Flavius Josephus as a created interpolation on Joseph Scaliger

Flavius Josephus (Josephus hereinafter) is to evangelical scholars what Ronald Reagan is to conservatives - a Demi-God. According to the mainstream scholarship, Josephus was the only source, outside the New Testament, who confirmed the historicity of the existence of Jesus (see Testimonium Flavianum).  However, a few scholars, this writer included, have questioned Josephus' historical account, contending that Josephus and his historical account were Christian fabrications. In other words, the so-called "Testimonium Flavium" by Josephus was certainly the victim of Christian editing or interpolation. Let's deal with it!

Firstly, Josephus could not have written any historical account around first Century AD; the era it was claimed he had lived, for history as a subject did not exist at that time. History as a subject was formulated around 16th Century AD by Joseph Scaliger and other Jesuit scholars. And it's not implausible that Flavius Josephus himself was a Christian interpolation on the real or historical Joseph Scaliger, who lived around 16th Century AD. 

I want my readers to be aware of the following:

1.  Christian/Jesuit historians and translators often "assign" different dates and locations to different accounts of the same historical events, creating multiple "phantom copies" of these events. In other words, Flavius Josephus was a created "phantom copy" of Joseph Scaliger, and their works are different accounts of the same historical events - one is real, but the other is fake.

2. The B.C/A.D conventional or ecclesiastical chronology was largely manufactured by Joseph Justus Scaliger, and his Jesuit comrade, Dionysius Petavius, and it represents a vast array of dates produced without any justification whatsoever, containing the repeating sequences of dates with shifts equal to multiples of the major cabalistic numbers 333 and 360.

3. No single document in existence can be reliably dated earlier than the 11th Century AD.

4. Histories of "Ancient Rome," "Greece" and dynastic Egypt were crafted during the Renaissance by humanists and clergy - mostly on the basis of documents of their own making.

5. Histories of the so-called Hebrews and Sumerians are nothing but phantom copies of the historical template of dynastic Egypt - this is why Hebrew and Sumerian archeological records are non-existed!

 

BELIEF IS ANTITHETICAL TO NATURE

The nature of truth is the nature of what one can observe and verify; everything else is a belief in what others claim they bear witness to or observe.

The truth is that, in nature, humans can only reproduce through sex, but a belief system says otherwise - immaculate conception.

In nature, animals don't speak to humans, but a belief system says otherwise - a talking snake.

In nature, men and women come out of the female reproductive organ, but a belief system says otherwise - women came from man's rib.

In nature, nothing is born in sin, but a belief system says otherwise - human is born in sin.

In nature, death is the end of life, but a belief system says otherwise - 72 virgins await men after death.

Clearly, belief is in conflict with nature. The struggle between the observable truth and the unobservable belief is the source of almost all conflicts in the world.

The wise draw conclusions from what they observe in nature, but the followers believe the narratives of the wise. Whenever you're in doubt, observe nature, and there lies your answer. 

Everything you need to know in order to survive is right in front of you, but you're too busy believing the narratives and abstractions of other men.

THE METAPHYSICS OF ORI

Ori (I.e. the immaterial head) is the initial condition that determines the outcome of human events.  Human events/activities are very complicated and random for we exist in a chaos dynamic world. But under the concept of Ori, the outcome of these complicated human activities are totally deterministic and predictable. It is the concept of Ori that makes IFA divination possible; without Ori, IFA would not be able to track randomness and make accurate predictions about the outcome of human activities.

Many religious scholars and moral philosophers argue against the underlying concept of Ori for being too deterministic and for denying "free will." Contrary  to this ignorant argument, Ori does not deny free will, and it is not deterministic in the slightest. It is the outcome of human events that is deterministic for every event starts with an initial condition. And since Ori is the initial condition, then Ori is what determines the outcome of human activities. 

While the outcome of any human event  is totally deterministic; free will, being the controller of human activities, makes every outcome appears random and uncertain. And it's this free will-induced uncertainty (i.e. uncertainty principle) that made classical physicists (Einstein et al) conclude, erroneously, that a deterministic system could not be uncertain (i.e. Einstein determinism and Heisenberg uncertainty). But the concept of Ori teaches us that free will-induced uncertainty in human activities can be totally reconciled with the ever present determinism in a chaos dynamic world like ours. In other words, free will-induced uncertainty does not preclude determinism - it is a necessary nuisance in a deterministic world. Thanks to Quatum physics, the physics world is slowly catching on to the metaphysics of Ori and the fundamental teachings of IFA.

In conclusion, while the initial condition or Ori is fixed, IFA teaches that with iwa pele (i.e. good character), ise (i.e. hard work), sacrifice, and good information, free will-induced randomness and uncertainty can be drastically reduced in human activities.

IS TRADITIONAL HISTORICAL CHRONOLOGY RELIABLE?

It's interesting how we would sit in the history class, unperturbed, while we're being fed with endless narratives about events that happened thousands of years before our own era, and we would not even for once ask the professor the hard question about the accuracy of traditional historical chronology.

The hard question we fail to ask is: if the ancient people did not write their own history and if modern men were not alive in the ancient times, how then do modern men feel comfortable learning and teaching about historical events they neither witnessed nor experienced?

The world history that modern men teach to one another today was formulated based on the historical chronology that was developed by Scaliger and Pentavius around 16th Century AD. This traditional historical chronology is popularly known as the Scaligerian Chronology.

The Scaligerian chronologists, mostly Jesuits, relied solely on the star catalogue of Ptolemy Almagest for dating historical epochs. Ptolemy Almagest was considered the main source of astronomical knowledge and planetary theory before the time of Corpenicus. And since advanced knowledge of astronomy was required for dating historical epochs, the star catalogue of Ptolemy Almagest became a highly sought after astronomical manual in the Scaligerian era (15th-17th Century AD). 

However, it turns out that the star catalogue of Almagest, upon which traditional historical chronology was formulated, had been been tampered with and edited by Scaligerian chronologists around 17th Century AD to promote their Jesuit world view and to compress world history into the Biblical timeline.

Conscientious scholars and moral philosophers, around the world,  like: Isaac Newton,  Nikolia Morozov, Wilhelm Kammeyer, Robert Baldauf, Peter Krekshin, Fomenko, and Walter Williams had sharply criticized to no avail Scaligerian chronologists for falsifying traditional historical chronology.  

So, if the traditional historical chronology is known to be false, why is it that world history as we know it today is still being taught based on the same falsified chronology?

The Game Changers

There're two inventions that shaped the nature of reality as we perceive it today. One was the invention of the printing press around 1445AD - 1450 AD, and the other was the invention of the gun powder around 13th - 14th Century AD. 

Prior to these two inventions, in spite of what you might have read in the so-called history books, almost all the nations of the world were relatively on the same level of development - there were strong and weak Asian states; strong and weak African states; strong and weak European states; and strong and weak native American states. Not one nation was significantly more developed than others.

However, there was a paradim shift in reality, and a dramatic change in the world order shortly after the invention of the printing press and the gun powder. It was at this time that all the academic subjects, including history, philosophy, and religious studies, and all books, including the Bible, the Torah and the Quran were formulated and developed. There were probably some ancient scrolls floating around in the Egyptian, Indian, native American, and other temples around world, but they were all compiled and published into books after the invention of the printing press in Europe.

This is why I said in my short essay (I.e. "History is written in the Present"),

that ancient men neither wrote nor chronicled their own histories. It's the modern men, who, after the invention of the printing press, created all sorts of paper histories and historical chronologies. And it was the modern men who attempted to compress the records of every ancient classical civilization into the 6000-year-old-ecclesiastical chronology they, themselves, invented.

This invented or falsified ecclesiastical chronology came to be accepted as reality today through the power of the gun powder. In other words, the printing press was used to print books that were formulated on the invented chronology, while the gun powder was used to force people to embrace them.

You can't really force people to embrace a book today, well in the West, but many people have been conditioned to accept the invented ecclesiastical chronology as reality.

An excerpt from Manly P. Hall’s "The Occult Anatomy of Man."

All the priests of the ancient world were anatomists. They recognized that all the functions of nature were reproduced in miniature in the human body. They therefore used man as the textbook, teaching their disciples that to understand man was to understand the universe. These wise men believed that every star in the heavens, every element in the earth, and every function in nature, was represented by a corresponding center, pole, or activity within the human body.

These wise ones realized that there was a great deal more involved in religion than the chanting of mantras and the singing of hymns; they realized that the path of salvation could be walked successfully only by those who have practical, scientific knowledge of the occult function of their own bodies. The anatomical symbolism which they evolved in order to perpetuate this understanding has come down to modern Christianity, but the keys to it apparently have been lost. It is a tragic situation for religionists that they are surrounded by hundreds of symbols which they cannot understand, but it is still sadder than they have even forgotten that these symbols ever had any meaning other than the foolish interpretations which they themselves have concocted.

The idea prevalent in the minds of Christians that their faith is the one and only truly inspired doctrine, and that it came parentless into the world, is unreasonable in the extreme. A study of comparative religions proves beyond doubt that Christianity has begged, borrowed, or stolen its philosophies and concepts from the religions and philosophies of the ancient and medieval pagan worlds. Among the religious symbols and allegories which belonged to the world long ago before the coming of Christianity are a few to which we would like to call your attention. The following Christian symbols and concepts are of pagan origin:

The Christian cross, comes from Egypt and India; the triple miter from the faith of the Mithraics; the shepherd’s crook from the Hermetic Mysteries and Greece; the immaculate conception from India; the transfiguration from Persia; and the trinity from the Brahmans. The Virgin Mary, as the mother of God, is found in a dozen different faiths. There are over twenty crucified world saviors. The church steeple is an adaption of Egyptian obelisks and pyramids, while the Christian devil is the Egyptian Typhon with certain modifications. The deeper one goes into the problem, the more he realizes there is nothing new under the sun. A truly sincere study of the Christian faith proves beyond all doubt that it is the evolutionary outgrowth of primitive doctrines. There is an evolution in religion as well as in physical form. If we accept and incorporate into our doctrines the religious symbolism of nearly forty peoples it behooves us to understand (at least in part) the meaning of myths and allegories which we borrow, lest we be more ignorant than those from whom we secured them.

This brochure is devoted to the problem of explaining the relationship existing between the symbolism of the ancient priests and the occult functions of the human body. We must first understand that all scared writings are supposed to be sealed with seven seals. In other words, it requires seven complete interpretations to understand fully the meaning of these ancient philosophic revelations which we have liked to call Holy Writ. Scripture is not intended to be historical. Those who understand its literal meaning understand the least of its meaning.

THE FALLACY OF PERFECTION

Have you ever noticed that the same people who subscribe to the concept of "universal truth" almost always subscribe to the idea of "perfection?" Their line of reasoning goes something like this: if over a billion people accept a concept, never mind how the concept came to be accepted,  then that concept must universally true, and thus perfect.

I know what you're thinking. "Oh, he's probably talking about religious people (I.e. Christians and Muslims)." Well, the truth is I am, but I'm also talking about non-religious humanists who subscribe to the same delusion of perfection as religionists.

As far as I'm concerned, the concept of universal truth or perfection, be it religious or non-religious, is illogical and fallacious. Same fallacy but different groups! Now, let's examine each group.

The Muslims and their estranged-Christian cousins would tell you to subscribe to their respectful spiritual concepts just because their doctrines are premised on universal truth and divine perfection. They're quick to point to the popular acceptance of their doctrines, billions of adherents and counting, as a testament to the universal truth embedded in their doctrines. Never mind, no where on this planet, truth has ever been established based on the popular acceptance of a concept. 

Well, since religious folks don't dwell much on logic. It behooves me to impress logic on them. If a concept is divinely perfect and universally true, no one would deny its validity. That is, if Christianity is the universal way to "divine truth;" then by default, there would never be Muslims, and vice versa. For example, the SUN is universally true in that it shines. This is why there's no Christian sun, Muslim sun, agnostic sun or even atheist sun. There is only one SUN that rises in the East and sets in the West, and the cosmic truth is that the sun would shine on you with or without your acceptance.

Anyway, the idea of "divine perfection" is even more bizarre than the conceptual idea of "universal truth." For the umpteenth time, there is no such thing as perfection in the Cosmos. The Cosmos operates on a strict "cosmic order" and balance (I.e. MAAT). On this planet, reality is based on relative perception or relativism (I.e. relative balance between opposites), but not on absolute perfection.

The non-religious humanists are just as fallacious in their thinking of the concept of "perfection" and "universal truth" as the religionists; though, in a different way. The humanists, unlike the religionists, believe nature is perfect. According to them, if nature is perfect and if Darwinian Evolution is a natural process, then everything must be evolving towards "perfection" and Darwin's Theory of Evolution must be universally true - this is a fallacious piece of reasoning.

First off, I subscribe to the theory of evolution, but the evolutionary process is not a perfecting process. Every evolutionary process is a binary-mutation process (I.e. positive mutation and negative mutation). Whatever you think you gain in the evolutionary process, you also lose something else of equal magnitude, balancing out the net outcome. In other words, evolution is a balancing process not a perfecting process. As evolved and prefect as we think we are, if the bees were extinct, we'd probably be extinct as well - we must not be too perfect if our existence is predicated on that of bees. Well, cosmic order and balance make it so!

Great thinkers overstand the cosmic principle of order and balance (I.e. MAAT), and that's why they don't conceptualize or waste time with the idea of  "perfection." They only conceptualize optimization and spend time on finding the optimal points not the perfect points. 

For example, Modigliani and Miller conceptualized and proved an optimum Capital Asset Equilibrium Price not a "perfect" Capital Asset Equilibrium Price. In Game theory, John Nash wasn't looking for the perfect payouts but optimal payouts (i.e. Nash Equilibrium). In the Monte-Carlo method, analysts never look for perfect models but optimal models.

In conclusion, perfection is not part of human reality; order and balance (I.e. MAAT) are. So, if you're constantly searching for perfection in anything, you're simply searching for something that's not there. Search for MAAT (order and balance) not perfection!