FORTY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN JUDAS AND JESUS
It can be easily argued that Jesus was the most influential person who lived and taught in first-century Israel. It would seem logical that his life would have been chronicled by contemporary historians. But that part of the Jesus story is puzzling. How could this giant of his time be ignored by the Jewish historian Josephus and the Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius? This treatment of Jesus is akin to omitting Babe Ruth from baseball greats of the 1920's and 1930's or Hitler from the causes of World War II. Surely no historian would make such a glaring mistake or omission. Unfortunately, the Gospel Jesus did not exist outside the pages of the New Testament.
The only mention of anything related to Jesus by Tacitus concerned the Great Fire of Rome in 64 CE. Nero blamed the Christians for the fire and mercilessly murdered them in retaliation. From this, we can deduce that the followers of Jesus were scattered throughout the cities of the Roman Empire, but nothing further concerning Jesus was revealed. (Annals xv. 44) In fact, the great historian Edward Gibbon conjectured that Tacitus had confused the Christians with the followers of Judas the Galilean. It only made sense to him that Nero would have used a group universally hated within the Empire as his scapegoat. (1) Gibbon realized that the traditional Christian story did not mesh with the Neronian persecution. However, Judas the Galilean’s movement would have been a perfect fit. My only difference with Gibbon is that I believe that the Christians were actually the followers of Judas the Galilean (Jesus).
Suetonius mentioned the Jews who were followers of a "Chrestus," who caused disturbances in Rome during the reign of Claudius, around 41 CE. (Twelve Caesars, Claudius 25) But once again, Jesus was not detailed in any way. It is interesting to note that the Jews Claudius banned from Rome were "constantly in rebellion, at the instigation of a Chrestus." In the traditional view of Christianity, the Christians were law abiding, meek individuals. However, this report by Suetonius gives us the exact opposite reading of this group. This Jewish Christian group was synonymous with Judas the Galilean's Fourth Philosophy. This conjecture is no different than the conjecture made by Gibbon concerning the passage by Tacitus. The reason for the persecution has been obscured for two thousand years. This occurred in 41 CE, not 50 CE as proposed by Acts. This earlier timeframe coincides with Agrippa's influence over Claudius. Since the Fourth Philosophy was a thorn in Agrippa's side, this persecution in Rome was done as a favor by Claudius. Claudius was not persecuting all Jews, just the followers of "Chrestus". In fact, at this very time, Claudius issued an edict giving the Jews throughout the Empire expanded religious rights, and this from the prompting of Agrippa.
While Tacitus and Suetonius gave their interpretations of Roman history, Josephus wrote of the rich history behind the Jewish nation, from its inception to its final agonizing end at Masada (73 CE). Surely, Jesus would have played an important role in his narrative. After all, Jesus was a sensation according to the Gospels. Jesus walked on water, raised people from the dead, healed the blind and crippled, produced matter out of thin air (the feeding of the five thousand), and his teachings confounded all the learned men of his day. Josephus should have had a field day with this rich material. Amazingly, Josephus wrote nothing about Jesus except one questionable passage which seems more like a later creed than his own skeptical writings. Many Christians believe that this lone passage in Josephus' Antiquities proves the existence of Jesus. The passage in question, called the Testimonium Flavianum (TF), will be reproduced below.
Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works - a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day. (Ant. 18.63-64)
Did Josephus write this? The answer is no. There are too many arguments against its authenticity. Did a later Christian edit this section of Antiquities and add this testimonial? That will be proved below. There are four main points in my argument against this passage.
First, as noted in Chapter 1 concerning Pontius Pilate, a curious pattern emerges right before the TF. Josephus described a three year tenure for the procurator Gratus, yet the text claimed that he served eleven years. Thus, Pilate must have begun his governorship at 26 CE, at least according to the traditional chronology. Yet everything surrounding the two passages about Pilate can be dated at 18-19 CE. Many of these events, such as the death of Germanicus and the expulsion of the Jews from Rome are also corroborated by Tacitus as 19 CE events. Thus, it is very likely that the term of Gratus was changed from three to eleven years by the same people who inserted the TF. (See Antiquities 18.26-84)
Second, the TF is so unlike the rest of Josephus' writings. Note that the TF makes Josephus a believing Christian, and also attests to the resurrection. The TF called Jesus a wonder worker. Later, in Antiquities, Josephus blasted those who claimed to be miracle workers (Ant. 20.98; 20.160; 20.167-168; 20.169-172; 20.188). Thus, from just a cursory analysis, it is obvious that someone other than Josephus wrote the TF. In addition, Josephus did not mention one word regarding the life of Jesus. This is interesting because Josephus wrote extensively about the life and deeds of Judas the Galilean but did not record his death. This is amazing considering Josephus recorded the crucifixions of Judas' sons Simon and James (Ant. 20.102), the stoning of another son, Menahem (War 2.433-434) and the suicide of his grandson, Eleazar, at Masada. In each case, Josephus referred back to that clever rabbi, Judas the Galilean. And lastly, even the term "wise man" used in the TF was also given to Judas the Galilean (Ant. 17.152). Thus, it appears as if the TF was a replacement passage for the crucifixion of Judas the Galilean. The death of Judas would have been the original Josephus.
Third, an amazing gap exists in the Antiquities. After Ant. 18.84 discusses the expulsion of the Jews in 19 CE, Ant. 18.85 goes directly to the reason for Pilate's dismissal from Judea in 37 CE, an awe inspiring eighteen years of missing information. In Ant. 18.89, Pilate was credited with ten years as governor. If Pilate came in 18 CE as claimed in the first point, then he actually reigned for eighteen years, not ten. It is no coincidence that the High Priest, Caiaphas, also held his title from 18-37 CE. Thus, it appears as if pious editing has occurred. How unlikely is it that almost eighteen years had little or no information about it? These years were within the lifetime of Josephus' parents. He would have known quite a lot about this time. It should not be missed that this would have been the first generation to guide the Fourth Philosophy after the death of Judas the Galilean (Jesus). How convenient for the Gospel writers! All contradictory information vanished into thin air. Certainly, Josephus did not delete his own material. The same individuals who tampered with Pilate's reign and who substituted the TF for Judas' death were responsible for erasing the early Church history. (Note: the War also has no information from 19 CE to 37 CE. (See War 2.175-177 at 19 CE and War 2.178 at 37 CE)).
Fourth, One other passage in Antiquities proves that the TF is not from the pen of Josephus. In Ant. 20.200, James, the brother of Jesus, was stoned. Our current edition of Antiquities is differs from the earliest edition. According to Origen, around 230 AD, the following was said about this passage:
This James was of so shining a character among the people, on account of his righteousness, that Flavius Josephus, when in his twentieth book of the Jewish Antiquities, he had a mind to set down what was the cause, why the people suffered such miseries, till the very holy house was demolished, he said, that these things befell them by the anger of God, on account of what they had dared to do to James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ; and wonderful it is, that while he did not receive Jesus for Christ, he did nevertheless bear witness that James was so righteous a man. He says further, that the people thought they had suffered these things for the sake of James. (Whiston, The Works of Josephus, pg. 815) (Emphasis mine)
From this we know that Josephus did not regard Jesus as the Christ as claimed in the TF. In addition, this passage was changed from the original because it attributed the destruction of Jerusalem to the slaying of James. The Orthodox Christians could not tolerate this. They believed the destruction was due to the crucifixion of Jesus.
From the above, much of the Church story has been obliterated from the writings of Josephus by later Christians. The reason for this extensive editing job is obvious: later Christians wanted to hide the relationship between Jesus and Judas the Galilean (the same man!). Also, the early history of the movement could be expunged and later replaced with the Acts of the Apostles, which was largely based upon the works of Josephus and twisted into a quite different story.
From the above analysis of the three historians who either mentioned Christians or should have known about Jesus, it should be appreciated that all three knew of Judas the Galilean and his movement of rebellious Jews. Could their Christians have really been the followers of Judas the Galilean, founder of the Fourth Philosophy? The following pages will list forty similarities between Jesus of Nazareth and Judas the Galilean. Some are general in nature and others quite specific. Although any such listing does not prove a 100% foolproof case, the odds overwhelmingly favor my hypothesis that Jesus was simply a title for Judas the Galilean. Of these forty similarities, let's assume a one in two chance of each event happening to Jesus in the time of Pilate and Judas a generation earlier. The mathematical formula for this would be 2 to the 40th power, or put simply: there would be one chance in 1.1 trillion that Jesus and Judas were separate individuals. Although my case is not 100% certain, this would come very close - 99.999...%. And consider this: would the release of prisoners in 4 BCE under the shaky rule of Archelaus (the real Barabbas event) be only one chance in two or would it be one chance in a million? As one can see, the one chance in 1.1 trillion of Jesus and Judas being separate individuals is a gross understatement of the odds favoring my hypothesis.
To further illustrate the odds against Judas and Jesus being separate individuals, just two similarities will be considered. Josephus stated that Judas was the author of the Fourth Philosophy. (The other three philosophies - the Pharisees, the Sadducees and the Essenes - were founded in the second century BCE.) To found a new philosophy was no ordinary undertaking. According to Josephus, this one new philosophy dominated the Jewish scene until the war with Rome had ended. In that particular timeframe, 4 BCE - 73 CE, Josephus never mentioned the word "Christianity." Could Christianity have been like the stealth bomber, hovering about, but never seen? The odds of this would be one in a million, conservatively. A second event concerning Barabbas also has long odds. Josephus wrote in the War and Antiquities of a Barabbas-style prisoner release in 4 BCE but never again mentioned such an event. Again, could this have also occurred under the government of Pontius Pilate around 30 CE? The odds of this would be a million to one, conservatively. Thus, these two similarities, when put together, would yield the formula 1,000,000 to the 2nd power, or one chance in a trillion. How can such overwhelming odds be ignored?
A LIST OF SIMILARITIES BETWEEN JUDAS AND JESUS
The following list of forty similarities is meant to draw attention to the fact that the life of Jesus, as portrayed in the Gospels, had much in common with Judas the Galilean, as written about by Josephus. To traditional Christians, this list may be very hard to swallow, as it may force a reexamination of their basic belief system. But this list will also madden the Mythicists, who claim that a Messiah figure named Jesus never really existed. While I agree that Jesus of Nazareth was fictional, I do believe that this Jesus was a rewrite of a real individual, Judas the Galilean. And Judas the Galilean was not fictional! If Judas the Galilean lived, then so did his brothers and sons. Combined, they formed the Fourth Philosophy, the forerunner of the religion which Mythicists claim did not exist until after the Jewish war.
To make it easier for readers to locate individual similarities, each will be numbered.
1. Jesus was born in 8-4 BCE (Matthew) and in 6 CE at the Census of Cyrenius (Luke). Judas was mentioned by Josephus in 4 BCE, relating to the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing (Ant. 17.149-167) and in 6 CE, regarding the Census of Cyrenius (Ant. 18.1-10) The birth narratives in Matthew and Luke are both inconsistent with the reign of Pilate and the ministry of John the Baptist. For example, if Jesus were born in 4 BCE and died thirty-three years later, then he would have died around 30 CE, during the reign of Pilate but five years before John the Baptist’s death. (Ant. 18.116-119) If Jesus were born in 6 CE and died thirty-three years later, then he would have died in 39 CE, a few years after John the Baptist but two years after Pilate left Judea. Both accounts appear historically flawed. These two birth narratives were strategically placed in an era when Judas the Galilean’s ministry flourished. This deception moved the adult Jesus thirty years away from Judas the Galilean, thus hiding the Messiah's true identity. This misdirection by the Gospel writers has worked brilliantly. Very few scholars have even considered Jesus outside of the 30 CE timeframe. This is even more disturbing considering Jesus' brother, James, was purported to be ninety-six years old in 62 CE. Even if this slightly exaggerates his age by ten years, James' birth date can be estimated at approximately 35-25 BCE. Jesus was the older brother and could not have been born any later than 25 BCE.
It should be asked: why would Matthew and Luke pick different dates for the Messiah's birth? If one solid date existed, then both Gospel writers should have easily followed that lone date. However, if the writers were trying to present an alternate date, then it might have been possible for each to tie his birth date to a different event. Matthew tied his birth date to the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing while Luke used the Census of Cyrenius, the two major events in Judas the Galilean's career.
2. This second coincidence relates to Matthew's Star of Bethlehem story which was placed in 4 BCE (See number 1). In the Gospel of Matthew, the magi were drawn to Jerusalem by a star, near the end of Herod the Great's reign, around 4 BCE. These Magi found the baby Jesus but did not return to Herod to report the findings. Herod was incensed and ordered the slaughter of all the baby boys in the vicinity of Bethlehem, two years old and younger.
In the Slavonic Josephus, Persian astrologers went to Herod the Great identifying the star in the sky and explaining its significance. Herod insisted they return to him after finding the infant. However, the astrologers were warned by the stars to avoid Herod on the return trip. In his rage, Herod wanted to kill all the male children throughout his kingdom. His advisors convinced him that the Messiah would come from Bethlehem, hoping to confine the slaughter to only Bethlehem. This Star of Bethlehem passage was inserted in the War during the early years of Herod, between 27-22 BCE. (2)
This Slavonic Josephus passage originated from the same source which supplied the Gospel version. The Slavonic text has some interesting details which are missing from Matthew. Matthew wrote that the chief priests and teachers of the law informed Herod that the infant would be born in Bethlehem. He then sent the Magi to Bethlehem and ordered them to return when they had located the infant. (Matt. 2:3-8) This version does not give Herod much credit, for if he really knew that a king would be born in Bethlehem, he would have had every child slaughtered in Bethlehem before the Magi could even reach the place. On the other hand, the Slavonic version had Herod learning about the location after waiting for the Persian astrologers to return. This blunder on Herod's part wasted precious time, allowing the infant's parents to escape. Herod's advisors also told Herod the meaning of the Star. This star was the promised Star Prophecy, which told of a leader coming from Judah. (Numbers 24:17) The same sentiment was included in Matthew 2:6, but this quote from Micah 5:2 promised that a ruler would come from Bethlehem. All in all, the two versions have much in common and vary very little, the difference being the time: 25 BCE versus 4 BCE.
If Jesus were born in 25 BCE, then he would have been 30 years old at the time of the census (6 CE). This was the exact time when John baptized in the Jordan and proclaimed the coming of the Messiah. (3) This date was also marked by the nationwide tax revolt led by Judas the Galilean, the historical Jesus. (Ant. 18.4)
3. The genealogy of Jesus can also be compared to information known about Judas the Galilean. In Matthew 1:15 and Luke 3:24, a Mattan and Matthat are listed as great grandfathers. Since the Gospels added a few generations to distance Jesus from Judas, these great grandfathers may have been Jesus’ father. Judas’s father may have been Matthias, a name closely resembling Mattan and Matthat.
On Mary’s side, a similarity exists concerning the town of Sepphoris. In Christian tradition, Mary’s family came from Sepphoris. Judas was also linked to Sepphoris by Josephus. It was written that Judas was the son of Sepphoris, or rather from Sepphoris, and he also raided the armory at Sepphoris. Certainly, Judas was well acquainted with this town.
4. Herod the Great planned to execute Judas after the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing. Luckily for Judas, Herod ordered to have his prisoners put to death after his own death, in order to create great sorrow in Israel. After Herod's death, his advisors reneged on the insane plan. (Ant. 17.149-167) According to the Gospels, Herod the Great tried to kill the baby Jesus. (Matt. 2) Herod's goal of eliminating Jesus ended with his own death. In both stories, an elderly paranoid Herod tried to destroy elements he perceived as being a threat to his rule. Of course, the infant narrative was not actual history but rather a replay of Moses' infancy.
5. Joseph returned to Israel after the death of Herod the Great but was afraid to settle in Judea because of Archelaus. Having been warned in a dream, Joseph moved his family to Nazareth, in Galilee. (Matt. 2:19-23) The New Testament often moved characters by using dreams, miracles or visions. For example, Philip was whisked away after baptizing the eunuch in Acts 8:39-40. Peter's visit to Cornelius' house in Caesarea was preceded by a vision in Acts chapter 10. And the Magi did not return to King Herod because they were warned in a dream. (Matt. 2:12) All three of these examples have alternative explanations. Philip and the eunuch as well as Peter and Cornelius were patterned after the account of King Izates given by Josephus. (Ant. 20.34-48) And as noted in number 2, the Slavonic Josephus explained the Persian astrologers’ decision to avoid Herod differently. Either the Star of Bethlehem convinced them not to return to Herod or they had talked to the locals about the King and decided to go home by another route. The point is this: when trying to reconstruct historical events, it may be wise to discount the passages which depend upon a literary devise such as a dream or vision.
After being released by Archelaus, Judas went to Sepphoris in Galilee, where he led an uprising against the son of Herod. (War 2.56) Sepphoris was in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas, not under the control of Archelaus. Since Archelaus was waging war upon the followers of Judas and Matthias, the move to Galilee was prudent in that it allowed reorganization without fear of being attacked by Archelaus. The events in Josephus and the New Testament both occurred because Herod the Great had died and the country was in unrest.
6. The Gospels do not mention the early life of Jesus, except when he taught at the Temple at the age of twelve. (Luke 2:41-52) Otherwise, no information was given from 6 CE (Census of Cyrenius) to 26 CE (supposed date of Pilate - see chapter 1). This lack of information mirrors Josephus' War where nothing was written from 6 CE (Census) to 26 CE (Pilate). (War 2.167-169) Josephus barely expanded on this paucity of information in Antiquities, where he listed the Roman procurators during this twenty year stretch, but little else. (Ant. 18.26-35) It is possible that these missing years from Josephus could have been the result of pious editing. The actual crucifixion of Judas the Galilean may have been deleted. Note that Josephus detailed the deaths of Judas' three sons, James, Simon, and Menahem and his grandson, Eleazar. With each of these occasions, Josephus referred back to Judas the Galilean. It is hard to believe that Josephus omitted the circumstances behind the death of Judas. So it is very possible that the writings of Josephus were edited to remove some interesting details of Judas' life and his eventual crucifixion.
7. When he was only twelve, Jesus spent three days at the Temple. He was "sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers." (Luke 2:41-52) Judas taught young men at the same Temple. Judas was "the most celebrated interpreters of the Jewish laws and ... well beloved by the people, because of [the] education of their youth." (Ant. 17.149 - 4 BCE) How many other men also taught at the Temple? Is it possible that Judas' early career as teacher at the Temple was made legend by placing his wisdom and knowledge within the body of a twelve year old? Consider this: if Judas had been born around 25 BCE (see number 2), then he would have been just twenty years old at the time of the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing (4 BCE). His status as one of the finest teachers of the law, at such a young age, must have been legendary. This child prodigy legacy was woven into the Gospel fabric by Luke in his story of the twelve year old Jesus.
8. The story of John the Baptist may very well be the most important link between Judas the Galilean and Jesus. In the Gospels, John the Baptist introduced Jesus to the world in 28-29 CE, per the dating of Luke. (Luke 3:1-3) In fact, this is the reason why scholars look nowhere else for Jesus. It is just a given that Jesus' ministry began around 30 CE.
According to the Slavonic Josephus, this same John came baptizing in the Jordan in 6 CE, right before the mention of Judas the Galilean and during the reign of Archelaus (4 BCE- 7 CE). (4) In addition, the Psuedoclementine Recognitions acknowledged John right before describing the various Jewish sects. (5) Josephus described these same sects right after his introduction of Judas the Galilean. (Ant. 18.4-22 and War 2.118-166) So the 6 CE timeframe for John the Baptist is attested to by more than one source.
Could this John the Baptist have been baptizing and proclaiming different Messiahs in both 6 CE and 29 CE? The odds of that would be millions to one. The only logical conclusion is that Jesus and Judas the Galilean were the same person. This explains why the Slavonic Josephus' version of events has been ignored over the years. If John actually came in 6 CE, then all of New Testament scholarship is, at best, misguided. That would not only make the scholars look foolish but would also prove Pauline Christianity a sham religion.
9. Both Judas and Jesus had a second-in-command, Sadduc and John the Baptist, respectively. This organizational model was fashioned after the Maccabees. Mattathias led the movement and his son, Judas Maccabee, was his lieutenant. After Mattathias died, Simon took his place and Judas Maccabee was elevated to the leadership role. In the later Fourth Philosophy, Matthias and Judas worked together at the Temple and were responsible for the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing. After Matthias suffered martyrdom, Judas filled this position with Sadduc. (Ant. 18.4)
In the Gospel accounts, Jesus picked Simon Peter as his second-in-command. In reality, Jesus was first paired with John the Baptist (Sadduc). When Jesus was crucified, he was replaced by his brother, James the Just. At this stage, John the Baptist and James shared control of the movement. In 35-36 CE, John was beheaded by Herod Antipas. James appointed Cephas (Peter) to be John's successor. The Gospels successfully minimized the roles of John the Baptist and James. According to these accounts, John died before Jesus, but per Josephus, John died after Jesus. Also, James the Just was barely mentioned by Acts, his leadership role unannounced until Acts chapter 15, at the Council of Jerusalem. By bypassing John the Baptist and James the Just, the Gospels were able to skip a generation, placing Peter (Cephas) as the leading apostle after the death of Jesus.
The dual leadership may have safeguarded the movement. If one of the leaders was captured or killed, then the other could take control. The movement of Judas the Galilean (Jesus) was different from that of Judas Maccabee in that the later movement believed in the resurrection of its leader. Thus, even though John the Baptist and James led the movement after the death of Jesus, many throughout the movement still awaited the return of Jesus in power and glory. So, in essence, John and James were merely caretakers. This may account for the divisions in the 40 CE church in Corinth. Paul wrote that some disciples followed himself, others followed Cephas (James the Just), others followed Apollos (John the Baptist) (see Acts 18:24-25), and others followed Christ (Judas the Galilean or Jesus). (1 Cor. 1:10-12) This split may have been inevitable since Judas the Galilean's movement was held together by a common hatred of Rome. Teachers within the movement could have possibly come from both the Pharisees and the Essenes. Differences, in approach to religion, were inevitable.
10. Jesus and Judas were both called the Galilean. Actually, Jesus was referred to as Jesus of Nazareth, a city located near Sepphoris in Galilee. It should not be missed that Sepphoris was central to Judas the Galilean's ministry. Placing Nazareth close to Sepphoris may have been more than just coincidence. In War 1.648, Judas was said to be the son of Sepphoris. This more likely was his place of birth as opposed to his father. And in War 2.56, Judas retreated to Sepphoris after being harassed by Archelaus. There, Judas armed his disciples with weapons from the armory. Judas' history with Sepphoris was no doubt changed to Nazareth to hide these embarrassing revelations. After all, both of the above references to Sepphoris were in the context of armed rebellion against Herod the Great and later, Archelaus.
The name Nazareth is probably a corruption of Nazarite, as no references to Nazareth appear in the Old Testament or in Josephus. (A Nazarite was consecrated to God by a vow and included such notables as John the Baptist and Samson). In fact, John Crossan stated that in addition to Josephus' silence concerning Nazareth, "it is never mentioned by any of the Jewish rabbis whose pronouncements are in the Mishnah or whose discussions are in the Talmud." (6) Jesus' disciples were called Galileans (Mark 14:70) and it may have been a sleight-of-hand which changed Jesus the Galilean to Jesus of Nazareth. In John 7:41, the crowd asked, "How can the Christ come from Galilee?" And the leaders had the same reservations about Jesus. "Look into it, and you will find that a prophet does not come out of Galilee." (John 7:52)
Judas the Galilean was mentioned in several passages by Josephus (War 2.118; War 2.433 and Ant. 20.102). Josephus did state that this Judas hailed from Gamala, across the River Jordan (Ant. 18.4), but he was known as the Galilean, as attributed to the above references. Galilee was a hotbed for revolutionaries. Both Jesus and Judas would have had a similar background, influenced by those who had struggled for years against Herod the Great.
11. The disciples of Jesus and Judas were zealous for the law. (Acts 21:20) (Ant. 17.149-154) It is true that Paul taught his Gentile followers to disregard the law. However, the Jewish Christians, led by James the Just, clearly denounced that teaching and removed Paul and his followers from fellowship. (See Galatians)
Some forty years after the death of Judas (19 CE), a splinter group of the Fourth Philosophy, known as the Zealots, appeared on the scene. Like their name suggests, these individuals were obsessed with the Law and were comparable to the fanatical followers of James the Just. (Acts 21:20)
12. Judas and Jesus were both called wise men by Josephus. (Ant. 17.152 and Ant. 18.63) As the Jesus passage was a late third or early fourth century interpolation, the use of the term wise man was taken from the description of Judas and Matthias. It must also be noted that Josephus did not freely use the term wise man. He did, however, use that term when describing himself. If Josephus called himself a wise man then this indeed was a great compliment.
13. Both teachers assigned a high value to the sharing of wealth or pure communism. (Matt. 6:19-27; Acts 2:42-45; James 5:1-6) (Ant. 18.7; War 2.427) (Essenes - War 2.122) In fact, this was the central message in "Love your Neighbor as Yourself." How could one love his neighbor if he let that neighbor go hungry or unclothed? When Jesus confronted the rich young ruler, he did not say give ten percent to the poor, but rather, give everything to the poor and then come follow me. (Matt. 19:16-24) This was a radical message two thousand years ago. How many middle-class Americans would follow that same philosophy today?
Members of the Fourth Philosophy were known as bandits by Josephus, for they exploited the wealthy, a type of Robin Hood movement. During the war with Rome, the debt records were burned in order to free those enslaved to the wealthy by their debt. (War 2.426-427) This was truly class warfare! As for the Zealots, Josephus shared his contempt for their practices concerning wealth and private property: "The dregs, the scum of the whole country, they have squandered their own property and practiced their lunacy upon the towns and villages around, and finally have poured in a stealthy stream into the Holy City...." (War 4.241) Considering what Jesus said to the rich young ruler, Josephus would have had the same attitude towards Jesus' lunacy!
At the beginning of the Church, disciples were urged to share everything in common. (Acts 2:42) This approach to living was in line with the Kingdom of God as preached by Jesus. Also, the feeding of the five thousand was simply the sharing of one's food with another. It had nothing to do with hocus-pocus. In addition, the letter of James favored the poor over the rich. (James 5:1-6)
14. Both Judas and Jesus were considered fine teachers of the Law. (Matt. 5:17-20; Mark 12:28-34) (Ant. 17.149; War 1.648) Judas followed the basic teachings of the Pharisees as did Jesus. As for Judas' abilities, Josephus wrote: "[Judas and Matthias were] the most celebrated interpreters of the Jewish laws, and well beloved by the people." (Ant. 17.149) The earlier assessment from War 1.648 stated that "there were two men of learning in the city [Jerusalem], who were thought the most skillful in the laws of their country, and were on that account held in very great esteem all over the nation."
From the Gospels, we know that Jesus used parables in relating his message, in line with Pharisaic practices. Jesus said that the two greatest commandments were to love God and to love thy neighbor. To love God involved obeying God and the Law handed down by God to Moses. To love thy neighbor included sharing one's possessions, so that no one was left hungry or homeless. In addition, both Judas and Jesus followed Judas Maccabee in his interpretation of the Sabbath: the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Judas Maccabee permitted his disciples to defend themselves if attacked on the Sabbath. Likewise, Jesus preached that it was proper to do good on the Sabbath. In fact, Jesus was reprimanded by some Pharisees for breaking the Sabbath laws as he fled from Herod. Jesus quoted the Old Testament story of David eating consecrated bread in order to maintain strength in his flight from the authorities. Jesus had good reason to follow David and Judas Maccabee: he was a marked man. Both Jesus and Judas Maccabee would not have flouted the Sabbath law for any old reason.
From the above passages from Josephus, Judas the Galilean was known throughout the nation for his ability in interpreting the law. We get the same feeling for Jesus when reading the Gospels. The Pharisees constantly invited him to dinner in order to discuss issues. We are privy to only the negative aspects of those meetings. In reality, most teachers in Israel considered Jesus an important figure and were constantly amazed at his teachings.
15. Judas the Galilean’s movement centered in Jerusalem and in Galilee. Judas began his public career in Jerusalem, teaching young men at the Temple. He convinced his students to take part in the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing and was arrested by Herod the Great. (Ant. 17.149-167) Judas was later released by Archelaus and fled to Sepphoris in Galilee. Until his return to Jerusalem, Judas preached in Galilee where he was crowned Messiah by his followers, and later led a tax revolt against Rome. (Ant. 17.271-272 and 18.1-10)
Jesus was also in Jerusalem at the start of his career, according to John. Coincidentally, John placed his Temple Cleansing at the start of Jesus' career, consistent with the story of Judas the Galilean. (John 2:12-17) Jesus then returned to Galilee, where he was proclaimed Messiah. From the Gospel accounts, Jesus spent most of his ministry in Galilee. Jesus finally returned to Jerusalem, where he was captured and crucified.
Even after Judas' death, his movement revolved around Jerusalem and Galilee. In fact, Josephus noted that Eleazar was sent by his leaders in Galilee to teach King Izates true Judaism, which included circumcision. King Izates had previously been taught by Ananias that he could become a full Jew without circumcision. The Jewish Christian model also practiced circumcision. Note that Paul and Cephas also had a similar disagreement in Antioch, caused by men sent from James. James may have been centered in either Jerusalem or in Galilee. However, since this occurred around the time of Agrippa's assassination, James probably located himself in a safer place, no doubt, Galilee.
16. Both Jesus and Judas cleansed the Temple in Jerusalem. (Matt. 21:12-13) (Ant. 17.149-167) Actually, Judas probably cleansed the Temple twice. The first cleansing was the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing where Matthias and Judas were captured by Herod the Great. The Golden Eagle was a sign of fealty to Rome, and the teachers could not condone this alliance, considering that God was their only Lord and Ruler. (Ant. 18.23) The second cleansing can be deduced from inference. Judas the Galilean's son, Menahem, followed his father's modus operandi and seized an armory before marching upon Jerusalem. Menehem promptly cleansed the Temple after being hailed as Messiah by his disciples. It is most probable that Judas the Galilean marched on Jerusalem some time after the Census of Cyrenius (6 CE) and cleansed the Temple as a Messianic act. It is interesting to note that the Gospel of John placed the Temple cleansing at the beginning of Jesus' career (John 2:12-25) while the Synoptic Gospels have it at the end of his ministry. What are the odds of the two men cleansing the Temple once, not to say twice? Outside of the cleansing in 4 BCE (Judas) and the cleansing by his son in 66 CE (Menahem), Josephus did not record one other Temple cleansing from 4 BCE to 66 CE. It was certainly not an everyday occurrence.
The 4 BCE Temple cleansing concerned the Golden Eagle, a graven image paying homage to Rome. The Slavonic Josephus verified that the Golden Eagle was in honor of Caesar and was even named "the Golden-winged Eagle." (7) Josephus stated that Pilate brought his standards into Jerusalem in 19 CE, right before the crucifixion of Jesus. These standards had the eagle upon them, the symbol of Rome. In both the Temple cleansing of 4 BCE and the one in 19 CE, the power of Rome was attacked by Judas (Jesus).
17. Judas opposed the Roman tax, and Jesus was crucified for the charge of opposing the Roman tax. (Luke 23.2) (Ant. 18.4) The ministry of Judas (4 BCE - 19 CE) focused upon the tax issue. At the Barabbas-style prisoner release ordered by Archelaus in 4 BCE, the Jewish crowd demanded the release of prisoners, the easing of annual payments and the removal of an onerous sales tax. (Ant. 17.204-205) Judas then led a tax revolt at the time of the census (6 CE), but this did not end the extortion by Rome. Tacitus stated that Judea was exhausted by its tax burden (16-18 CE). (Annals, ii. 42) This struggle against Roman taxation was well documented by both Tacitus and Josephus.
Jesus did not oppose every tax, but his hatred of Roman taxation is beyond doubt. "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's" was not a pro-tax message. Jesus was saying this: take your money with Caesar's portrait and leave our country. This statement went well beyond a yes or no answer to the tax question. To "Give God what is God's" harkened the Jews back to the days of Judas Maccabee and his struggle for Jewish independence. This is why Jesus was crucified by the Romans.
Paul, on the other hand, taught his disciples to pay their taxes to Rome without hesitation. (Rom. 13:1-7) This accommodation to Roman taxation was totally opposite the view of Judas (Jesus). Many people read Paul's view into the interpretation of Jesus' statement: "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." But we must remember that Jesus was crucified and that death was not a result of upholding Roman taxation.
18. According to Josephus, Judas founded the Fourth Philosophy during his fight with Herod the Great's dynasty and Rome. (Ant. 18.1-10) Jesus was credited with the founding of Christianity, a new religion. This religion of Jesus was never mentioned by Josephus, an amazing omission. It is my contention that Josephus was very concerned with the followers of Jesus, but this Christian movement was termed the Fourth Philosophy.
The Fourth Philosophy joined the earlier philosophies of the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. This Fourth Philosophy was similar to that of the Pharisees except that followers of Judas were extremely nationalistic. Also, Judas' disciples shared some practices with the Essenes. Thus, the nationalistic movement had drawing power away from the other philosophies. This may explain why John the Essene was a leader in the war against Rome. Essenes were known as pacifists, so the mention of a warlike Essene has confounded scholars. This John the Essene was no doubt influenced by the Fourth Philosophy.
In reading the New Testament, one must admit that Jesus was quite often friendly with the Pharisees. He did blast those who loved themselves more than their fellow Jews, but his overall feeling for the Pharisees was positive. "You are not far from the kingdom of heaven," Jesus said to one Pharisee. (Mark 12:34) In addition, Jesus preached using parables, a mode of teaching practiced by the Pharisees. Thus, like Judas, Jesus was very close to the Pharisees in belief and action.
19. Josephus detailed the life but not the death of Judas while mentioning the death of Jesus but not one word about his life. Josephus invested much effort in recounting Judas' life, even touching upon the lives of his sons, James, Simon, and Menahem and his grandson, Eleazar. (Ant. 20.102; War 2.433-434; War 7.253) Each time the descendants were recognized, Josephus recounted their pedigree. This did not occur in just one isolated time period. Simon and James were crucified in 46-48 CE, Menahem stoned in 66 CE and Eleazar led the Sicarii at Masada in 73 CE. This theme of Judas the Galilean ran throughout Josephus' narrative.
It is probable that the death of Judas was removed by a later Gentile Christian who believed the death of Judas by crucifixion might attract too much unwanted attention. Most scholars believe that the passage in Josephus, which details the death of Jesus, is a late third to early fourth century forgery. The question is this: was the spurious Jesus passage (TF of Ant. 18.63-64) a replacement for Judas' death by crucifixion? The death of Judas by crucifixion should not be doubted. Judas fought against Rome and such actions were punishable by crucifixion. In addition, Judas' two sons, James and Simon, were crucified a generation later (46-48 CE).
20. Zealots and Sicarii arose from Judas' Fourth Philosophy. Two of Jesus' apostles were named Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot (a garbling of Sicarios). Since the Zealots and Sicarii were not introduced until the late 50's and early 60's by Josephus, titles of that sort would not have been used in Jesus' time (4 BCE - 19 CE). These names were placed on the Apostles by Gentile Christians, nearly one hundred years later. In addition, the nickname "Sons of Thunder" denotes a power associated with the Fourth Philosophy, not the mild Christianity of the Gospels.
21. Disciples of both Judas and Jesus were willing to die for their respective cause. The Neronian persecution reported by Tacitus and the description of the Fourth Philosophy by Josephus indicate a willingness to die happily for God. (In fact, Edward Gibbon conjectured that Tacitus really was describing the Fourth Philosophy, not the traditional Christians.) Jesus said: "Blessed [are] the ones being persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the Kingdom of God." (Matt. 5:10) In the same way, Judas and Matthias stressed the rewards of righteousness if they were to be punished by Herod the Great. (Ant. 17.149-167) The followers of Judas the Galilean gladly accepted death for the sake of righteousness. (Ant. 18.23-24)
Unlike the Fourth Philosophy or Jewish Christianity, Paul's Gentiles were taught to pay taxes to Rome and to follow their rulers (Nero and other madmen.) Paul's philosophy of acting like a Gentile to the Gentiles and like a Jew to the Jews was totally contrary to Judas' and Jesus' teachings. Judas (Jesus) was who he claimed to be. He never acted a part as did Paul.
22. The sons of Judas and the "brothers" of Jesus were named James and Simon. How easy it would have been for an early Gospel writer to change children into brothers and a wife into a mother. This would have been done for several reasons. First, by making sons and a wife into brothers and a mother, the Gospel writers wiped out a generation, making Jesus a much younger man, that of about thirty. Second, to follow in Paul's footsteps, one had to be celibate. Although marriage and sex had no negative connotations in Jewish society, the later Church found it difficult to accept the fact that God's son had sex which resulted in children (mini-gods). Third, it was easier to disassociate Jesus from brothers and a mother. A good father and husband would have been more understanding with his wife and his own children.
23. The sons of Judas were put to death by crucifixion. Jesus was the only other individual crucified to be mentioned by name. Also two Apostles were to drink the same cup as Jesus, namely crucifixion. (Matt. 20:20-23) (Ant. 20.102) It is my contention that these two Apostles were the sons of Jesus (Judas the Galilean).
This is very significant because crucifixion was a form of punishment doled out by the Roman authorities. One was crucified because of political activity, not for religious beliefs. In fact, the Romans allowed all types of religions as long as they did not oppose Rome and its tax machine. Paul's version of Christianity would have been the model Roman religion! Jesus preached against Roman taxation and was proclaimed King or Messiah. That is why he was crucified. The two sons of Judas the Galilean would have been crucified for the same reason: resistance against Rome.
24. Many members of the movement had nicknames. Sadduc was a priestly title denoting righteousness while John the Baptist "commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God." (Ant. 18.117) James, the brother of Jesus, was known as the Just. Judas the Galilean was known as Jesus (Joshua or Savior), Saul was renamed Paul (small), and Simon became Cephas (Peter), which means rock. The above nicknames generally described the character of the individual. These internal nicknames would not have been known or used by those outside the movement. Thus, Josephus wrote of Judas the Galilean, Simon and Saul, never using the names Jesus, Cephas and Paul.
Nicknames were also used in the Maccabean movement. Judas was nicknamed Maccabee or the Hammer. Since the Fourth Philosophy (Jewish Christianity) was based upon the Maccabean movement, the use of nicknames should be expected.
Other nicknames in the Jesus movement included the Sons of Thunder (James and Simon, the sons of Judas the Galilean). Only Judas would have been referred to as Thunder. Simon the Zealot and James the Younger may have also been references to these sons of Judas. Remember, the Gospel writers were intent on hiding the true identities of Jesus' sons. One other nickname was Thomas, which may have referred to Judas, another son of Judas the Galilean. The combination of Judas and Thomas may have yielded Theudas or Thaddeus.
25. Jesus was proclaimed Messiah or King in Galilee, or close by. Before the Transfiguration, Jesus and the Twelve were in Caesarea Philippi (Matt. 16:13) and afterwards traveled to Capernaum. (Matt. 17:24) After Jesus was proclaimed King, he marched to Jerusalem.
Judas was also proclaimed King in Galilee, around Sepphoris. This occurred after he captured Herod's armory and equipped his followers. (Ant. 17.271-272; War 2.56) He also may have marched upon Jerusalem, deduced by examining the behavior of his son, Menahem, who proclaimed himself King after capturing Herod's armory at Masada. He then marched straight to Jerusalem. (War 2.433) Judas the Galilean's entrance to Jerusalem may have been in 19 CE, so his kingship may have actually lasted twenty-two years, from 4 BCE to 19 CE. This is different from Jesus who went directly to Jerusalem. However, the Gospels may have telescoped the career of Jesus into a few short years just as Josephus compressed the seventy-five year movement created by Judas into a few paragraphs. (Ant. 18.1-10)
26. In Acts 5:37, Judas the Galilean was killed "and all his followers were scattered." This passage was meant to minimize Judas' influence, giving the impression that Judas' movement ended with his death. However, Josephus clearly stated that Judas' movement grew and expanded over the next fifty to sixty years.
After Jesus was captured, his disciples fled and some denied their association with him (Peter). Even after the crucifixion, the disciples were forlorn and in hiding. It seems as if both movements acted the same way after their leaders were killed.
There is an amazing convergence between Judas and Jesus concerning the disciples' reaction to his arrest. In Matt. 26:56, after Jesus' arrest, "the disciples deserted him and fled." In Mark 14:50, "everyone deserted him and fled." These two Gospels are in complete agreement concerning the disciples’ behavior after the arrest. The interesting part concerns the Gospel of Luke. In Luke, the disciples did not flee, but Simon Peter followed at a distance. Why is the account in Luke different from the other Synoptic Gospels? The answer may be in Acts 5:37, that passage which distorted the picture of Judas the Galilean. If the author of Acts were the same writer who penned Luke, then a direct correlation between Judas and Jesus can be established. The Gospel of Luke omitted the language of the deserting disciples. However, this scattering of disciples was recorded by Luke in Acts 5, concerning the disciples of Judas the Galilean. Did Luke forget his mission and erroneously credit the disciples of Judas with the same actions accorded the followers of Jesus in Matthew and Mark?
27. After Jesus’ arrest, he was brought first to Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas and former High Priest. (John 18:12-24) This Annas was appointed High Priest in 6 CE by Cyrenius and Coponius, in the days of the census. Opposing the census and Annas was none other than Judas the Galilean. It would seem that Annas would have been much more interested in the death of Judas the Galilean than the Gospel Jesus. But why would the ex-High Priest take a leading role in the arrest of Jesus? Under the governorship of Gratus (15-18 CE), four different High Priests were appointed. This musical chair approach to the High Priesthood must have maddened the religious people of the day, including Jesus. This may have been one reason why Jesus picked this time to enter Jerusalem. In all probability, Annas may have been calling the shots even after his stint as High Priest. Josephus wrote that this Annas had five sons who were High Priest. (Ant. 20.198) The existence of this dynasty means that Annas was a force in first-century Judea.
The Gospel of John may have inadvertently connected Jesus with Judas' old adversary. The Synoptic Gospels were careful to avoid mentioning Annas, preferring to have the whole affair tried before Caiaphas and the elders. Annas certainly lends credence to my Judas the Galilean hypothesis, in that he functioned in a leadership role during the lifetime of Judas. It is also more likely that Annas would have been physically stronger in 19 CE rather than the later date of 30-33 CE, per the traditional dating. Annas may well have been dead by 30-33 CE.
28. In the trial of Matthias in the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing, the High Priest was also named Matthias. This latter Matthias had once relinquished his office for a day, a day celebrated by a fast, because of a dream where he had sexual relations with his wife. Pilate washed his hands of responsibility on a single day because of his wife's dream concerning Jesus' innocence. (Matt. 27:19-24) (Ant. 17.166) In both cases, a dream sequence was used to remove responsibility for a short period of time. In the case of Pilate, this conveniently shifted the blame for Jesus' crucifixion from the Romans to the Jews, even though crucifixion was a Roman punishment. The Jews supposedly said, "Let his blood be on us and on our children." (Matt. 27:25) Unfortunately, this has been used as an excuse to persecute the Jews throughout history.
The whole scene, where Pilate washed his hands and the Jews greedily usurped his power of life and death, appears extremely unlikely. According to the Gospels, the Jews had welcomed Jesus into Jerusalem as Messiah, just a few days earlier. Now they were willing to have his blood on their heads for all eternity. This cannot be logically explained. The alternative is radical but at least logical: this dream scene was adapted from the Matthias episode and reworked using the new Pauline thinking. The Jews were the enemies, not the Romans.
29. Herod the Great sent Matthias, Judas and the rebels to Jericho for questioning concerning the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing. There, Herod heard the reasons for the uprising. (Ant. 17.160) Pilate sent Jesus to Herod for questioning. (Luke 23:6-7) This interrogation was told only by Luke. Luke had a tendency to take events from Josephus and incorporate them into the fictional story of Jesus and the early Church. There were two Temple Cleansings, the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing and the one recorded in the Gospels at the end of Jesus' career. Two trials or interrogations also occurred, one before Herod the Great in 4 BCE and the other before Pilate in 19 CE. Luke simply combined these two trials in his Gospel.
30. Under Herod the Great's son, Archelaus (4 BCE), prisoners were released to appease the Jewish mob. One of these prisoners may have been Judas the Galilean. (War 2.4 and Ant. 17.204-205) This same story was repeated at the trial of Jesus. In that account, Pilate released Barabbas to the mob instead of Jesus. (Matt. 27:15-26) One point must be noted: the Romans did not release political prisoners; they crucified them. On the other hand, the release of prisoners by Archelaus rings true as he was dealing with the remnants of the Matthias and Judas following. This crowd would have wished for the release of Barabbas, the son of the Father. The Father would have been either Matthias or God.
A critic of my theory insists that Archelaus never released the prisoners, only that he promised to release them. This scenario does not make sense for two reasons. First, Archelaus could have quickly appeased the mob by releasing prisoners. It could have been done immediately. He also promised to reduce taxes. Since that could not be accomplished immediately, Archelaus may very well have reneged on that promise. Second, after the prisoner release, Archelaus also granted the mob's request regarding the removal of the High Priest. This, too, could be done immediately. With these two points in mind, it is clear that the releasing of prisoners actually occurred.
31. In the Gospel story, Barabbas led an insurrection in the city, Jerusalem. (Mark 15:7 and Luke 23:19) Shortly before the prisoner release of 4 BCE, Matthias and Judas led the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing, an insurrection in the city, where many of the rebels suffered martyrdom, while others, Judas included, were held for later punishment. (Ant. 17.149-167; 17.204-206)
Insurrections in the city of Jerusalem were not commonplace in the timeframe noted. From 4 BCE to 50 CE, the only ones recorded were the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing (4 BCE) and the one supposedly led by Barabbas. This should reinforce the statement that Barabbas was really a nickname for Judas (Jesus). (In some manuscripts, Barabbas was known as Jesus Barabbas.) Both insurrections were aimed at Rome. The Golden Eagle was a symbol of Rome, and Barabbas of Gospel fame was undoubtedly a member of the Fourth Philosophy. Judas and Barabbas were also very popular with the Jewish crowd, who were anti-Roman.
32. The trial of Jesus and the release of Barabbas occurred at the Passover feast. (Mark 14:12) The release of prisoners on 4 BCE also coincided with the Passover. (Ant. 17.213) As there were three Jewish pilgrim festivals (Passover, Pentecost and Tabernacles), the odds of this coincidence can be calculated as 3 to the 2nd power, or one in nine. (8)
33. King Herod the Great died a week or so before the Passover feast. At his death, Herod was clothed in purple, with a crown of gold upon his head and a scepter in his right hand. (Ant. 17.198) Before his death, Jesus was mocked by the Roman soldiers who put a purple robe on him and wove a crown of thorns to be placed upon his head. A staff was used to beat him. (Mark 15:16-20) The Gospel writers had used so much of this section of Antiquities regarding Judas they just applied this to Jesus as well.
34. Jesus was mocked by the Roman soldiers. (Mark 15:16-20) Herod the Great was afraid that the people would mourn his death in "sport and mockery" only. (Ant. 17.177) The Gospels and Acts often used information from Josephus or the letters of Paul to flesh out the story of Jesus and his Church. Jesus not only wore the same garb as Herod, but he was treated as poorly by his adversaries.
35. Many religious scholars have questioned the silence of Jesus before Pilate. When charged with a crime, Jesus made no reply, to the amazement of Pilate. (Mark 15:3-5) Unlike Paul, who made a speech everywhere in Acts, Jesus remained silent. The only mention of this type of behavior in Josephus concerned Simon, who had been summoned to answer charges by Agrippa I (43 CE). (This Simon-Agrippa episode was the basis for the Simon Peter-Cornelius story of Acts chapter 10.)
Silence was a way to protect the movement. Under interrogation, members of the movement would not betray their compatriots. The questioning of Jesus may have been more severe than we are led to believe by the Gospel accounts. Pilate and his henchmen would have liked information, and they no doubt tortured Jesus. He, however, did not betray his friends. The Fourth Philosophy, represented by Simon in the Simon-Agrippa episode, also was famous for its steadfast loyalty to God and fellow members. "They do not value dying any kind of death, nor indeed do they heed the deaths of their relations and friends, nor can any such fear make them call any man Lord." (Ant. 18.23-25) In short, they would rather die than betray God and their fellow disciples.
36. In the Gospels, the crowd (Pharisees, etc.) preferred Barabbas over King Jesus. (Mark 15:1-15) This was not only an endorsement for Barabbas but also demonstrated an intense hatred for Jesus. Anyone would have been chosen over Jesus.
Josephus described the crowd as followers of Matthias and Judas, who preferred these teachers over King Herod. (Ant. 17.204-206) The disciples really loved Judas and Matthias, but their hatred of Herod and all he represented was unparalleled. Their hatred of Herod corresponds to the Gospel story where the Chief Priests and the Jews hated Jesus.
37. In the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing, Matthias and Judas were captured by Herod the Great. Matthias was put to death by fire, while Judas eventually gained freedom in a Barabbas-style prisoner release. Once released, Judas assumed the leadership role once held by Matthias. The second-in-command role was then given to Sadduc.
In the book of Acts, Matthias replaced Judas Iscariot as one of the Twelve. While the Josephus story had Judas replacing Matthias, the Acts' version had Matthias replacing a Judas. This Matthias was never mentioned in the Gospels and was absent from any subsequent activities as recorded by Acts. Matthias was just a name taken from Judas the Galilean's past and playfully included in the Judas Iscariot story.
In fact, James the Just replaced the crucified Jesus. Since Judas Iscariot was an invented character to further lay blame upon the Jewish people, there could not have been a replacement for him. He never existed! On the other hand, Jesus was crucified. Jesus was the person being replaced. With the death of Jesus, John the Baptist (Sadduc) became the leader of the movement with James the Just as his second-in-command.
38. Jesus was crucified between two bandits. The bandit was Josephus' term for members of the Fourth Philosophy. This term bandit did not refer to thieves or highwaymen but rather to terrorists (freedom fighters) or those seeking political turmoil. (9) That Jesus was crucified between these two should not surprise. Jesus was their leader.
John Crossan admits that Jesus was an apocalypticist, but that did not mean that Jesus advocated violence. He concludes that if Jesus were a military threat then Pilate would have captured a large number of Jesus' disciples with him and crucified them as well. (10) There are two fundamental errors in Crossan's reasoning. First, the Jesus (Judas the Galilean) movement was not violent as compared to the later Fourth Philosophy as dominated by the Zealots and Sicarii. The early version of the Fourth Philosophy, as preached by Jesus (Judas), would rid Israel of Roman occupation by the power of God, not by armed rebellion or by assassinations. This same philosophy was still in place by the 40's when Theudas called upon God to part the river Jordan. (Ant. 20.97) Second, Crossan does not recognize that Jesus was placed between two bandits. Obviously, Pilate had captured some of Jesus' disciples as they hung to his left and to his right. By placing Jesus in the middle and by attaching the charge against him, King of the Jews, Pilate attacked the Fourth Philosophy head on.
The treatment of the bandits in the Gospels is not consistent. John 19:18 simply stated that Jesus was crucified with "two others - one on each side and Jesus in the middle." John had nothing more to say about these two. Mark and Matthew told a different tale. They wrote that "those crucified with him [the bandits] also heaped insults on him." (Mark 15:32) In this, Mark and Matthew placed the bandits along with the High Priest, aligned against Jesus. But no one does the story better than Luke.
One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him. "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!"
But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."
Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." (Luke 23:39-43) (Emphasis mine)
Three major discrepancies can be noted from the above passage. First, Luke called the two men criminals and not bandits. This changed the two into common criminals and not part of a religious or political movement, that being the Fourth Philosophy. Second, one of the criminals hurled insults but the other now sided with Jesus, even saying that Jesus had done nothing wrong, thus exonerating Jesus. Third, this second criminal was pardoned by Jesus, a Pauline move. Jesus always preached a lifelong commitment to God. All of a sudden, he now accepted deathbed conversions. Again, this was added to make Jesus accept the Pauline notion of faith; saved by faith, not by works.
39. The movements continued after the deaths of Judas the Galilean and Jesus. It is interesting that Acts downplayed the movement of Judas the Galilean, saying that Judas was killed "and all his followers were scattered." (Acts 5:37) In reality, the Fourth Philosophy of Judas did not end with Judas' death but grew to a great degree according to Josephus. (Ant. 18.1-10) So the speech by Gamaliel in Acts was an attempt by Luke to alter history. The author of Acts did not want people to associate the rebellious Jews with the Gentile Christian movement of the second century. It is true, however, that when the story of Acts was written (second century), the followers of Judas the Galilean had been smashed and scattered.
40. The movements of Judas and Jesus expanded throughout the Roman Empire. The Fourth Philosophy of Judas was responsible for the war against Rome. Although centered in Jerusalem and Galilee, Judas' followers were numbered throughout the Empire and suffered greatly during the Jewish war. We know that Paul's Gentile churches were scattered amongst the great cities, but the Jewish Christian movement must have been much greater. While Paul was the lone apostle to the Gentiles, the influence of Cephas and others must have reached a great multitude. In fact, the early Church would have placed most of its resources in the "conversion" of the Jewish community to the Way of Righteousness.
Note also that Suetonius tied the rebellious, trouble-making Jews to Chrestus or Christ. (Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars, Claudius 25) This passage definitively connected the Fourth Philosophy to Christ. While this particular disturbance was at Rome, it seems most probable that all large Jewish congregations of the Diaspora would have contained an element sympathetic to the nationalism of Judas the Galilean (Jesus). Near the end of the Jewish War, Josephus wrote that some Sicarii had escaped to Alexandria after the destruction of Masada (73 CE). The Sicarii attempted to gain support from the Alexandrian Jews to rebel against the Romans. This attempt would only have been made if there were some sympathy for their movement. However, they were rebuffed by the majority of Jews, caught, tortured and killed by the authorities. (War 7.407-419)
CONCLUSION
Many people have concluded that a Jesus never existed because little evidence supports this Messiah figure in the timeframe generally accepted by scholars, around 30-33 CE. Too many problems exist with this late date, and no corroboration comes from the only Jewish historian of the time, Josephus. Could Josephus have missed the greatest story ever told? Considering that Josephus was born in the 30's, it is quite inconceivable that he could have missed out on Jesus.
Josephus did chronicle another Messiah figure, that being Judas the Galilean. This Judas was a great teacher who despised the ruling class and its association with Rome. This rebel led a tax revolt, cleansed the Temple, was pardoned in a Barabbas-style prisoner release, was claimed Messiah and eventually died fighting the injustice of Rome. This death was not recorded by Josephus. This is amazing considering Judas the Galilean was the driving force in the struggle against Rome. Josephus wrote about the deaths of Judas' sons, Simon and James by crucifixion and Menahem by stoning, and a grandson, Eleazar, who committed suicide at Masada. Each time, Josephus emphasized the relationship between these individuals and Judas the Galilean. So why did Josephus omit Judas' death? The answer is obvious: he did not omit the death of Judas. The story of Judas' death was erased by later Christians who inserted the spurious passage about Jesus. (Ant. 18.63-64) This passage has long been discounted by most scholars, but these same scholars have not recognized what the passage replaced. It was not just an insertion into the text but rather a replacement passage. Judas the Galilean suffered crucifixion under Pilate, not a mythical Jesus of Nazareth.
The above similarities between Judas and Jesus should convince the reader that a bait and switch game has occurred. The history of Judas the Galilean was transformed into the history of Jesus of Nazareth. Could there have been two separate individuals who experienced such similar events? The odds would be incalculable. So we are left with the only logical conclusion: Jesus of Nazareth was invented to distance the rebel, Judas the Galilean, from the Jewish religion. The catalyst for this ingenious attempt of history building was the apostle Paul, the man known as the Liar, the Enemy and the Traitor. His theology survived through Jesus of Nazareth, not that of Judas the Galilean. The greatest Jewish teacher of first-century Israel has long been forgotten. His glory was usurped by a literary character, Jesus of Nazareth.
1. Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Vol. 1, Chapter 16, pp. 530-531.
2. Slavonic Josephus, After War 1.400.
3. Ibid., After War 2.110
4. Ibid., After War 2.110
5. Pseudoclementine Recognitions 1.53-54.
6. John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed, Excavating Jesus, p. 18.
7. Slavonic Josephus, After War 1.650.
8. Hyam Maccoby, Revolution in Judaea, p. 19 and p. 222 (note 3).
9. G. A. Williamson and E. Mary Smallwood, The Jewish War, Appendix A, p. 461.
10. John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed, Excavating Jesus, p. 174.
It can be easily argued that Jesus was the most influential person who lived and taught in first-century Israel. It would seem logical that his life would have been chronicled by contemporary historians. But that part of the Jesus story is puzzling. How could this giant of his time be ignored by the Jewish historian Josephus and the Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius? This treatment of Jesus is akin to omitting Babe Ruth from baseball greats of the 1920's and 1930's or Hitler from the causes of World War II. Surely no historian would make such a glaring mistake or omission. Unfortunately, the Gospel Jesus did not exist outside the pages of the New Testament.
The only mention of anything related to Jesus by Tacitus concerned the Great Fire of Rome in 64 CE. Nero blamed the Christians for the fire and mercilessly murdered them in retaliation. From this, we can deduce that the followers of Jesus were scattered throughout the cities of the Roman Empire, but nothing further concerning Jesus was revealed. (Annals xv. 44) In fact, the great historian Edward Gibbon conjectured that Tacitus had confused the Christians with the followers of Judas the Galilean. It only made sense to him that Nero would have used a group universally hated within the Empire as his scapegoat. (1) Gibbon realized that the traditional Christian story did not mesh with the Neronian persecution. However, Judas the Galilean’s movement would have been a perfect fit. My only difference with Gibbon is that I believe that the Christians were actually the followers of Judas the Galilean (Jesus).
Suetonius mentioned the Jews who were followers of a "Chrestus," who caused disturbances in Rome during the reign of Claudius, around 41 CE. (Twelve Caesars, Claudius 25) But once again, Jesus was not detailed in any way. It is interesting to note that the Jews Claudius banned from Rome were "constantly in rebellion, at the instigation of a Chrestus." In the traditional view of Christianity, the Christians were law abiding, meek individuals. However, this report by Suetonius gives us the exact opposite reading of this group. This Jewish Christian group was synonymous with Judas the Galilean's Fourth Philosophy. This conjecture is no different than the conjecture made by Gibbon concerning the passage by Tacitus. The reason for the persecution has been obscured for two thousand years. This occurred in 41 CE, not 50 CE as proposed by Acts. This earlier timeframe coincides with Agrippa's influence over Claudius. Since the Fourth Philosophy was a thorn in Agrippa's side, this persecution in Rome was done as a favor by Claudius. Claudius was not persecuting all Jews, just the followers of "Chrestus". In fact, at this very time, Claudius issued an edict giving the Jews throughout the Empire expanded religious rights, and this from the prompting of Agrippa.
While Tacitus and Suetonius gave their interpretations of Roman history, Josephus wrote of the rich history behind the Jewish nation, from its inception to its final agonizing end at Masada (73 CE). Surely, Jesus would have played an important role in his narrative. After all, Jesus was a sensation according to the Gospels. Jesus walked on water, raised people from the dead, healed the blind and crippled, produced matter out of thin air (the feeding of the five thousand), and his teachings confounded all the learned men of his day. Josephus should have had a field day with this rich material. Amazingly, Josephus wrote nothing about Jesus except one questionable passage which seems more like a later creed than his own skeptical writings. Many Christians believe that this lone passage in Josephus' Antiquities proves the existence of Jesus. The passage in question, called the Testimonium Flavianum (TF), will be reproduced below.
Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works - a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day. (Ant. 18.63-64)
Did Josephus write this? The answer is no. There are too many arguments against its authenticity. Did a later Christian edit this section of Antiquities and add this testimonial? That will be proved below. There are four main points in my argument against this passage.
First, as noted in Chapter 1 concerning Pontius Pilate, a curious pattern emerges right before the TF. Josephus described a three year tenure for the procurator Gratus, yet the text claimed that he served eleven years. Thus, Pilate must have begun his governorship at 26 CE, at least according to the traditional chronology. Yet everything surrounding the two passages about Pilate can be dated at 18-19 CE. Many of these events, such as the death of Germanicus and the expulsion of the Jews from Rome are also corroborated by Tacitus as 19 CE events. Thus, it is very likely that the term of Gratus was changed from three to eleven years by the same people who inserted the TF. (See Antiquities 18.26-84)
Second, the TF is so unlike the rest of Josephus' writings. Note that the TF makes Josephus a believing Christian, and also attests to the resurrection. The TF called Jesus a wonder worker. Later, in Antiquities, Josephus blasted those who claimed to be miracle workers (Ant. 20.98; 20.160; 20.167-168; 20.169-172; 20.188). Thus, from just a cursory analysis, it is obvious that someone other than Josephus wrote the TF. In addition, Josephus did not mention one word regarding the life of Jesus. This is interesting because Josephus wrote extensively about the life and deeds of Judas the Galilean but did not record his death. This is amazing considering Josephus recorded the crucifixions of Judas' sons Simon and James (Ant. 20.102), the stoning of another son, Menahem (War 2.433-434) and the suicide of his grandson, Eleazar, at Masada. In each case, Josephus referred back to that clever rabbi, Judas the Galilean. And lastly, even the term "wise man" used in the TF was also given to Judas the Galilean (Ant. 17.152). Thus, it appears as if the TF was a replacement passage for the crucifixion of Judas the Galilean. The death of Judas would have been the original Josephus.
Third, an amazing gap exists in the Antiquities. After Ant. 18.84 discusses the expulsion of the Jews in 19 CE, Ant. 18.85 goes directly to the reason for Pilate's dismissal from Judea in 37 CE, an awe inspiring eighteen years of missing information. In Ant. 18.89, Pilate was credited with ten years as governor. If Pilate came in 18 CE as claimed in the first point, then he actually reigned for eighteen years, not ten. It is no coincidence that the High Priest, Caiaphas, also held his title from 18-37 CE. Thus, it appears as if pious editing has occurred. How unlikely is it that almost eighteen years had little or no information about it? These years were within the lifetime of Josephus' parents. He would have known quite a lot about this time. It should not be missed that this would have been the first generation to guide the Fourth Philosophy after the death of Judas the Galilean (Jesus). How convenient for the Gospel writers! All contradictory information vanished into thin air. Certainly, Josephus did not delete his own material. The same individuals who tampered with Pilate's reign and who substituted the TF for Judas' death were responsible for erasing the early Church history. (Note: the War also has no information from 19 CE to 37 CE. (See War 2.175-177 at 19 CE and War 2.178 at 37 CE)).
Fourth, One other passage in Antiquities proves that the TF is not from the pen of Josephus. In Ant. 20.200, James, the brother of Jesus, was stoned. Our current edition of Antiquities is differs from the earliest edition. According to Origen, around 230 AD, the following was said about this passage:
This James was of so shining a character among the people, on account of his righteousness, that Flavius Josephus, when in his twentieth book of the Jewish Antiquities, he had a mind to set down what was the cause, why the people suffered such miseries, till the very holy house was demolished, he said, that these things befell them by the anger of God, on account of what they had dared to do to James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ; and wonderful it is, that while he did not receive Jesus for Christ, he did nevertheless bear witness that James was so righteous a man. He says further, that the people thought they had suffered these things for the sake of James. (Whiston, The Works of Josephus, pg. 815) (Emphasis mine)
From this we know that Josephus did not regard Jesus as the Christ as claimed in the TF. In addition, this passage was changed from the original because it attributed the destruction of Jerusalem to the slaying of James. The Orthodox Christians could not tolerate this. They believed the destruction was due to the crucifixion of Jesus.
From the above, much of the Church story has been obliterated from the writings of Josephus by later Christians. The reason for this extensive editing job is obvious: later Christians wanted to hide the relationship between Jesus and Judas the Galilean (the same man!). Also, the early history of the movement could be expunged and later replaced with the Acts of the Apostles, which was largely based upon the works of Josephus and twisted into a quite different story.
From the above analysis of the three historians who either mentioned Christians or should have known about Jesus, it should be appreciated that all three knew of Judas the Galilean and his movement of rebellious Jews. Could their Christians have really been the followers of Judas the Galilean, founder of the Fourth Philosophy? The following pages will list forty similarities between Jesus of Nazareth and Judas the Galilean. Some are general in nature and others quite specific. Although any such listing does not prove a 100% foolproof case, the odds overwhelmingly favor my hypothesis that Jesus was simply a title for Judas the Galilean. Of these forty similarities, let's assume a one in two chance of each event happening to Jesus in the time of Pilate and Judas a generation earlier. The mathematical formula for this would be 2 to the 40th power, or put simply: there would be one chance in 1.1 trillion that Jesus and Judas were separate individuals. Although my case is not 100% certain, this would come very close - 99.999...%. And consider this: would the release of prisoners in 4 BCE under the shaky rule of Archelaus (the real Barabbas event) be only one chance in two or would it be one chance in a million? As one can see, the one chance in 1.1 trillion of Jesus and Judas being separate individuals is a gross understatement of the odds favoring my hypothesis.
To further illustrate the odds against Judas and Jesus being separate individuals, just two similarities will be considered. Josephus stated that Judas was the author of the Fourth Philosophy. (The other three philosophies - the Pharisees, the Sadducees and the Essenes - were founded in the second century BCE.) To found a new philosophy was no ordinary undertaking. According to Josephus, this one new philosophy dominated the Jewish scene until the war with Rome had ended. In that particular timeframe, 4 BCE - 73 CE, Josephus never mentioned the word "Christianity." Could Christianity have been like the stealth bomber, hovering about, but never seen? The odds of this would be one in a million, conservatively. A second event concerning Barabbas also has long odds. Josephus wrote in the War and Antiquities of a Barabbas-style prisoner release in 4 BCE but never again mentioned such an event. Again, could this have also occurred under the government of Pontius Pilate around 30 CE? The odds of this would be a million to one, conservatively. Thus, these two similarities, when put together, would yield the formula 1,000,000 to the 2nd power, or one chance in a trillion. How can such overwhelming odds be ignored?
A LIST OF SIMILARITIES BETWEEN JUDAS AND JESUS
The following list of forty similarities is meant to draw attention to the fact that the life of Jesus, as portrayed in the Gospels, had much in common with Judas the Galilean, as written about by Josephus. To traditional Christians, this list may be very hard to swallow, as it may force a reexamination of their basic belief system. But this list will also madden the Mythicists, who claim that a Messiah figure named Jesus never really existed. While I agree that Jesus of Nazareth was fictional, I do believe that this Jesus was a rewrite of a real individual, Judas the Galilean. And Judas the Galilean was not fictional! If Judas the Galilean lived, then so did his brothers and sons. Combined, they formed the Fourth Philosophy, the forerunner of the religion which Mythicists claim did not exist until after the Jewish war.
To make it easier for readers to locate individual similarities, each will be numbered.
1. Jesus was born in 8-4 BCE (Matthew) and in 6 CE at the Census of Cyrenius (Luke). Judas was mentioned by Josephus in 4 BCE, relating to the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing (Ant. 17.149-167) and in 6 CE, regarding the Census of Cyrenius (Ant. 18.1-10) The birth narratives in Matthew and Luke are both inconsistent with the reign of Pilate and the ministry of John the Baptist. For example, if Jesus were born in 4 BCE and died thirty-three years later, then he would have died around 30 CE, during the reign of Pilate but five years before John the Baptist’s death. (Ant. 18.116-119) If Jesus were born in 6 CE and died thirty-three years later, then he would have died in 39 CE, a few years after John the Baptist but two years after Pilate left Judea. Both accounts appear historically flawed. These two birth narratives were strategically placed in an era when Judas the Galilean’s ministry flourished. This deception moved the adult Jesus thirty years away from Judas the Galilean, thus hiding the Messiah's true identity. This misdirection by the Gospel writers has worked brilliantly. Very few scholars have even considered Jesus outside of the 30 CE timeframe. This is even more disturbing considering Jesus' brother, James, was purported to be ninety-six years old in 62 CE. Even if this slightly exaggerates his age by ten years, James' birth date can be estimated at approximately 35-25 BCE. Jesus was the older brother and could not have been born any later than 25 BCE.
It should be asked: why would Matthew and Luke pick different dates for the Messiah's birth? If one solid date existed, then both Gospel writers should have easily followed that lone date. However, if the writers were trying to present an alternate date, then it might have been possible for each to tie his birth date to a different event. Matthew tied his birth date to the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing while Luke used the Census of Cyrenius, the two major events in Judas the Galilean's career.
2. This second coincidence relates to Matthew's Star of Bethlehem story which was placed in 4 BCE (See number 1). In the Gospel of Matthew, the magi were drawn to Jerusalem by a star, near the end of Herod the Great's reign, around 4 BCE. These Magi found the baby Jesus but did not return to Herod to report the findings. Herod was incensed and ordered the slaughter of all the baby boys in the vicinity of Bethlehem, two years old and younger.
In the Slavonic Josephus, Persian astrologers went to Herod the Great identifying the star in the sky and explaining its significance. Herod insisted they return to him after finding the infant. However, the astrologers were warned by the stars to avoid Herod on the return trip. In his rage, Herod wanted to kill all the male children throughout his kingdom. His advisors convinced him that the Messiah would come from Bethlehem, hoping to confine the slaughter to only Bethlehem. This Star of Bethlehem passage was inserted in the War during the early years of Herod, between 27-22 BCE. (2)
This Slavonic Josephus passage originated from the same source which supplied the Gospel version. The Slavonic text has some interesting details which are missing from Matthew. Matthew wrote that the chief priests and teachers of the law informed Herod that the infant would be born in Bethlehem. He then sent the Magi to Bethlehem and ordered them to return when they had located the infant. (Matt. 2:3-8) This version does not give Herod much credit, for if he really knew that a king would be born in Bethlehem, he would have had every child slaughtered in Bethlehem before the Magi could even reach the place. On the other hand, the Slavonic version had Herod learning about the location after waiting for the Persian astrologers to return. This blunder on Herod's part wasted precious time, allowing the infant's parents to escape. Herod's advisors also told Herod the meaning of the Star. This star was the promised Star Prophecy, which told of a leader coming from Judah. (Numbers 24:17) The same sentiment was included in Matthew 2:6, but this quote from Micah 5:2 promised that a ruler would come from Bethlehem. All in all, the two versions have much in common and vary very little, the difference being the time: 25 BCE versus 4 BCE.
If Jesus were born in 25 BCE, then he would have been 30 years old at the time of the census (6 CE). This was the exact time when John baptized in the Jordan and proclaimed the coming of the Messiah. (3) This date was also marked by the nationwide tax revolt led by Judas the Galilean, the historical Jesus. (Ant. 18.4)
3. The genealogy of Jesus can also be compared to information known about Judas the Galilean. In Matthew 1:15 and Luke 3:24, a Mattan and Matthat are listed as great grandfathers. Since the Gospels added a few generations to distance Jesus from Judas, these great grandfathers may have been Jesus’ father. Judas’s father may have been Matthias, a name closely resembling Mattan and Matthat.
On Mary’s side, a similarity exists concerning the town of Sepphoris. In Christian tradition, Mary’s family came from Sepphoris. Judas was also linked to Sepphoris by Josephus. It was written that Judas was the son of Sepphoris, or rather from Sepphoris, and he also raided the armory at Sepphoris. Certainly, Judas was well acquainted with this town.
4. Herod the Great planned to execute Judas after the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing. Luckily for Judas, Herod ordered to have his prisoners put to death after his own death, in order to create great sorrow in Israel. After Herod's death, his advisors reneged on the insane plan. (Ant. 17.149-167) According to the Gospels, Herod the Great tried to kill the baby Jesus. (Matt. 2) Herod's goal of eliminating Jesus ended with his own death. In both stories, an elderly paranoid Herod tried to destroy elements he perceived as being a threat to his rule. Of course, the infant narrative was not actual history but rather a replay of Moses' infancy.
5. Joseph returned to Israel after the death of Herod the Great but was afraid to settle in Judea because of Archelaus. Having been warned in a dream, Joseph moved his family to Nazareth, in Galilee. (Matt. 2:19-23) The New Testament often moved characters by using dreams, miracles or visions. For example, Philip was whisked away after baptizing the eunuch in Acts 8:39-40. Peter's visit to Cornelius' house in Caesarea was preceded by a vision in Acts chapter 10. And the Magi did not return to King Herod because they were warned in a dream. (Matt. 2:12) All three of these examples have alternative explanations. Philip and the eunuch as well as Peter and Cornelius were patterned after the account of King Izates given by Josephus. (Ant. 20.34-48) And as noted in number 2, the Slavonic Josephus explained the Persian astrologers’ decision to avoid Herod differently. Either the Star of Bethlehem convinced them not to return to Herod or they had talked to the locals about the King and decided to go home by another route. The point is this: when trying to reconstruct historical events, it may be wise to discount the passages which depend upon a literary devise such as a dream or vision.
After being released by Archelaus, Judas went to Sepphoris in Galilee, where he led an uprising against the son of Herod. (War 2.56) Sepphoris was in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas, not under the control of Archelaus. Since Archelaus was waging war upon the followers of Judas and Matthias, the move to Galilee was prudent in that it allowed reorganization without fear of being attacked by Archelaus. The events in Josephus and the New Testament both occurred because Herod the Great had died and the country was in unrest.
6. The Gospels do not mention the early life of Jesus, except when he taught at the Temple at the age of twelve. (Luke 2:41-52) Otherwise, no information was given from 6 CE (Census of Cyrenius) to 26 CE (supposed date of Pilate - see chapter 1). This lack of information mirrors Josephus' War where nothing was written from 6 CE (Census) to 26 CE (Pilate). (War 2.167-169) Josephus barely expanded on this paucity of information in Antiquities, where he listed the Roman procurators during this twenty year stretch, but little else. (Ant. 18.26-35) It is possible that these missing years from Josephus could have been the result of pious editing. The actual crucifixion of Judas the Galilean may have been deleted. Note that Josephus detailed the deaths of Judas' three sons, James, Simon, and Menahem and his grandson, Eleazar. With each of these occasions, Josephus referred back to Judas the Galilean. It is hard to believe that Josephus omitted the circumstances behind the death of Judas. So it is very possible that the writings of Josephus were edited to remove some interesting details of Judas' life and his eventual crucifixion.
7. When he was only twelve, Jesus spent three days at the Temple. He was "sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers." (Luke 2:41-52) Judas taught young men at the same Temple. Judas was "the most celebrated interpreters of the Jewish laws and ... well beloved by the people, because of [the] education of their youth." (Ant. 17.149 - 4 BCE) How many other men also taught at the Temple? Is it possible that Judas' early career as teacher at the Temple was made legend by placing his wisdom and knowledge within the body of a twelve year old? Consider this: if Judas had been born around 25 BCE (see number 2), then he would have been just twenty years old at the time of the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing (4 BCE). His status as one of the finest teachers of the law, at such a young age, must have been legendary. This child prodigy legacy was woven into the Gospel fabric by Luke in his story of the twelve year old Jesus.
8. The story of John the Baptist may very well be the most important link between Judas the Galilean and Jesus. In the Gospels, John the Baptist introduced Jesus to the world in 28-29 CE, per the dating of Luke. (Luke 3:1-3) In fact, this is the reason why scholars look nowhere else for Jesus. It is just a given that Jesus' ministry began around 30 CE.
According to the Slavonic Josephus, this same John came baptizing in the Jordan in 6 CE, right before the mention of Judas the Galilean and during the reign of Archelaus (4 BCE- 7 CE). (4) In addition, the Psuedoclementine Recognitions acknowledged John right before describing the various Jewish sects. (5) Josephus described these same sects right after his introduction of Judas the Galilean. (Ant. 18.4-22 and War 2.118-166) So the 6 CE timeframe for John the Baptist is attested to by more than one source.
Could this John the Baptist have been baptizing and proclaiming different Messiahs in both 6 CE and 29 CE? The odds of that would be millions to one. The only logical conclusion is that Jesus and Judas the Galilean were the same person. This explains why the Slavonic Josephus' version of events has been ignored over the years. If John actually came in 6 CE, then all of New Testament scholarship is, at best, misguided. That would not only make the scholars look foolish but would also prove Pauline Christianity a sham religion.
9. Both Judas and Jesus had a second-in-command, Sadduc and John the Baptist, respectively. This organizational model was fashioned after the Maccabees. Mattathias led the movement and his son, Judas Maccabee, was his lieutenant. After Mattathias died, Simon took his place and Judas Maccabee was elevated to the leadership role. In the later Fourth Philosophy, Matthias and Judas worked together at the Temple and were responsible for the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing. After Matthias suffered martyrdom, Judas filled this position with Sadduc. (Ant. 18.4)
In the Gospel accounts, Jesus picked Simon Peter as his second-in-command. In reality, Jesus was first paired with John the Baptist (Sadduc). When Jesus was crucified, he was replaced by his brother, James the Just. At this stage, John the Baptist and James shared control of the movement. In 35-36 CE, John was beheaded by Herod Antipas. James appointed Cephas (Peter) to be John's successor. The Gospels successfully minimized the roles of John the Baptist and James. According to these accounts, John died before Jesus, but per Josephus, John died after Jesus. Also, James the Just was barely mentioned by Acts, his leadership role unannounced until Acts chapter 15, at the Council of Jerusalem. By bypassing John the Baptist and James the Just, the Gospels were able to skip a generation, placing Peter (Cephas) as the leading apostle after the death of Jesus.
The dual leadership may have safeguarded the movement. If one of the leaders was captured or killed, then the other could take control. The movement of Judas the Galilean (Jesus) was different from that of Judas Maccabee in that the later movement believed in the resurrection of its leader. Thus, even though John the Baptist and James led the movement after the death of Jesus, many throughout the movement still awaited the return of Jesus in power and glory. So, in essence, John and James were merely caretakers. This may account for the divisions in the 40 CE church in Corinth. Paul wrote that some disciples followed himself, others followed Cephas (James the Just), others followed Apollos (John the Baptist) (see Acts 18:24-25), and others followed Christ (Judas the Galilean or Jesus). (1 Cor. 1:10-12) This split may have been inevitable since Judas the Galilean's movement was held together by a common hatred of Rome. Teachers within the movement could have possibly come from both the Pharisees and the Essenes. Differences, in approach to religion, were inevitable.
10. Jesus and Judas were both called the Galilean. Actually, Jesus was referred to as Jesus of Nazareth, a city located near Sepphoris in Galilee. It should not be missed that Sepphoris was central to Judas the Galilean's ministry. Placing Nazareth close to Sepphoris may have been more than just coincidence. In War 1.648, Judas was said to be the son of Sepphoris. This more likely was his place of birth as opposed to his father. And in War 2.56, Judas retreated to Sepphoris after being harassed by Archelaus. There, Judas armed his disciples with weapons from the armory. Judas' history with Sepphoris was no doubt changed to Nazareth to hide these embarrassing revelations. After all, both of the above references to Sepphoris were in the context of armed rebellion against Herod the Great and later, Archelaus.
The name Nazareth is probably a corruption of Nazarite, as no references to Nazareth appear in the Old Testament or in Josephus. (A Nazarite was consecrated to God by a vow and included such notables as John the Baptist and Samson). In fact, John Crossan stated that in addition to Josephus' silence concerning Nazareth, "it is never mentioned by any of the Jewish rabbis whose pronouncements are in the Mishnah or whose discussions are in the Talmud." (6) Jesus' disciples were called Galileans (Mark 14:70) and it may have been a sleight-of-hand which changed Jesus the Galilean to Jesus of Nazareth. In John 7:41, the crowd asked, "How can the Christ come from Galilee?" And the leaders had the same reservations about Jesus. "Look into it, and you will find that a prophet does not come out of Galilee." (John 7:52)
Judas the Galilean was mentioned in several passages by Josephus (War 2.118; War 2.433 and Ant. 20.102). Josephus did state that this Judas hailed from Gamala, across the River Jordan (Ant. 18.4), but he was known as the Galilean, as attributed to the above references. Galilee was a hotbed for revolutionaries. Both Jesus and Judas would have had a similar background, influenced by those who had struggled for years against Herod the Great.
11. The disciples of Jesus and Judas were zealous for the law. (Acts 21:20) (Ant. 17.149-154) It is true that Paul taught his Gentile followers to disregard the law. However, the Jewish Christians, led by James the Just, clearly denounced that teaching and removed Paul and his followers from fellowship. (See Galatians)
Some forty years after the death of Judas (19 CE), a splinter group of the Fourth Philosophy, known as the Zealots, appeared on the scene. Like their name suggests, these individuals were obsessed with the Law and were comparable to the fanatical followers of James the Just. (Acts 21:20)
12. Judas and Jesus were both called wise men by Josephus. (Ant. 17.152 and Ant. 18.63) As the Jesus passage was a late third or early fourth century interpolation, the use of the term wise man was taken from the description of Judas and Matthias. It must also be noted that Josephus did not freely use the term wise man. He did, however, use that term when describing himself. If Josephus called himself a wise man then this indeed was a great compliment.
13. Both teachers assigned a high value to the sharing of wealth or pure communism. (Matt. 6:19-27; Acts 2:42-45; James 5:1-6) (Ant. 18.7; War 2.427) (Essenes - War 2.122) In fact, this was the central message in "Love your Neighbor as Yourself." How could one love his neighbor if he let that neighbor go hungry or unclothed? When Jesus confronted the rich young ruler, he did not say give ten percent to the poor, but rather, give everything to the poor and then come follow me. (Matt. 19:16-24) This was a radical message two thousand years ago. How many middle-class Americans would follow that same philosophy today?
Members of the Fourth Philosophy were known as bandits by Josephus, for they exploited the wealthy, a type of Robin Hood movement. During the war with Rome, the debt records were burned in order to free those enslaved to the wealthy by their debt. (War 2.426-427) This was truly class warfare! As for the Zealots, Josephus shared his contempt for their practices concerning wealth and private property: "The dregs, the scum of the whole country, they have squandered their own property and practiced their lunacy upon the towns and villages around, and finally have poured in a stealthy stream into the Holy City...." (War 4.241) Considering what Jesus said to the rich young ruler, Josephus would have had the same attitude towards Jesus' lunacy!
At the beginning of the Church, disciples were urged to share everything in common. (Acts 2:42) This approach to living was in line with the Kingdom of God as preached by Jesus. Also, the feeding of the five thousand was simply the sharing of one's food with another. It had nothing to do with hocus-pocus. In addition, the letter of James favored the poor over the rich. (James 5:1-6)
14. Both Judas and Jesus were considered fine teachers of the Law. (Matt. 5:17-20; Mark 12:28-34) (Ant. 17.149; War 1.648) Judas followed the basic teachings of the Pharisees as did Jesus. As for Judas' abilities, Josephus wrote: "[Judas and Matthias were] the most celebrated interpreters of the Jewish laws, and well beloved by the people." (Ant. 17.149) The earlier assessment from War 1.648 stated that "there were two men of learning in the city [Jerusalem], who were thought the most skillful in the laws of their country, and were on that account held in very great esteem all over the nation."
From the Gospels, we know that Jesus used parables in relating his message, in line with Pharisaic practices. Jesus said that the two greatest commandments were to love God and to love thy neighbor. To love God involved obeying God and the Law handed down by God to Moses. To love thy neighbor included sharing one's possessions, so that no one was left hungry or homeless. In addition, both Judas and Jesus followed Judas Maccabee in his interpretation of the Sabbath: the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Judas Maccabee permitted his disciples to defend themselves if attacked on the Sabbath. Likewise, Jesus preached that it was proper to do good on the Sabbath. In fact, Jesus was reprimanded by some Pharisees for breaking the Sabbath laws as he fled from Herod. Jesus quoted the Old Testament story of David eating consecrated bread in order to maintain strength in his flight from the authorities. Jesus had good reason to follow David and Judas Maccabee: he was a marked man. Both Jesus and Judas Maccabee would not have flouted the Sabbath law for any old reason.
From the above passages from Josephus, Judas the Galilean was known throughout the nation for his ability in interpreting the law. We get the same feeling for Jesus when reading the Gospels. The Pharisees constantly invited him to dinner in order to discuss issues. We are privy to only the negative aspects of those meetings. In reality, most teachers in Israel considered Jesus an important figure and were constantly amazed at his teachings.
15. Judas the Galilean’s movement centered in Jerusalem and in Galilee. Judas began his public career in Jerusalem, teaching young men at the Temple. He convinced his students to take part in the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing and was arrested by Herod the Great. (Ant. 17.149-167) Judas was later released by Archelaus and fled to Sepphoris in Galilee. Until his return to Jerusalem, Judas preached in Galilee where he was crowned Messiah by his followers, and later led a tax revolt against Rome. (Ant. 17.271-272 and 18.1-10)
Jesus was also in Jerusalem at the start of his career, according to John. Coincidentally, John placed his Temple Cleansing at the start of Jesus' career, consistent with the story of Judas the Galilean. (John 2:12-17) Jesus then returned to Galilee, where he was proclaimed Messiah. From the Gospel accounts, Jesus spent most of his ministry in Galilee. Jesus finally returned to Jerusalem, where he was captured and crucified.
Even after Judas' death, his movement revolved around Jerusalem and Galilee. In fact, Josephus noted that Eleazar was sent by his leaders in Galilee to teach King Izates true Judaism, which included circumcision. King Izates had previously been taught by Ananias that he could become a full Jew without circumcision. The Jewish Christian model also practiced circumcision. Note that Paul and Cephas also had a similar disagreement in Antioch, caused by men sent from James. James may have been centered in either Jerusalem or in Galilee. However, since this occurred around the time of Agrippa's assassination, James probably located himself in a safer place, no doubt, Galilee.
16. Both Jesus and Judas cleansed the Temple in Jerusalem. (Matt. 21:12-13) (Ant. 17.149-167) Actually, Judas probably cleansed the Temple twice. The first cleansing was the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing where Matthias and Judas were captured by Herod the Great. The Golden Eagle was a sign of fealty to Rome, and the teachers could not condone this alliance, considering that God was their only Lord and Ruler. (Ant. 18.23) The second cleansing can be deduced from inference. Judas the Galilean's son, Menahem, followed his father's modus operandi and seized an armory before marching upon Jerusalem. Menehem promptly cleansed the Temple after being hailed as Messiah by his disciples. It is most probable that Judas the Galilean marched on Jerusalem some time after the Census of Cyrenius (6 CE) and cleansed the Temple as a Messianic act. It is interesting to note that the Gospel of John placed the Temple cleansing at the beginning of Jesus' career (John 2:12-25) while the Synoptic Gospels have it at the end of his ministry. What are the odds of the two men cleansing the Temple once, not to say twice? Outside of the cleansing in 4 BCE (Judas) and the cleansing by his son in 66 CE (Menahem), Josephus did not record one other Temple cleansing from 4 BCE to 66 CE. It was certainly not an everyday occurrence.
The 4 BCE Temple cleansing concerned the Golden Eagle, a graven image paying homage to Rome. The Slavonic Josephus verified that the Golden Eagle was in honor of Caesar and was even named "the Golden-winged Eagle." (7) Josephus stated that Pilate brought his standards into Jerusalem in 19 CE, right before the crucifixion of Jesus. These standards had the eagle upon them, the symbol of Rome. In both the Temple cleansing of 4 BCE and the one in 19 CE, the power of Rome was attacked by Judas (Jesus).
17. Judas opposed the Roman tax, and Jesus was crucified for the charge of opposing the Roman tax. (Luke 23.2) (Ant. 18.4) The ministry of Judas (4 BCE - 19 CE) focused upon the tax issue. At the Barabbas-style prisoner release ordered by Archelaus in 4 BCE, the Jewish crowd demanded the release of prisoners, the easing of annual payments and the removal of an onerous sales tax. (Ant. 17.204-205) Judas then led a tax revolt at the time of the census (6 CE), but this did not end the extortion by Rome. Tacitus stated that Judea was exhausted by its tax burden (16-18 CE). (Annals, ii. 42) This struggle against Roman taxation was well documented by both Tacitus and Josephus.
Jesus did not oppose every tax, but his hatred of Roman taxation is beyond doubt. "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's" was not a pro-tax message. Jesus was saying this: take your money with Caesar's portrait and leave our country. This statement went well beyond a yes or no answer to the tax question. To "Give God what is God's" harkened the Jews back to the days of Judas Maccabee and his struggle for Jewish independence. This is why Jesus was crucified by the Romans.
Paul, on the other hand, taught his disciples to pay their taxes to Rome without hesitation. (Rom. 13:1-7) This accommodation to Roman taxation was totally opposite the view of Judas (Jesus). Many people read Paul's view into the interpretation of Jesus' statement: "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." But we must remember that Jesus was crucified and that death was not a result of upholding Roman taxation.
18. According to Josephus, Judas founded the Fourth Philosophy during his fight with Herod the Great's dynasty and Rome. (Ant. 18.1-10) Jesus was credited with the founding of Christianity, a new religion. This religion of Jesus was never mentioned by Josephus, an amazing omission. It is my contention that Josephus was very concerned with the followers of Jesus, but this Christian movement was termed the Fourth Philosophy.
The Fourth Philosophy joined the earlier philosophies of the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. This Fourth Philosophy was similar to that of the Pharisees except that followers of Judas were extremely nationalistic. Also, Judas' disciples shared some practices with the Essenes. Thus, the nationalistic movement had drawing power away from the other philosophies. This may explain why John the Essene was a leader in the war against Rome. Essenes were known as pacifists, so the mention of a warlike Essene has confounded scholars. This John the Essene was no doubt influenced by the Fourth Philosophy.
In reading the New Testament, one must admit that Jesus was quite often friendly with the Pharisees. He did blast those who loved themselves more than their fellow Jews, but his overall feeling for the Pharisees was positive. "You are not far from the kingdom of heaven," Jesus said to one Pharisee. (Mark 12:34) In addition, Jesus preached using parables, a mode of teaching practiced by the Pharisees. Thus, like Judas, Jesus was very close to the Pharisees in belief and action.
19. Josephus detailed the life but not the death of Judas while mentioning the death of Jesus but not one word about his life. Josephus invested much effort in recounting Judas' life, even touching upon the lives of his sons, James, Simon, and Menahem and his grandson, Eleazar. (Ant. 20.102; War 2.433-434; War 7.253) Each time the descendants were recognized, Josephus recounted their pedigree. This did not occur in just one isolated time period. Simon and James were crucified in 46-48 CE, Menahem stoned in 66 CE and Eleazar led the Sicarii at Masada in 73 CE. This theme of Judas the Galilean ran throughout Josephus' narrative.
It is probable that the death of Judas was removed by a later Gentile Christian who believed the death of Judas by crucifixion might attract too much unwanted attention. Most scholars believe that the passage in Josephus, which details the death of Jesus, is a late third to early fourth century forgery. The question is this: was the spurious Jesus passage (TF of Ant. 18.63-64) a replacement for Judas' death by crucifixion? The death of Judas by crucifixion should not be doubted. Judas fought against Rome and such actions were punishable by crucifixion. In addition, Judas' two sons, James and Simon, were crucified a generation later (46-48 CE).
20. Zealots and Sicarii arose from Judas' Fourth Philosophy. Two of Jesus' apostles were named Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot (a garbling of Sicarios). Since the Zealots and Sicarii were not introduced until the late 50's and early 60's by Josephus, titles of that sort would not have been used in Jesus' time (4 BCE - 19 CE). These names were placed on the Apostles by Gentile Christians, nearly one hundred years later. In addition, the nickname "Sons of Thunder" denotes a power associated with the Fourth Philosophy, not the mild Christianity of the Gospels.
21. Disciples of both Judas and Jesus were willing to die for their respective cause. The Neronian persecution reported by Tacitus and the description of the Fourth Philosophy by Josephus indicate a willingness to die happily for God. (In fact, Edward Gibbon conjectured that Tacitus really was describing the Fourth Philosophy, not the traditional Christians.) Jesus said: "Blessed [are] the ones being persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the Kingdom of God." (Matt. 5:10) In the same way, Judas and Matthias stressed the rewards of righteousness if they were to be punished by Herod the Great. (Ant. 17.149-167) The followers of Judas the Galilean gladly accepted death for the sake of righteousness. (Ant. 18.23-24)
Unlike the Fourth Philosophy or Jewish Christianity, Paul's Gentiles were taught to pay taxes to Rome and to follow their rulers (Nero and other madmen.) Paul's philosophy of acting like a Gentile to the Gentiles and like a Jew to the Jews was totally contrary to Judas' and Jesus' teachings. Judas (Jesus) was who he claimed to be. He never acted a part as did Paul.
22. The sons of Judas and the "brothers" of Jesus were named James and Simon. How easy it would have been for an early Gospel writer to change children into brothers and a wife into a mother. This would have been done for several reasons. First, by making sons and a wife into brothers and a mother, the Gospel writers wiped out a generation, making Jesus a much younger man, that of about thirty. Second, to follow in Paul's footsteps, one had to be celibate. Although marriage and sex had no negative connotations in Jewish society, the later Church found it difficult to accept the fact that God's son had sex which resulted in children (mini-gods). Third, it was easier to disassociate Jesus from brothers and a mother. A good father and husband would have been more understanding with his wife and his own children.
23. The sons of Judas were put to death by crucifixion. Jesus was the only other individual crucified to be mentioned by name. Also two Apostles were to drink the same cup as Jesus, namely crucifixion. (Matt. 20:20-23) (Ant. 20.102) It is my contention that these two Apostles were the sons of Jesus (Judas the Galilean).
This is very significant because crucifixion was a form of punishment doled out by the Roman authorities. One was crucified because of political activity, not for religious beliefs. In fact, the Romans allowed all types of religions as long as they did not oppose Rome and its tax machine. Paul's version of Christianity would have been the model Roman religion! Jesus preached against Roman taxation and was proclaimed King or Messiah. That is why he was crucified. The two sons of Judas the Galilean would have been crucified for the same reason: resistance against Rome.
24. Many members of the movement had nicknames. Sadduc was a priestly title denoting righteousness while John the Baptist "commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God." (Ant. 18.117) James, the brother of Jesus, was known as the Just. Judas the Galilean was known as Jesus (Joshua or Savior), Saul was renamed Paul (small), and Simon became Cephas (Peter), which means rock. The above nicknames generally described the character of the individual. These internal nicknames would not have been known or used by those outside the movement. Thus, Josephus wrote of Judas the Galilean, Simon and Saul, never using the names Jesus, Cephas and Paul.
Nicknames were also used in the Maccabean movement. Judas was nicknamed Maccabee or the Hammer. Since the Fourth Philosophy (Jewish Christianity) was based upon the Maccabean movement, the use of nicknames should be expected.
Other nicknames in the Jesus movement included the Sons of Thunder (James and Simon, the sons of Judas the Galilean). Only Judas would have been referred to as Thunder. Simon the Zealot and James the Younger may have also been references to these sons of Judas. Remember, the Gospel writers were intent on hiding the true identities of Jesus' sons. One other nickname was Thomas, which may have referred to Judas, another son of Judas the Galilean. The combination of Judas and Thomas may have yielded Theudas or Thaddeus.
25. Jesus was proclaimed Messiah or King in Galilee, or close by. Before the Transfiguration, Jesus and the Twelve were in Caesarea Philippi (Matt. 16:13) and afterwards traveled to Capernaum. (Matt. 17:24) After Jesus was proclaimed King, he marched to Jerusalem.
Judas was also proclaimed King in Galilee, around Sepphoris. This occurred after he captured Herod's armory and equipped his followers. (Ant. 17.271-272; War 2.56) He also may have marched upon Jerusalem, deduced by examining the behavior of his son, Menahem, who proclaimed himself King after capturing Herod's armory at Masada. He then marched straight to Jerusalem. (War 2.433) Judas the Galilean's entrance to Jerusalem may have been in 19 CE, so his kingship may have actually lasted twenty-two years, from 4 BCE to 19 CE. This is different from Jesus who went directly to Jerusalem. However, the Gospels may have telescoped the career of Jesus into a few short years just as Josephus compressed the seventy-five year movement created by Judas into a few paragraphs. (Ant. 18.1-10)
26. In Acts 5:37, Judas the Galilean was killed "and all his followers were scattered." This passage was meant to minimize Judas' influence, giving the impression that Judas' movement ended with his death. However, Josephus clearly stated that Judas' movement grew and expanded over the next fifty to sixty years.
After Jesus was captured, his disciples fled and some denied their association with him (Peter). Even after the crucifixion, the disciples were forlorn and in hiding. It seems as if both movements acted the same way after their leaders were killed.
There is an amazing convergence between Judas and Jesus concerning the disciples' reaction to his arrest. In Matt. 26:56, after Jesus' arrest, "the disciples deserted him and fled." In Mark 14:50, "everyone deserted him and fled." These two Gospels are in complete agreement concerning the disciples’ behavior after the arrest. The interesting part concerns the Gospel of Luke. In Luke, the disciples did not flee, but Simon Peter followed at a distance. Why is the account in Luke different from the other Synoptic Gospels? The answer may be in Acts 5:37, that passage which distorted the picture of Judas the Galilean. If the author of Acts were the same writer who penned Luke, then a direct correlation between Judas and Jesus can be established. The Gospel of Luke omitted the language of the deserting disciples. However, this scattering of disciples was recorded by Luke in Acts 5, concerning the disciples of Judas the Galilean. Did Luke forget his mission and erroneously credit the disciples of Judas with the same actions accorded the followers of Jesus in Matthew and Mark?
27. After Jesus’ arrest, he was brought first to Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas and former High Priest. (John 18:12-24) This Annas was appointed High Priest in 6 CE by Cyrenius and Coponius, in the days of the census. Opposing the census and Annas was none other than Judas the Galilean. It would seem that Annas would have been much more interested in the death of Judas the Galilean than the Gospel Jesus. But why would the ex-High Priest take a leading role in the arrest of Jesus? Under the governorship of Gratus (15-18 CE), four different High Priests were appointed. This musical chair approach to the High Priesthood must have maddened the religious people of the day, including Jesus. This may have been one reason why Jesus picked this time to enter Jerusalem. In all probability, Annas may have been calling the shots even after his stint as High Priest. Josephus wrote that this Annas had five sons who were High Priest. (Ant. 20.198) The existence of this dynasty means that Annas was a force in first-century Judea.
The Gospel of John may have inadvertently connected Jesus with Judas' old adversary. The Synoptic Gospels were careful to avoid mentioning Annas, preferring to have the whole affair tried before Caiaphas and the elders. Annas certainly lends credence to my Judas the Galilean hypothesis, in that he functioned in a leadership role during the lifetime of Judas. It is also more likely that Annas would have been physically stronger in 19 CE rather than the later date of 30-33 CE, per the traditional dating. Annas may well have been dead by 30-33 CE.
28. In the trial of Matthias in the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing, the High Priest was also named Matthias. This latter Matthias had once relinquished his office for a day, a day celebrated by a fast, because of a dream where he had sexual relations with his wife. Pilate washed his hands of responsibility on a single day because of his wife's dream concerning Jesus' innocence. (Matt. 27:19-24) (Ant. 17.166) In both cases, a dream sequence was used to remove responsibility for a short period of time. In the case of Pilate, this conveniently shifted the blame for Jesus' crucifixion from the Romans to the Jews, even though crucifixion was a Roman punishment. The Jews supposedly said, "Let his blood be on us and on our children." (Matt. 27:25) Unfortunately, this has been used as an excuse to persecute the Jews throughout history.
The whole scene, where Pilate washed his hands and the Jews greedily usurped his power of life and death, appears extremely unlikely. According to the Gospels, the Jews had welcomed Jesus into Jerusalem as Messiah, just a few days earlier. Now they were willing to have his blood on their heads for all eternity. This cannot be logically explained. The alternative is radical but at least logical: this dream scene was adapted from the Matthias episode and reworked using the new Pauline thinking. The Jews were the enemies, not the Romans.
29. Herod the Great sent Matthias, Judas and the rebels to Jericho for questioning concerning the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing. There, Herod heard the reasons for the uprising. (Ant. 17.160) Pilate sent Jesus to Herod for questioning. (Luke 23:6-7) This interrogation was told only by Luke. Luke had a tendency to take events from Josephus and incorporate them into the fictional story of Jesus and the early Church. There were two Temple Cleansings, the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing and the one recorded in the Gospels at the end of Jesus' career. Two trials or interrogations also occurred, one before Herod the Great in 4 BCE and the other before Pilate in 19 CE. Luke simply combined these two trials in his Gospel.
30. Under Herod the Great's son, Archelaus (4 BCE), prisoners were released to appease the Jewish mob. One of these prisoners may have been Judas the Galilean. (War 2.4 and Ant. 17.204-205) This same story was repeated at the trial of Jesus. In that account, Pilate released Barabbas to the mob instead of Jesus. (Matt. 27:15-26) One point must be noted: the Romans did not release political prisoners; they crucified them. On the other hand, the release of prisoners by Archelaus rings true as he was dealing with the remnants of the Matthias and Judas following. This crowd would have wished for the release of Barabbas, the son of the Father. The Father would have been either Matthias or God.
A critic of my theory insists that Archelaus never released the prisoners, only that he promised to release them. This scenario does not make sense for two reasons. First, Archelaus could have quickly appeased the mob by releasing prisoners. It could have been done immediately. He also promised to reduce taxes. Since that could not be accomplished immediately, Archelaus may very well have reneged on that promise. Second, after the prisoner release, Archelaus also granted the mob's request regarding the removal of the High Priest. This, too, could be done immediately. With these two points in mind, it is clear that the releasing of prisoners actually occurred.
31. In the Gospel story, Barabbas led an insurrection in the city, Jerusalem. (Mark 15:7 and Luke 23:19) Shortly before the prisoner release of 4 BCE, Matthias and Judas led the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing, an insurrection in the city, where many of the rebels suffered martyrdom, while others, Judas included, were held for later punishment. (Ant. 17.149-167; 17.204-206)
Insurrections in the city of Jerusalem were not commonplace in the timeframe noted. From 4 BCE to 50 CE, the only ones recorded were the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing (4 BCE) and the one supposedly led by Barabbas. This should reinforce the statement that Barabbas was really a nickname for Judas (Jesus). (In some manuscripts, Barabbas was known as Jesus Barabbas.) Both insurrections were aimed at Rome. The Golden Eagle was a symbol of Rome, and Barabbas of Gospel fame was undoubtedly a member of the Fourth Philosophy. Judas and Barabbas were also very popular with the Jewish crowd, who were anti-Roman.
32. The trial of Jesus and the release of Barabbas occurred at the Passover feast. (Mark 14:12) The release of prisoners on 4 BCE also coincided with the Passover. (Ant. 17.213) As there were three Jewish pilgrim festivals (Passover, Pentecost and Tabernacles), the odds of this coincidence can be calculated as 3 to the 2nd power, or one in nine. (8)
33. King Herod the Great died a week or so before the Passover feast. At his death, Herod was clothed in purple, with a crown of gold upon his head and a scepter in his right hand. (Ant. 17.198) Before his death, Jesus was mocked by the Roman soldiers who put a purple robe on him and wove a crown of thorns to be placed upon his head. A staff was used to beat him. (Mark 15:16-20) The Gospel writers had used so much of this section of Antiquities regarding Judas they just applied this to Jesus as well.
34. Jesus was mocked by the Roman soldiers. (Mark 15:16-20) Herod the Great was afraid that the people would mourn his death in "sport and mockery" only. (Ant. 17.177) The Gospels and Acts often used information from Josephus or the letters of Paul to flesh out the story of Jesus and his Church. Jesus not only wore the same garb as Herod, but he was treated as poorly by his adversaries.
35. Many religious scholars have questioned the silence of Jesus before Pilate. When charged with a crime, Jesus made no reply, to the amazement of Pilate. (Mark 15:3-5) Unlike Paul, who made a speech everywhere in Acts, Jesus remained silent. The only mention of this type of behavior in Josephus concerned Simon, who had been summoned to answer charges by Agrippa I (43 CE). (This Simon-Agrippa episode was the basis for the Simon Peter-Cornelius story of Acts chapter 10.)
Silence was a way to protect the movement. Under interrogation, members of the movement would not betray their compatriots. The questioning of Jesus may have been more severe than we are led to believe by the Gospel accounts. Pilate and his henchmen would have liked information, and they no doubt tortured Jesus. He, however, did not betray his friends. The Fourth Philosophy, represented by Simon in the Simon-Agrippa episode, also was famous for its steadfast loyalty to God and fellow members. "They do not value dying any kind of death, nor indeed do they heed the deaths of their relations and friends, nor can any such fear make them call any man Lord." (Ant. 18.23-25) In short, they would rather die than betray God and their fellow disciples.
36. In the Gospels, the crowd (Pharisees, etc.) preferred Barabbas over King Jesus. (Mark 15:1-15) This was not only an endorsement for Barabbas but also demonstrated an intense hatred for Jesus. Anyone would have been chosen over Jesus.
Josephus described the crowd as followers of Matthias and Judas, who preferred these teachers over King Herod. (Ant. 17.204-206) The disciples really loved Judas and Matthias, but their hatred of Herod and all he represented was unparalleled. Their hatred of Herod corresponds to the Gospel story where the Chief Priests and the Jews hated Jesus.
37. In the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing, Matthias and Judas were captured by Herod the Great. Matthias was put to death by fire, while Judas eventually gained freedom in a Barabbas-style prisoner release. Once released, Judas assumed the leadership role once held by Matthias. The second-in-command role was then given to Sadduc.
In the book of Acts, Matthias replaced Judas Iscariot as one of the Twelve. While the Josephus story had Judas replacing Matthias, the Acts' version had Matthias replacing a Judas. This Matthias was never mentioned in the Gospels and was absent from any subsequent activities as recorded by Acts. Matthias was just a name taken from Judas the Galilean's past and playfully included in the Judas Iscariot story.
In fact, James the Just replaced the crucified Jesus. Since Judas Iscariot was an invented character to further lay blame upon the Jewish people, there could not have been a replacement for him. He never existed! On the other hand, Jesus was crucified. Jesus was the person being replaced. With the death of Jesus, John the Baptist (Sadduc) became the leader of the movement with James the Just as his second-in-command.
38. Jesus was crucified between two bandits. The bandit was Josephus' term for members of the Fourth Philosophy. This term bandit did not refer to thieves or highwaymen but rather to terrorists (freedom fighters) or those seeking political turmoil. (9) That Jesus was crucified between these two should not surprise. Jesus was their leader.
John Crossan admits that Jesus was an apocalypticist, but that did not mean that Jesus advocated violence. He concludes that if Jesus were a military threat then Pilate would have captured a large number of Jesus' disciples with him and crucified them as well. (10) There are two fundamental errors in Crossan's reasoning. First, the Jesus (Judas the Galilean) movement was not violent as compared to the later Fourth Philosophy as dominated by the Zealots and Sicarii. The early version of the Fourth Philosophy, as preached by Jesus (Judas), would rid Israel of Roman occupation by the power of God, not by armed rebellion or by assassinations. This same philosophy was still in place by the 40's when Theudas called upon God to part the river Jordan. (Ant. 20.97) Second, Crossan does not recognize that Jesus was placed between two bandits. Obviously, Pilate had captured some of Jesus' disciples as they hung to his left and to his right. By placing Jesus in the middle and by attaching the charge against him, King of the Jews, Pilate attacked the Fourth Philosophy head on.
The treatment of the bandits in the Gospels is not consistent. John 19:18 simply stated that Jesus was crucified with "two others - one on each side and Jesus in the middle." John had nothing more to say about these two. Mark and Matthew told a different tale. They wrote that "those crucified with him [the bandits] also heaped insults on him." (Mark 15:32) In this, Mark and Matthew placed the bandits along with the High Priest, aligned against Jesus. But no one does the story better than Luke.
One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him. "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!"
But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."
Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." (Luke 23:39-43) (Emphasis mine)
Three major discrepancies can be noted from the above passage. First, Luke called the two men criminals and not bandits. This changed the two into common criminals and not part of a religious or political movement, that being the Fourth Philosophy. Second, one of the criminals hurled insults but the other now sided with Jesus, even saying that Jesus had done nothing wrong, thus exonerating Jesus. Third, this second criminal was pardoned by Jesus, a Pauline move. Jesus always preached a lifelong commitment to God. All of a sudden, he now accepted deathbed conversions. Again, this was added to make Jesus accept the Pauline notion of faith; saved by faith, not by works.
39. The movements continued after the deaths of Judas the Galilean and Jesus. It is interesting that Acts downplayed the movement of Judas the Galilean, saying that Judas was killed "and all his followers were scattered." (Acts 5:37) In reality, the Fourth Philosophy of Judas did not end with Judas' death but grew to a great degree according to Josephus. (Ant. 18.1-10) So the speech by Gamaliel in Acts was an attempt by Luke to alter history. The author of Acts did not want people to associate the rebellious Jews with the Gentile Christian movement of the second century. It is true, however, that when the story of Acts was written (second century), the followers of Judas the Galilean had been smashed and scattered.
40. The movements of Judas and Jesus expanded throughout the Roman Empire. The Fourth Philosophy of Judas was responsible for the war against Rome. Although centered in Jerusalem and Galilee, Judas' followers were numbered throughout the Empire and suffered greatly during the Jewish war. We know that Paul's Gentile churches were scattered amongst the great cities, but the Jewish Christian movement must have been much greater. While Paul was the lone apostle to the Gentiles, the influence of Cephas and others must have reached a great multitude. In fact, the early Church would have placed most of its resources in the "conversion" of the Jewish community to the Way of Righteousness.
Note also that Suetonius tied the rebellious, trouble-making Jews to Chrestus or Christ. (Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars, Claudius 25) This passage definitively connected the Fourth Philosophy to Christ. While this particular disturbance was at Rome, it seems most probable that all large Jewish congregations of the Diaspora would have contained an element sympathetic to the nationalism of Judas the Galilean (Jesus). Near the end of the Jewish War, Josephus wrote that some Sicarii had escaped to Alexandria after the destruction of Masada (73 CE). The Sicarii attempted to gain support from the Alexandrian Jews to rebel against the Romans. This attempt would only have been made if there were some sympathy for their movement. However, they were rebuffed by the majority of Jews, caught, tortured and killed by the authorities. (War 7.407-419)
CONCLUSION
Many people have concluded that a Jesus never existed because little evidence supports this Messiah figure in the timeframe generally accepted by scholars, around 30-33 CE. Too many problems exist with this late date, and no corroboration comes from the only Jewish historian of the time, Josephus. Could Josephus have missed the greatest story ever told? Considering that Josephus was born in the 30's, it is quite inconceivable that he could have missed out on Jesus.
Josephus did chronicle another Messiah figure, that being Judas the Galilean. This Judas was a great teacher who despised the ruling class and its association with Rome. This rebel led a tax revolt, cleansed the Temple, was pardoned in a Barabbas-style prisoner release, was claimed Messiah and eventually died fighting the injustice of Rome. This death was not recorded by Josephus. This is amazing considering Judas the Galilean was the driving force in the struggle against Rome. Josephus wrote about the deaths of Judas' sons, Simon and James by crucifixion and Menahem by stoning, and a grandson, Eleazar, who committed suicide at Masada. Each time, Josephus emphasized the relationship between these individuals and Judas the Galilean. So why did Josephus omit Judas' death? The answer is obvious: he did not omit the death of Judas. The story of Judas' death was erased by later Christians who inserted the spurious passage about Jesus. (Ant. 18.63-64) This passage has long been discounted by most scholars, but these same scholars have not recognized what the passage replaced. It was not just an insertion into the text but rather a replacement passage. Judas the Galilean suffered crucifixion under Pilate, not a mythical Jesus of Nazareth.
The above similarities between Judas and Jesus should convince the reader that a bait and switch game has occurred. The history of Judas the Galilean was transformed into the history of Jesus of Nazareth. Could there have been two separate individuals who experienced such similar events? The odds would be incalculable. So we are left with the only logical conclusion: Jesus of Nazareth was invented to distance the rebel, Judas the Galilean, from the Jewish religion. The catalyst for this ingenious attempt of history building was the apostle Paul, the man known as the Liar, the Enemy and the Traitor. His theology survived through Jesus of Nazareth, not that of Judas the Galilean. The greatest Jewish teacher of first-century Israel has long been forgotten. His glory was usurped by a literary character, Jesus of Nazareth.
1. Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Vol. 1, Chapter 16, pp. 530-531.
2. Slavonic Josephus, After War 1.400.
3. Ibid., After War 2.110
4. Ibid., After War 2.110
5. Pseudoclementine Recognitions 1.53-54.
6. John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed, Excavating Jesus, p. 18.
7. Slavonic Josephus, After War 1.650.
8. Hyam Maccoby, Revolution in Judaea, p. 19 and p. 222 (note 3).
9. G. A. Williamson and E. Mary Smallwood, The Jewish War, Appendix A, p. 461.
10. John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed, Excavating Jesus, p. 174.