Tuesday, December 6, 2016

Immaculate Mary Ark of the Covenant

Image result for ark covenant

by
Damien F. Mackey
  
 
“In our modern Bibles, there is a chapter division between the appearance of the Ark of the Covenant and the description of the “woman clothed with the sun.” But chapter divisions were added in the Middle Ages to make the books of the Bible easier to refer to. John did not make any divisions: he wrote straight through from Revelation 11:19 to Revelation 12:1 without a break”.
  
 


The human activity discussed in Part Three (i), of ‘cleaving across the real structure’ of things, for some legitimate utilitarian purpose, rather than patiently studying ‘the thing as it is in itself’ (Immanuel Kant’s das Ding an sich), is apparent from the artificial re-arranging of the Book of Genesis into 50 chapters each consisting of multiple verses - whereas the book in-itself naturally falls into those eleven toledot (‘family history) divisions as discussed in my:


Structure of the Book of Genesis


Today we would be hard put to live without those familiar chapters and verses, artificial though they be, which can serve as a handy mnemonic device and points of reference. However they, because they are artificial, can also have the unfortunate effect of hindering one from properly grasping the original intention and meaning of the author(s) of the text.
This is well exemplified when we turn from the first book of the Bible, Genesis, to the last, Revelation. Dr. Scott Hahn, writing of what he calls “The Ark of the New Covenant”, explains how St. John the Evangelist’s intended meaning gets completely lost due to the thematic discontinuity caused by the artificial division of Revelation’s Chapters 11-12 (https://stpaulcenter.com/studies/lesson/lesson-three-the-ark-of-the-new-covenant):


A. The Ark Reappears in Heaven



Luke uses parallel language and images to make his point. But John, the author of Revelation, tells us directly that he saw the Ark of the Covenant - the holy object that had been lost since Jeremiah’s time - in a vision.
“Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm. A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth” (see Revelation 11:19 and Revelation 12:1-2).
This is a strange string of images, almost overwhelming - like much of the book of Revelation. But certainly the statement that the Ark of the Covenant was visible must have caught the attention of the first people who heard the vision.
If the Ark had been seen, then the time Jeremiah spoke of must have come: the time when “God gathers his people together again and shows them mercy,” the time when “the glory of the Lord will be seen in the cloud, just as it appeared in the time of Moses” (see 2 Maccabees 7-8)
And indeed the sights and sounds are the same as in the time of Moses - storm and earthquake:
“There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm” (see Revelation 11:19).
“On the morning of the third day there were peals of thunder and lightning, and a heavy cloud over the mountain, and a very loud trumpet blast, so that all the people in the camp trembled . . . Mount Sinai was all wrapped in smoke, for the LORD came down upon it in fire. The smoke rose from it as though from a furnace, and the whole mountain trembled violently” (see Exodus 19:16, 18)
Naturally, we want to hear more about the rediscovered Ark of the Covenant. And John goes on to describe what he sees: “a woman clothed with the sun” (see Revelation 12:1).
In our modern Bibles, there is a chapter division between the appearance of the Ark of the Covenant and the description of the “woman clothed with the sun.” But chapter divisions were added in the Middle Ages to make the books of the Bible easier to refer to. John did not make any divisions: he wrote straight through from Revelation 11:19 to Revelation 12:1 without a break.
In the dream-like but deeply significant logic of John’s vision, the Ark of the Covenant is “a woman clothed with the sun.”

 

B. The Woman Clothed With the Sun



And who is this woman?
“She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth ” (see Revelation 12:2).
“She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod. Her child was caught up to God and his throne” (see Revelation 12:5).
The one destined to rule the nations with an iron rod (a shepherd’s rod) is the Lord’s Anointed, the Messiah or Christ (see Psalm 2). The “woman clothed with the sun,” whom John sees when he looks at the Ark of the Covenant, is the Mother of the Christ.

 

C. What Makes Mary the Ark of the New Covenant?

 
The Ark of the Covenant was the sign of God’s real presence among His people. In Jesus Christ, born of Mary, God was really present among his people in an even more direct way.
The Ark held the Word of God written in stone. Mary bore the Word of God in flesh.
The Ark held the bread from heaven, a foreshadowing of the Eucharist (see 1 Corinthians 10:1-4). Mary bore the Bread of Life, Jesus Christ (see John 6:48-50).
The Ark contained the rod of Aaron, symbol of his priesthood. Mary bore Jesus Christ, our High Priest (see Hebrews 3:1).
If the Ark of the Covenant was holy, then by the same standards Mary is even holier. As Mother of God, she is the Ark of the New Covenant, bearing Jesus Christ, the Word of God, the Bread of Life, our great High Priest. That is not a re-interpretation of the Gospel: it is a truth made clear by the New Testament writers themselves.
[End of quote]


For more on this fascinating subject, see the following article:
'The Marian Dimension'. Part Three: Mary as New Ark of Covenant

Saturday, December 3, 2016

The Face of Mercy

The Face of Mercy 

Description

Pope Francis has inspired millions by urging the world to embrace Mercy. The essence of this call is revealed in The Face of Mercy, an extraordinary new documentary film narrated by Jim Caviezel.

Watch its story unfold, from St. Faustina's powerful visions of a merciful God, to her countryman Pope John Paul II who propelled the message of Divine Mercy onto the world stage. Weaving together theology and history with modern testimonials and visual effects, this stirring film creates a remarkable tapestry of what constitutes the face of mercy in our modern world.

Meet the woman who found freedom in forgiveness after seeing her family wiped out by genocide; the former-NFL linebacker who walked away from football to share Christ's mercy with the homeless; the baseball player who traded MLB ambitions for the monastery; and the young widow who chose mercy towards her husband's killer.

These moving testimonies offer compelling proof that Divine Mercy is not some abstract theology – it is alive, it is present, and it will transform the world.

Some of the many well-known people featured in this film include Scott Hahn, Fr. Michael Gaitley, Andrezej Duda (President of Poland), George Weigel, Eric Mahl, Immaculee Ilibigaza, Cardinal Marc Ouellet, Fr. Seraphim Michalenko (Vice Postulator for St. Faustina), Vinny Flynn, Fr. Donald Calloway, and others.

....

Taken from: http://www.ignatius.com/Products/FMER-M/the-face-of-mercy.aspx

Sunday, November 20, 2016

Pope: Full text of homily for Solemnity of Christ the King


The statue of Christ atop the facade of St Peter's Basilica. On Sunday, Pope Francis celebrated the Sacred Liturgy for the Solemnity of Jesus Christ, King of the Universe, in the Piazza in front of the Basilica. - AP


20/11/2016 10:30

Homily of His Holiness Pope Francis
Solemnity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of the Universe
20 November 2016

The Solemnity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of the Universe, is the crown of the liturgical year and this Holy Year of Mercy.  The Gospel in fact presents the kingship of Jesus as the culmination of his saving work, and it does so in a surprising way.  “The Christ of God, the Chosen One, the King” (Lk 23:35,37) appears without power or glory: he is on the cross, where he seems more to be conquered than conqueror.  His kingship is paradoxical: his throne is the cross; his crown is made of thorns; he has no sceptre, but a reed is put into his hand; he does not have luxurious clothing, but is stripped of his tunic; he wears no shiny rings on his fingers, but his hands are pierced with nails; he has no treasure, but is sold for thirty pieces of silver.
Jesus’ reign is truly not of this world (cf. Jn 18:36); but for this reason, Saint Paul tells us in the Second Reading, we find redemption and forgiveness (cf. Col 1:13-14).  For the grandeur of his kingdom is not power as defined by this world, but the love of God, a love capable of encountering and healing all things.  Christ lowered himself to us out of this love, he lived our human misery, he suffered the lowest point of our human condition: injustice, betrayal, abandonment; he experienced death, the tomb, hell.  And so our King went to the ends of the universe in order to embrace and save every living being.  He did not condemn us, nor did he conquer us, and he never disregarded our freedom, but he paved the way with a humble love that forgives all things, hopes all things, sustains all things (cf. 1 Cor 13:7).  This love alone overcame and continues to overcome our worst enemies: sin, death, fear.
Dear brothers and sisters, today we proclaim this singular victory, by which Jesus became the King of every age, the Lord of history: with the sole power of love, which is the nature of God, his very life, and which has no end (cf. 1 Cor 13:8).  We joyfully share the splendour of having Jesus as our King: his rule of love transforms sin into grace, death into resurrection, fear into trust.
It would mean very little, however, if we believed Jesus was King of the universe, but did not make him Lord of our lives: all this is empty if we do not personally accept Jesus and if we do not also accept his way of being King.  The people presented to us in today’s Gospel, however, help us.  In addition to Jesus, three figures appear: the people who are looking on, those near the cross, and the criminal crucified next to Jesus.
First, the people: the Gospel says that “the people stood by, watching” (Lk 23:35): no one says a word, no one draws any closer.  The people keep their distance, just to see what is happening.  They are the same people who were pressing in on Jesus when they needed something, and who now keep their distance.  Given the circumstances of our lives and our unfulfilled expectations, we too can be tempted to keep our distance from Jesus’ kingship, to not accept completely the scandal of his humble love, which unsettles and disturbs us.  We prefer to remain at the window, to stand apart, rather than draw near and be with him.  A people who are holy, however, who have Jesus as their King, are called to follow his way of tangible love; they are called to ask themselves, each one each day: “What does love ask of me, where is it urging me to go?  What answer am I giving Jesus with my life?”
There is a second group, which includes various individuals: the leaders of the people, the soldiers and a criminal.  They all mock Jesus.  They provoke him in the same way: “Save yourself!” (Lk 23:35,37,39).  This temptation is worse than that of the people.  They tempt Jesus, just as the devil did at the beginning of the Gospel (cf. Lk 4:1-13), to give up reigning as God wills, and instead to reign according to the world’s ways: to come down from the cross and destroy his enemies!  If he is God, let him show his power and superiority!  This temptation is a direct attack on love: “save yourself” (vv. 37,39); not others, but yourself.  Claim triumph for yourself with your power, with your glory, with your victory.  It is the most terrible temptation, the first and the last of the Gospel.  When confronted with this attack on his very way of being, Jesus does not speak, he does not react.  He does not defend himself, he does not try to convince them, he does not mount a defence of his kingship.  He continues rather to love; he forgives, he lives this moment of trial according to the Father’s will, certain that love will bear fruit.
In order to receive the kingship of Jesus, we are called to struggle against this temptation, called to fix our gaze on the Crucified One, to become ever more faithful to him.  How many times, even among ourselves, do we seek out the comforts and certainties offered by the world.  How many times are we tempted to come down from the Cross.  The lure of power and success seem an easy, quick way to spread the Gospel; we soon forget how the Kingdom of God works.  This Year of Mercy invites us to rediscover the core, to return to what is essential.  This time of mercy calls us to look to the true face of our King, the one that shines out at Easter, and to rediscover the youthful, beautiful face of the Church, the face that is radiant when it is welcoming, free, faithful, poor in means but rich in love, on mission.  Mercy, which takes us to the heart of the Gospel, urges us to give up habits and practices which may be obstacles to serving the Kingdom of God; mercy urges us to orient ourselves only in the perennial and humble kingship of Jesus, not in submission to the precarious regalities and changing powers of every age.
In the Gospel another person appears, closer to Jesus, the thief who begs him: “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom” (v. 42).  This person, simply looking at Jesus, believed in his kingdom.  He was not closed in on himself, but rather – with his errors, his sins and his troubles – he turned to Jesus.  He asked to be remembered, and he experienced God’s mercy: “Today you will be with me in paradise” (v. 43).  As soon as we give God the chance, he remembers us.  He is ready to completely and forever cancel our sin, because his memory – unlike our own – does not record evil that has been done or keep score of injustices experienced.  God has no memory of sin, but only of us, of each of us, we who are his beloved children.  And he believes that it is always possible to start anew, to raise ourselves up.
Let us also ask for the gift of this open and living memory.  Let us ask for the grace of never closing the doors of reconciliation and pardon, but rather of knowing how to go beyond evil and differences, opening every possible pathway of hope.  As God believes in us, infinitely beyond any merits we have, so too we are called to instil hope and provide opportunities to others.  Because even if the Holy Door closes, the true door of mercy which is the heart of Christ always remains open wide for us.  From the lacerated side of the Risen One until the very end of time flow mercy, consolation and hope.
So many pilgrims have crossed the threshold of the Holy Doors, and far away from the clamour of the daily news they have tasted the great goodness of the Lord.  We give thanks for this, as we recall how we have received mercy in order to be merciful, in order that we too may become instruments of mercy.  Let us go forward on this road together.  May our Blessed Lady accompany us, she who was also close to the Cross, she who gave birth to us there as the tender Mother of the Church, who desires to gather all under her mantle.  Beneath the Cross, she saw the good thief receive pardon, and she took Jesus’ disciple as her son.  She is Mother of Mercy, to whom we entrust ourselves: every situation we are in, every prayer we make, when lifted up to his merciful eyes, will find an answer.

....
Taken from: http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2016/11/20/pope_full_text_of_homily_for_solemnity_of_christ_the_king/1273568

Saturday, November 19, 2016

Simon Bar Kochba Dated Too Late

Coin of Bar Kochba, showing the Temple with a star on the roof and the Ark of the Covenant. British Museum, London (Britain). Photo Jona Lendering.      
  

by

 Damien F. Mackey

 
 

It is apparent from Simon Bar Kochba’s coins that

the Temple of Yahweh was still standing in his day.

 

 
 

According to what I wrote in my hypothetical account of the life of Barabbas:

 

I Am Barabbas

 


 

My connection between Simon Barabbas and Simon Bar Giora is based on this, albeit vague, tradition: “Some sources also say that [Barabbas] was later killed while taking part in another revolt against the Romans” (http://www.gospel-mysteries.net/barabbas.html), and, conversely, that Simon Bar Giora had previous “form” as a revolutionary bandit. “[Simon Bar Giora was] already apparently known as a partisan leader” (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0003_0_02036.html): 

“Bar Giora (also Bar Poras), meaning “Son of the Proselyte”, can be taken as a descriptive, rather than a proper, name. The Jews were fond of using the phrase “Son of … (Man, the Father, Deception, the Lie, Iniquity, the Star, etc., etc.)”.”

 

Now here comes the really controversial bit.

 

I have for quite some time considered that the First Jewish Revolt in which Simon Bar Giora figures prominently was the very same event as the so-called Second Jewish Revolt led by the far more famous Simon Bar Kochba, or Simon “Son of the Star”, ostensibly 70 years later (during the 130’s AD), at the time of the emperor Hadrian.

Bar Kochba is a messianic figure.

I know that history can repeat itself, and that one might argue, for instance, that there were many common factors in the First and Second World Wars of the C20th. 

In previous articles I had noted that the First and Second Jewish Revolts were similarly, e.g.: 

- of about 3 years’ duration;

 

- had a prominent military leader named Simon Bar ….;

 

- and had a religious leader named Eleazer.

 

But the most compelling argument in favour of a necessary (as I think) synchronisation of the activities of Simon Bar Giora and Simon Bar Kochba is that the destruction in Israel was so complete in the first case, at the hands of Vespasian and Titus, with the entire land devastated, the great City (Jerusalem) and its Temple completely burned to the ground, and the people slaughtered wholesale, or sent into slavery, that I do not consider it reasonable to suggest that, some 60-70 years later (and again readers might cite the recovery of nations much sooner after the First World War going in to the Second – but these nations, e.g. Germany, had not been obliterated internally), Simon Bar Kochba was able to command armies of 400,000 men in Israel against a Hadrian-led Rome and to have several of the most famous of all the Roman legions on the verge of annihilation - only afterwards to see some 580,000 Jewish men die, almost 1000 fortified villages in Israel completely devastated, once again, and the people, once again, slaughtered or taken into captivity en masse.

 

The “Son of the Star” was now being called, contemptuously, Bar Kozeba, “Son of Deception”, or “Son of the Lie”.

 

Now here is the clincher:

 

The nail in the coffin of the textbook history for these times is that Simon Bar Kochba issued coins depicting “The Redemption of Israel” - oh, yes, and so did Simon Bar Giora do the exact same thing. And, guess what was depicted on Bar Kochba’s coins?: THE TEMPLE OF JERUSALEM, which I believe he was so desperately defending, with the Ark of the Covenant inside it, and a star, his own star, depicted over the Temple. 

 

 

Part Two: Such Meagre Sources

 

 

 

Sources for the so-called Second Jewish Revolt against Rome are pitifully scarce.

When one reads Dio’s Roman History VIII, they [sic] find the largest written account of the revolt, all of two small pages”.

 

 

 

The chief source for Bar Kochba’s rebellion against Rome is Dio Cassius’s Historia Romana.

According to the conventional view, Dio himself was born some decades after the occurrence of this war of 132-135 AD, either in 155 AD or 163/164 AD.

Scholars have felt emboldened, nonetheless, to draw some sweeping conclusions from the pitiful amount of information that Dio Cassius has left for us, as is apparent from this article, “The 2nd Jewish Revolt: Cassius Dio Revisited”: http://www.wou.edu/history/files/2015/08/JP-Johnson.pdf

 

When one reads Dio’s Roman History VIII, they [sic] find the largest written account of the revolt, all of two small pages. It is with Dio’s short account of the 2nd Judean revolt, which we must work with. For by looking closely at Dio’s short account of the war, we are able in conjunction with other evidence to find exactly what occurred during the 2nd Judean Revolt.

[End of quote]

 

Brave words indeed!

Especially in light of what we learn further on in this article:

 

Bar Kochba’s kingdom lasted for three and a half years or so we are to understand in the Talmud. If that is true then how did Bar Kochba, raise an army, gather funds, build over fifty fortresses, and carve out a kingdom from the Roman military machine in only two [sic?] and a half years?

[End of quote]

 

Moreover, according to the Jewish Virtual Library, “sources” for the Second War are “few” and “largely legendary”: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Kokhba.html

 

There are few sources about Bar-Kokhba. Those that exist in Talmud, Midrash and Church Father [Eusebius] are largely legendary. Even his name is uncertain. His first name, Shimon, was found written on coins from the time of the revolt. His last name, however, is written with many variations, such as Ben Koziva or Bar Kozevah, in different documents. ….

 

Bar-Kokhba was an imperious dictator who was in charge of both the army and the economy during the Jewish revolt against Rome. He held the title of Nasi, which could be a Messianic allusion or could simply refer to the one in charge of army, administration and economy. Bar-Kokhba had unlimited authority over his army and was concerned with even the most minor details. He was not afraid to threaten senior officers of his army with punishment. The 400,000 soldiers in his army were said to have been initiated either by having a finger cut off or by being forced to uproot a cedar tree. Bar-Kokhba relied on his own powers and, according to aggada, when he went to battle he asked God to "neither assist nor discourage us."

[End of quote]

 

Justin Martyr is considered to be an important Christian source for the Jewish war, given what is thought to be his close proximity to that event. However, as we read in the article “St. Justin Martyr”, at: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08580c.htmThe date of his birth is uncertain, but would seem to fall in the first years of the second century”.

In his First Apology, Justin Martyr asserts that Bar Kochba commanded that only Christians should suffer persecution unless they would deny Jesus Christ and utter blasphemy (1 Apol. 31.6): “For in the Jewish war which now occurred, Bar Kokhba, the leader of the revolt of the Jews, ordered that Christians alone should be led to terrible punishments unless they would deny Jesus, the Christ, and blaspheme.”

 

The famous Tenth Roman Legion, X Fretensis, played a key part in the First Jewish Revolt, conquering Jerusalem and then the last stronghold of Masada:


 

X Fretensis was centrally involved in the First Jewish-Roman War (66–73), under the supreme command of Vespasian.

In 66, the X Fretensis and V Macedonica … were needed in Judaea to suppress a revolt.

….

By 70, the rebellion in all of Judaea had been crushed, except for Jerusalem and a few fortresses, including Masada. In that year X Fretensis, in conjunction with V Macedonica, XII Fulminata, and XV Apollinaris, began the siege of Jerusalem, stronghold of the rebellion. The Xth camped on the Mount of Olives. During the siege, Legio X gained fame in the effective use of their various war machines. It was noted that they were able to hurl stones that weighted a talent (about 25 kg) a distance of two furlongs (400 m) or further. The projectiles of their ballistae caused heavy damage to the ramparts. According to Josephus (vol. III of his history of Judaean war) Larcius Lepidus was the commanding officer of the X Legion. The siege of Jerusalem lasted five months and the besieged population experienced all the terrible rigors of starvation. Finally, the combined assaults of the legions succeeded in taking the city, which was then subjected to destruction.

During the spring of 71 … X Fretensis took Herodium, and then crossed the Jordan to capture the fortress of Machaerus on the shore of the Dead Sea … and moved against the last Jewish stronghold, Masada, in the autumn of 72. …[,]

 

but then again, ostensibly, in the Second Jewish Revolt, conquering Jerusalem and then the last stronghold of Betar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legio_X_Fretensis

 

After participating in Trajan's Parthian campaign, [the Tenth Legion] Fretensis was caught up in the Bar Kokhba's revolt (132-135).

A possible cause for the revolt was the decision of Emperor Hadrian to build a Pagan temple to Jupiter in Jerusalem. Simon Bar Kokhba started the revolt and inflicted massive casualties on the Romans. The war ended when the Roman army — including Fretensis and Danubian troops under the command of Sextus Julius Severus — reconquered the entire territory and successfully besieged the last Jewish stronghold, the fortress of Betar.

 

 

Part Three:

“Was it a Zombie apocalypse?”

 

 

“This Bar Kokhba revolt sounds actually made up, especially because of the way historical blanks were filled in”.

 

 

 

Apparently I am not the only one who thinks that the so-called Second Jewish Revolt against Rome could not have happened historically in the second century AD, though I would strongly disagree with the view (below) of the Biblicism Institute that the whole thing was a complete and deliberate fabrication. I also strongly reject the Biblicism Institute’s fierce, anti-Jewish tone: https://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/jews-and-history-lies-galore/

 

Jews and History: Lies Galore


C H U R C H   R E F O R M    S E R I E S

By Biblicism Institute

 

“You are of your father the devil…Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” John 8: 44

 

There are two historical events where Jews went all out with their lies and fabrications: the Bar Kokhba revolt and the Holocaust.

The Bar Kokhba revolt was a Hebrew rebellion against the Romans that supposedly took place between 131 and 135 AD in Judea and spearheaded by someone called Simeon Bar Kosevah. However, it is a spurious historical event that has been dredged up – and possibly invented out of whole cloth – in order to cast doubt on the annihilation of the Hebrew people in 70 AD.

As for the so-called World War 2 “Holocaust“, there’s not one person on earth that has not been exposed to its well-oiled propaganda machine.

Both of these events point to dubious crimes of apocalyptic proportions, while they immensely and unsurprisingly benefit modern-day Israel which was founded in 1948 on the stolen land of Palestine.

 

Historian Flavius Josephus is the foremost authority on the events that led to the destruction of the Hebrew people, Jerusalem, and the Hebrew Temple in 70 AD.

He himself was a Hebrew who converted to Christianity upon witnessing firsthand the materialization of Jesus’s prophecies in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem and the annihilation of the Judahite Hebrews who rejected the Messiah.

 

Mackey’s comment: There is so much speculation about Flavius Josephus, including the view held by not a few that he, born Joseph bar Matthias, was the same as the New Testament’s Joseph of Arimathea (Joseph ab Arimathia).

The article continues:

 

However, a campaign has been ongoing to discredit the fact that he became a Christian in order to somehow prove that not all non-Christian Hebrews were killed in 70 AD. Still, his writings tell his story:

 

“At about this time lived Jesus, a wise man. . . He was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth with pleasure. He won over many Judahites and many of the Greeks. . . When Pilate, upon an indictment brought by the principal men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him from the very first did not cease to be attached to him. And the tribe of the Christians, so-called after him, has to this day still not disappeared…. He was the Messiah.”

 

….

 

The Revolt That Wasn’t

 

In biblical times, Judahite Hebrews living abroad made the trip every year to Jerusalem for the Feast of Unleavened Bread and the Feast of Weeks, which took place right after Passover.

“Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Judahites from every nation under heaven.” Acts 2: 5

However, in AD 70, as they all gathered in Jerusalem God had a surprise for them. They were all about to be slaughtered by the Roman Army. An event that is known as the Apocalypse and the End of the Age of the Hebrews and of the Old Covenant. Hence, the entire Hebrew race was wiped out, except for those who accepted Christ and fled beforehand, like Josephus.

So, if all Hebrews were killed, how was it possible that a Hebrew rebellion took place 60 years after their annihilation?

Was it a Zombie apocalypse?

 

It either happened with converted Jews (different from Judahite Hebrews) or it didn’t happen at all.

 

1) If that revolt actually occurred,

 

a) it would have most likely involved converted Jews from different places that tried to establish themselves in Palestine;

b) it would have been sparked by the Samaritans who were themselves converted Jews and lived in Samaria, next to Judea – they were no strangers to insurrections as they had a series of them during the 5th and 6th centuries;

c) its recorded “occurrence” might in actuality be that of the Apocalypse of AD 70, spun to discredit the fact that all Hebrews were killed then.

 

2) It most likely didn’t happen at all.

Even recorded history cannot firmly place the origin of the author of the rebellion. Here’s Wikipedia:

 

“Documents discovered in the 20th century in the Cave of Letters give his original name, with variations: Simeon bar Kosevah (Hebrew: שמעון בר כוסבה‎), Bar Koseva (בר כוסבא) or Ben Koseva (בן כוסבא‎) This may indicate his father or his place of origin was named Kosevah… Rabbi Akiva indulged the possibility that Simon could be the Jewish messiah, and gave him the surname ‘Bar Kokhba’ meaning ‘Son of the Star’ in Aramaic. The name Bar Kokhba does not appear in the Talmud but in ecclesiastical sources. Rabbinical writers subsequent to Rabbi Akiva did not share Rabbi Akiva’s estimation of ben Kosiva. Akiva’s disciple, Yose ben Halaphta, in the Seder ‘Olam (chapter 30) called him ‘bar Koziba’ (Hebrew: בר כוזיבא‎), meaning, ‘son of the lie’.”

 

Not even converted Jews can agree on the man’s existence or who he was or where he came from. Further, this so-called Bar Kokhba revolt is quite doubtful, given that there’s only one fragmented historical account of it. Here’s how Wikipedia views it:

 

“…based on the single source of the Historia Augusta, regarded as ‘unreliable and problematic’,… The revolt is shrouded in mystery, and only one brief historical account of the rebellion survives… According to Cassius Dio, who likely exaggerated his numbers, 580,000 Jews were killed in the overall operations, and 50 fortified towns and 985 villages were razed to the ground, with many more Jews dying of famine and disease… the writings of the Roman historian concerning the Bar Kokhba revolt survived only as fragments.”

 

here cannot exist an accurate historical account of an event with just ONE single source and only fragments surviving.

The Apocalypse of AD 70 was not just recorded by Flavius Josephus but by others as well, including Tacitus. The Gospel accounts were written by four of the Apostles, not one.

This Bar Kokhba revolt sounds actually made up, especially because of the way historical blanks were filled in.

There were NOT 580,000 Judahite Hebrews, nor 50 towns and 985 villages (geez!) in Judea at that time, particularly when 60 years earlier 1.2 million Hebrews were slaughtered, and Jerusalem and the countryside were razed to the ground by the Roman Army.

Oh, the lies!

Note how documents about the author of the revolt were “discovered” in the occupied West Bank in the 20th century (1960-1961) in the Cave of Letters. Said “discovery” was quite fortuitous and convenient, especially as it occurred right in the midst of the establishment of a Jewish state on the stolen land of Palestine which they fraudulently claimed as their Abrahamic inheritance, when converted Jews of today are NOT even remotely bloodline descendants of Abraham.

These “documents” were to “prove” that the Hebrews were not wiped out in 70 AD, and that Jesus was a liar when He said:

 

“Behold, your house is being left to you desolate!” Matthew 23:38

 

….

The Bar Kokhba revolt is therefore quite suspicious. And as far as we’re concerned it never actually happened, especially as it is interpreted to have been a Hebrew revolt.