrippa. ….

 

In July of 64, he was suspected of incendiarism in connection with the Great Fire of Rome. After the fire had initially subsided it broke out again in Tigellinus' estate in the Amaelian district of the city. This led to the claim by Tacitus that Tigellinus was an arsonist. ….

 

In 65, during the investigation into the abortive conspiracy of Gaius Calpurnius Piso, he and Nero's second wife, Poppaea Sabina, formed a kind of imperial privy council, falsely accusing the courtier and novelist Petronius Arbiter of treason. Under house-arrest in the coastal resort of Cumae, Petronius did not wait for a sentence of execution to be passed. Instead, he chose to commit suicide by repeatedly slitting and rebinding his wrists—apparently over a period of several days, during which he entertained his friends … until he finally chose to be fatally drained of blood. ….

 

In 67 Tigellinus accompanied Nero on his tour of Greece. He had a role in the death of the famous General Corbulo, who had also been invited to come to Greece but was ordered to commit suicide.

 

In 68, when Nero's downfall appeared imminent, Tigellinus deserted him, supposedly suffering from 'incurable bodily diseases' ….

[End of quote]

 

From this lurid and no doubt exaggerated biography, I would take a couple of points: namely, the Agrippa connection (Agrippina, Basin of Agrippa) and the 'incurable bodily diseases', like in the case of King Herod ‘the Great’:

Herods diseases.pdf

 

Herod's bodily diseases

 

King Herod the Great's health issues were multifaceted, with chronic kidney disease being a primary concern. His symptoms included intense itching, painful intestinal problems, breathlessness, convulsions, and gangrene of the genitalia, which were likely caused by complications of Fournier's gangrene. This rare infection, caused by bacteria such as Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, or E. coli, rapidly kills cells and turns tissue black. Herod's case of gangrene was unusual and likely introduced by an infection in his abdomen, possibly spreading to his groin and rectal areas. The scratching of his skin could have introduced the infection directly into the affected areas. 

 

Nero not named as such in Bible

 

Of all the names of supposed Roman emperors listed above, the only ones that appear in the Bible under those exact names are:

 

Augustus (Luke 2:1);

Tiberius (Luke 3:1);

Claudius (Acts 11:28).

 

Given my unexpected finding that:

 

Rome [is] surprisingly minimal in Bible

 

(2) Rome surprisingly minimal in Bible

 

I am leaning towards the view that some, if not most, of the ‘Roman’ names listed above were actually Greeks (certainly, Augustus; Caligula; Trajan; Hadrian; Antoninus Pius).

 

What, then, about the philhellenic Nero?

 

He may remind one in various ways (see also above) of Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, especially in his deterioration as ‘Epimanes’; of Caligula; and of the bearded Hadrian.

 

One of Nero’s names (Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus) actually refers to the beard. Ahenobarbus = “red (bronze) beard”.

 

He presumably became Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus.

 

Nero is most probably a nickname, meaning “strong” or “vigorous”, derived from Nereus, a Greek sea god associated with strength and power.

 

But nowhere do we find the name Nero in the Bible.

 

Nero in need of alter egos

 

Nero’s reputation as a builder on a vast scale and his impressive architectural achievements, these are not fully supported archaeologically:

 

Nero’s missing architecture

 

(3)           Nero's missing architecture

 

Was the so-called Domus Aurea of Nero actually a Flavian enterprise?

 

(2) Was the so-called Domus Aurea of Nero actually a Flavian enterprise?

 

One can conclude either that Nero did not build them. Or, that he did, but under a different name, an alter ego.

 

In the case of certain Egyptian pharaohs who were reputedly renowned builders, but whose output is not apparent from archaeology (e.g. pharaoh Psusennes), I have had success in finding alter egos that have perfectly saved the situation.

 

Some great names in history, belonging to rulers considered to have been significant builders, appear to be lacking crucial evidence for their building works.

 

Putting ‘Humpty Dumpty’ Nero all together again

 

My revised king list may account for the apparently missing architecture of Nero, and lead us in the direction that Nero was, in fact, Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ Caesar Augustus.

In my “missing architecture” article (above) we read:

 

…. Nero appears to have been a grandiose builder, though few of the buildings he constructed survive. Early in his reign, he began building a gymnasium and a bath-house, which was used to stage the Neronia. Although one can find reconstructions, these are highly speculative and there is nothing left. There is even disagreement as to whether [the] baths and gymnasium formed a single complex or were separate buildings, partly because the limited sources are unclear.

 

Nevertheless, a gymnasium was a Hellenistic ideal imported from the East and there is an association of gymnasia and bath houses. The building was in itself innovative, but not wildly so.

 

Two comments required here: Building gymnasia was precisely what the Seleucid king Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ did, even imposing this upon the Jews (I Maccabees 1:14-15): “So they built a gymnasium in Jerusalem, according to Gentile custom, and removed the marks of circumcision, and abandoned the holy covenant. They joined with the Gentiles and sold themselves to do evil”.

 

Nero’s missing gymnasium and bath house may well be the one built by the king’s second, Marcus Agrippa:

 

Agrippa built the Laconicum Gymnasium in 25 BC, which seems to have associated a large public bath house with a gymnasium.

 

The building was adorned with Greek statuary and may have been built as a public amenity to echo the grand private villas of the rich and powerful. It is possible to understand Nero’s building both as … a civic improvement echoing the work of Augustus and Agrippa and as making available the benefits of Greek culture to the wider Roman public.

 

More obviously regal was … his building of the Domus Transitoria. This building is also lost, destroyed in the great fire of Rome and buried under the Domus Aurea. It appears to have been a major construction designed to encompass some of the grand gardens in Rome (horti maecenatis) into the imperial palace.

 

The topography of the region is extremely complex, partly because of the repeated building over of the area in this period. Augustus … built palatial structures or extended existing buildings. ….

 

Comment: Probably, again, the Augustan era.

 

….

The fire gave Nero room for the most extravagant of buildings, the Domus Aurea, the Golden House of Nero …. The site was rapidly remodeeled after AD 69 and formed the basis of buildings of Vespasian and Trajan. ….

 

Comment: Again, I have Trajan in the Augustan era.

 

The indicators here to me are that Nero Caesar Augustus was none other than the Seleucid Greek king, Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ Caesar Augustus, the terrible persecutor of the Maccabean Jews. That the massive building works of Augustus and his second, Marcus Agrippa (Herod), were likewise the buildings and architecture of Nero.

 

Augustus, generally given a good press, was presumably the more positive side of Nero (of Caligula), generally given a bad (mad) press:

Nero | Life and Accomplishments of an insane Roman Emperor

 

Nero …. In character he was a strange mix of paradoxes; artistic, sporting, brutal, weak, sensual, erratic, extravagant, sadistic, bisexual – and later in life almost certainly deranged.

But for a period the empire enjoyed sound government under the guidance of Burrus and Seneca.

Nero announced he sought to follow the example of Augustus’ reign. The senate was treated respectfully and granted greater freedom …. Sensible legislation was introduced to improve public order, reforms were made to the treasury and provincial governors were prohibited from extorting large sums of money to pay for gladiatorial shows in Rome. ….

 

Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ I have identified as the prophet Ezekiel’s tragic King of Tyre:

 

The Fallen King of Tyre

 

(2) The Fallen King of Tyre

 

Seemingly perfect in his beginnings (Ezekiel 28:12):

 

You were the seal of perfection,
    full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.

then came a crashing fall into wickedness (28:15):

 

You were blameless in your ways
    from the day you were created
    till wickedness was found in you.

 

And, finally, a terrible public death (28:18-19):

 

So I made a fire come out from you,
    and it consumed you,
and I reduced you to ashes on the ground
    in the sight of all who were watching.

All the nations who knew you
    are appalled at you;
you have come to a horrible end
    and will be no more.

 

Nero, now re-located in time to the Infancy of Jesus Christ, as Caesar Augustus, could not possibly, therefore, be Saint John’s Beast, or 666.

 

He reigned too early for this.

 

Nero was, indeed, a great persecutor, but of Maccabean Jews, not Christians – although some of these, such as the prophetess Anna, had already seen the Christ Child and had spread the word amongst those of good will (Luke 2:36-38):

 

“There was also a prophetess, Anna, the daughter of Penuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was very old; she had lived with her husband seven years after her marriage, and then was a widow until she was eighty-four. She never left the Temple but worshiped night and day, fasting and praying. Coming up to [Mary and Joseph] at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the Child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem”.