" AND NOT EVEN BY LYING DID YOU SUCCEED IN MAKING YOUR FABRICATIONS CREDIBLE. ON THE CONTRARY SOME OF THE FAITHFUL JUST LIKE DRUNKS WHO PICK A QUARREL WITH EACH OTHER CHANGED THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF THE GOSPEL IN THREE AND FOUR AND MANY DIFFERENT WAYS AND DOCTORED IT SO AS TO HAVE A MEANS OF REPLYING TO REFUTATIONS ".

kelsos/true speech II,26-II,27/c. 178 ce



I discovered the historical simon peterS.

Follow me down...



I. FOUNDATIONAL - MYTHMAKING

There is no hard historical evidence that the christian character known as "saint peter" ever even existed at all. Certainly the one depicted in the new testament book acts of the apostles, an anti-jewish jew who prefers to hang out with gentiles even to the the point of fraternizing with roman centurion cornelius who belonged to a legion of jew-butcherers in roman palestine of the first century ce, could hardly have survived in the radical zealot antiroman milieu that was palestine at the time let alone have founded a successful community or church there and led it.

Having said this, foundational-mythmaking such as is the case with regime religions never invents stories from scratch - if mythmakers fabricated everything nobody would relate to their stories or believe them. The constant pattern that the new testament forgers exhibit is taking bits and pieces of underlying historical truth out of their original context and refitting everything together in a new mix with a good dose of overdubbed lies and evasive chronological archaization.

This is the case for the historical jesuses:

http://utah.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/12693.php

and that was the case for 'saint peter' too.

The forgers took a very real historical figure, simon bar ya'ir revolutionary zealot who fought rome to the bitter end in the 66-73 war and transmogrified him into a pious antisemitic preacher who would become the first pope and founder of the church. They then proceeded to add to the inverted simon a bit of another simon, simon bar cleopas probably a brother and successor of the real jesus ; they shook both up in the shaker, added a bit of mythology and came up with 'saint peter'.

II. SIMON BAR YA'IR

The contemporary source we have to turn to for simon bar ya'ir is turncoat jewish historian joseph flavius an asskisser and traitor who first fought the romans at the outbreak of the 66-73 ce jewish war and then betrayed his people and switched sides in the process sucking up so much and so well to soon-to-become emperors vespasian and titus that they adopted him into their flavia family and gave him a mansion and a life annuity in rome.

The only reason I've read such a creep's book, jewish war or bellum judaicum, is because historians agree that his human faults notwithstanding he more or less told the basic facts in an often though not always reliable way. At jewish war IV.9.3.503 he says that a simon bar ya'ir also translated from the aramaic as bar giora or jair or jairus which strangely becomes bar giona/jona elsewhere in the same book leaving us wondering as to just what precisely his last name that is his father's name (bar meaning son of in aramaic) had been, was a revolutionary militant of the sort joseph dubs "brigands" or "thieves" lestaì in greek which is the language the book was handed down to us although the original version was in aramaic that is the hebrew-like language spoken in palestine in the first century ce.

Today a neocon like joseph would call a simon "terrorist" if you know what i mean. Anyway this simon bar ya'ir which means son of jair or jairus soon became one of the chief leaders of the antiroman jewish army. Joseph says simon was not the smartest guy but quite strong of body and audacious. Now doesn't it sound familiar from the new testament presentation of simon peter?

Gospels and acts state that simon was the son of a jona or john which is the same as our variant form simon bar giona in joseph flavius. Interestingly the canonic gospels call simon peter 'simon bariona' that is son of jona ('matthew' 16:17) which must be flavius' 'giona/jona' variant for simon bar ya'ir 's last name=father's name.

Again : these fictional gospel characters such as jesus and simon peter were cooked up by means of a collage, a patchwork of several real , historical people of the time : jihadist antiroman zealots the likes of simon bar ya´ir but also a simon son of john, brother of jesus bar saba another jihadist attested to by flavius : their father was one hanan (=johanan, john) the hidden.

'Matthew' 16:17 may be dissimulating/changing the last name slightly so we won't associate simon peter with simon bar ya'ir. But again : another simon, a real simon son of john , is another piece of the puzzle here.

The gospel of john too has jesus call simon peter 'son of john' : 'john' 21:15.16.17: ' simon son of john do you love me?' . Here quite a few manuscripts read 'son of jona' instead of the generally accepted 'johannes' - just like 'matthew' 16:17 and joseph flavius' variant giona/jona. I incline towards the form simon bar ya'ir or jairus because it's more frequent in flavius' book and because oh coincidence every time gospel simon peter pops up in the first part of the narrative that is in the galilean scenario he is closely associated with a jairus chief of the capernaum synagogue and whose 12-year old daughter ´jesus´ raises from the dead ('mark' 5:22; 'luke' 8:41) .When jesus performs this gospel miracle he takes only 3 disciples with him into jair's house - and one of them is simon.

Possibly because simon was jair's son? And the 12-year-old girl his sister?

Elsewhere in the gospels jesus heals simon's mother-in-law always at capernaum city on the lake of tiberias also called sea of galilee or lake gennezareth at the time. And this episode comes in close proximity to the jair-daughter episode. So again gospel simon is always associated to a jair in capernaum where both live.



III. THE BAR JAIRs AND JUDAS THE GALILEAN : A REVOLUTIONARY CLAN

That's because elsewhere in the jewish war book joseph flavius tells us that simon bar ya'ir in the course of the first phases of the 66-73 antiroman war ends up in the fortress masada on the dead sea at the time already occupied by another group of zealot-like militants led by a...lazarus or eleazar...BAR JAIR ! With whom flavius' simon soon familiarizes especially since lazarus probably was his brother although flavius does not say so.

Whatever and however this may be eleazar or lazarus bar jair of masada fame was says flavius a descendant of the illustrious judas the galilean founder of the zealot movement around the time of the census of cyrenius or quirinius roman official who had the task of identifying all taxation-liable jews. This was the time of the alleged birth of jesus in luke's gospel. The year being 6 or 7 ce.

The zealots says joseph were a group of hardened antiroman antiromantaxation proindependence fighters who wouldn't call any man lord because they already had one and an only lord that is god. Judas the galilean and his men rebelled against the romans and got duly massacred in the process (although specifically as to judas' fate joseph flavius' extant text leaves us in the dark).

Not all of them though if some 60 years later at the outbreak of the roman/jewish war of 66-73 one of judas the galilean's sons menachem was leader of resistance in jerusalem and a relative of his our lazarus or eleazar bar jair was leader at masada as joseph flavius tells us. Zealot comes from the greek word zeal which means passion zeal ardor for something - in this case for the law the torah or mosaic law not the roman one. Aramaic for zealot is qanna'im that is cananean and guess what in one of the gospel apostle lists there crops up a simon...the cananean ! In obvious dissimulation, explained away as an alleged provenance from the city of cana...

Simon bar ya'ir dwells in masada for a while with lazarus bar ya'ir.

By now you will have thought of gospel lazarus whom jesus resurrects.

There are connections here too with flavius' lazarus because the latter before committing suicide in masada in 73 at the close of the war gives a last speech reported or rather invented by flavius in which he speaks of the immortality of the soul which is not exactly the resurrection of the dead but akin to it.

Anyway there's more to that and it takes us back to our simon-lazarus connection.

In john's gospel - the only one to recount the resurrection of lazarus - the miracle happens in bethania not far from the mount of olives near jerusalem.

Guess what in flavius' jewish war another lazarus dies near bethany that is at herodion a fortress just south of jerusalem.

This eleazar who dies at herodion doesn't have a last name in flavius and does not rise from the dead but he is "one of simon bar jair's trusted men" just like gospel's lazarus is a guy whom "jesus" loved a lot.

In flavius this cannot be the same lazarus as masada's because the herodion episode happens before the masada suicide but it's interesting to have two "lazarus" deaths in flavius one of which happens close to john's gospel's location of bethany for lazarus' resurrection.

And again I remind the reader that the general modus operandi of the new testament fabricators is to take bits and pieces of history out of context (they did the same with bible quotes) and remix them together with inverted meaning.

Thus they may have remixed the 2 flavius-lazarus episodes after arbitrarily blending them together.

Interestingly although john is the sole gospel to feature the lazarus-resurrection miracle, matthew also features jesus in john's bethany at the home of...SIMON the leper!

Again you see here the mixed salad of flavius' simon and lazarus bar jair becoming gospel lore - not about antiroman jihadists though anymore but about proroman miracle wizard "jesus" who'll tell you to give caesar's what's caesar's - just to stay in the salad metaphor.



IV. SIMON BAR YA'IR = " SAINT PETER "



Joseph flavius' jewish war's simon son of jair is suspiciously similar to new testament simon peter that is "saint peter":

1.simon=simon

2.simon bar jair is not the smartest guy in the world and neither is simon peter who's always messing things up in the NT drowning sinking falling asleep at the wrong time you name it

3.simon bar jair though is a tough strongman and audacious and so is NT simon peter who walks around armed with a sword with which he chops off the high priest's servant's ear the night of the arrest of jesus. He also scolds ananias and his wife sapphira so violently in acts of the apostles for not duly bringing him all of their money but only half that the pair dies on the spot.

It is true that for dissimulation's or put-down's sake gospel peter is also at times pictured as the very opposite a creep who denies jesus 3 times in a row is afraid of sinking etc.

4.we shall see more paralleles below of simon bar jair's and simon peter's violent behavior.

5.both flavius' and gospel simon are closely associated to a jairus and to a lazarus son of jairus.

6.both simons are married and travel around with women - probably meaning wife 12-year old sister and mother-in-law of gospel lore.

"Paul" in one of his letters even whines about kephas that is peter having the right to have women with him so why can't he?

7.flavius' simon bar ya'ir at jewish war II.22.2.652 " not only looted the houses of the rich but mishandled them physically too " - see NT peter again chopping off ears and shouting the rich ananias and sapphira into a heart attack for not delivering to him all their wealth

8.one of the apostles in gospel apostle lists is called simon the zealot! and another (probably the same one duplicated for information fog's sake) is called simon the cananean that is zealot in aramaic whereas zealot is greek for the same thing that is ardent for the law the torah not the roman law.

Eisenman avers that simon the zealot is simon bar cleopas about whom see further below that is the brother of jesus but I disagree I think jesus' family was bar sabba or sappha not bar ya'ir although the 2 clans may well have had strong ties especially during the war see my jesus essay at:

http://utah.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/12675.php

Flavius says that simon bar ya'ir was from jerash in the decapolis so what is he doing in capernaum galilee in the gospels? More dissimulation? Was simon bar ya'ir originally from his probable ancestor judas the galilean's hometown of gamala on lake tiberias in the golan? Well maybe he moved in the course of his life like most of us do. If he was indeed a descendant of zealot-founder judas the galilee who was from gamala near the same lake of tiberias then maybe his family had moved from gamala to jerash to escape the romans or something after judas' defeat in the early I century ce. Or the nt may be lying/dissimulating about jairus and simon peter in capernaum just like the nt forgers have been proven to have lied about nazareth as the hometown of jesus see my :

The nazareth lie

http://utah.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/12674.php

Anyway whether or not simon son of jairus was a brother of lazarus son of jairus at masada he bears too much resemblance to nt simon peter for it to just be random coincidence.



V. SIMON BAR YA'IR = 'SAINT PETER' BUT ALSO 'JESUS'

In my jesus essay I showed how gospel jesus' betrayal story is patterned after the attempted betrayal of simon bar ya'ir during the siege of jerusalem on the part of - of all people - a...judas !

And flavius' simon bar ya'ir again demonstrates all the violence he's capable of and known for by not only slaying judas and his ten coplotters after finding out about the plot just like gospel "jesus" finds out about judas' betrayal in advance - simon bar ya'ir also mutilates the bodies just like in gospel lore peter chops off the high priest's servant's ear - and then bar jair proceeds to cast the body parts down the walls of jerusalem for the romans to see and deterrence of future traitors/deserters. Pretty tough - well deserving of the surname peter which in greek and latin means rock and translates the aramaic kephas.

3 days more or less after taking refuge in a tunnel carved in the rock under the destroyed jerusalem temple in 70 ce flavius' simon bar jair comes out of the tunnel and back...to earth donning his messiah-style white priestly tunics and kingly purple cloak in the traditon of maccabean priestly kingship and delivers himself to the romans. Which sounds suspiciously like the resurrection of "jesus" from the jerusalem newly-carved rocky tomb.

Again you cannot fail but notice how new testament jesus and peter are the result of the conflation into one of bits and pieces of underlying truth but in a skewed distorted inverted and mythologized manner.

Such is the constant collage-like modus operandi of the NT forgers.



VI. SIMON BAR YA'IR AS " YESHU'A "

Lastly before leaving jerusalem for rome: at joseph flavius' bellum iudaicum IV.9.10.575 simon bar ya'ir triumphally enters jerusalem "hailed by the people as SAVIOR [in aramaic 'yeshu'a-jesus'] and protector" : there you have 'jesus' ' triumphal jerusalem entry at 'matthew' 21:8-9 : here the people welcoming 'jesus' are portrayed as shouting 'hosanna' hebrew word from psalms akin in meaning to aramaic yeshu'a : hosanna means 'come on save!' .

except we are not under pontius pilate in the real story - the real triumphal jerusalem entry ONLY REAL SUCH EVENT RECORDED FOR A JEWISH LEADER FOR THE I CENTURY CE BY CONTEMPORARY SOURCES is simon bar ya'ir's in the year 69 at the height of the antiroman war of which simon had by now become the main leader (though factional strife among jewish resistants wasn't bound to end here according to flavius).

Recapping :

1. upon entering jerusalem simon bar ya'ir in joseph flavius' jewish war is hailed by the people as their savior just like gospel jesus

2. savior in aramaic the language spoken by the cheering crowds in I-century-ce jerusalem is YESHU'A - JESUS. Thereby simon...becomes 'jesus' but it's his title not his name whereas in the gospel rewrite it becomes the messiah's name. That's why 'matthew' 21:9 pictures the crowds implausibly waxing literary in quoting the ancient hebrew of psalm 118:25f 's 'hosanna' instead of just plainly spontaneously erupting in a big 'yeshu'a' in their native aramaic

3. simon bar ya'ir cheered as their 'jesus'=savior by the jerusalem crowds enters town around EASTER TIME ACCORDING TO JOSEPH FLAVIUS' JEWISH WAR V.3.1.99 - AGAIN AND AGAIN JUST LIKE GOSPEL JESUS !



VII. SIMON BAR YA'IR IN ROME

Just like "saint peter" who according to extrabiblical christian lore came to rome with paul founded the roman curch and was crucified upside down.

Except flavius' simon comes to rome in chains after delivering himself up to the romans and being transferred to the palestinian town of caesarea maritima first where titus was waiting to sail home with the plunder and 700 muscular prisoners to be paraded in the triumphal party - among whom our poor jihadist patriot simon bar jair.

Incidentally acts portrays peter in caesarea too albeit in a totally different context as usual.

Christian lore has it that saint peter was kept prisoner alongside paul, 47 other martyrs and the 2 prison guards he'd converted to christianity in the so-called tullianum an unsavory dungeon, still open to visitors today, in the forum at the foot of capitol hill .

It's a scary undergound cave which the romans used not so much as a prison but as a death row jail and death chamber at the same time.

Upon entering the site and before descending the steps to the tullianum, in the space called carcer mamertinum, look right and read the inscription mentioning all the famous death-row prisoners who were executed in the underlying tullianum : famous enemy chiefs vanquished by rome such as jugurtha vercingetorix...and our unfortunate simon bar giora in 70 ce - other authors say 71.

Now walk down the steps and enter the tullianum.

There's a well which according to christian lore is a miraculous spring produced by peter for the purpose of baptizing his 2 prison guards but for modern archaeology it's a natural spring that had been there from time immemorial.

Fountain and jail. Remember: fountain and jail.

The modern inscription on the plaque on the wall upstairs says that simon bar giora was beheaded.

But we know from christian tradition that peter was crucified upside down - for which there is not the slightest historical evidence as usual of course but then again haven't I told you and showed you how foundational-mythmaking wouldn't have a chance of credibility if it didn't build on stories people may somehow relate to albeit by skewing distorting twisting and ultimately turning the truth into lie?

It is not historically probable that a non-roman citizen would be executed by beheading because beheading was the quick way out rome reserved to its citizens as a...special privilege.

Non-citizens were first tortured and then strangled in the tullianum - we know this for sure from sources for king jugurtha for instance.

Anyway : what is the underlying truth beneath the peter-crucifixion story?

Exit the mamertinum-tullianum horror den and turn right - after a few feet turn right again and you'll see a stairway to hell.

It leads up to the top of capitol hill. Ancient romans called it scalae gemoniae gemoniae stairs.

According to ancient sources the corpses of the executed in the tullianum were...hanged in public along the scalae gemoniae both for deterrence and because romans loved live gore, see the sort of entertainment offered in the colosseum.

I wouldn't be surprised if the bodies were hanged or even crucified upside down - and that's how simon bar giora aka saint peter ended up in all likelihood.

Another inspiration for the peter-upside-down story of christian lore certainly also comes again from our joseph flavius' book jewish war where he says that during the siege of jerusalem the romans "prompted by hatred and ire" took to crucifying prisoners..."IN VARIOUS POSITIONS"!...

The story of "peter" ´s crucifixion might as well have been derived, collage-wise, from the historical execution of simeon bar cleopas, one of jesus bar saba´s brothers, under trajan, as reported by ancient christian sources.

Wasn´t "saint peter" crucified upside down at san pietro in montorio on the janiculum hill ?

He wasn't.

San pietro in montorio is a pretty church on the janiculum hill in rome. In its closter there's the so-called tempietto del bramante a renaissance microchurch built on top on what is believed to be the very location of saint peter's martyrdom.

Except that I haven't been able so far to find not even one attestation/documentation of that story before the year 1500 when the tempietto was dedicated. Of course the lore must have been around for some time before 1500 if popes decided to have a tempietto built there by top renaissance architect bramante. But precisely when the san pietro in montorio localization for "saint peter" 's crucifixion story started I do not know. Certainly it's a late myth - certainly later than the year 800 ce when the itinerarium einsiedlense was composed according to experts.

What I have found out about is a document dating from 700 years earlier than the tempietto inscription : the so-called itinerarium einsiedlense a guidebook of rome for pilgrims whose original is kept in the swiss monastery of einsiedeln whence the name.

Re the locale of san pietro in montorio (church that didn't exist yet in the year 800 ce - though a first church on the site would be built soon after in the IX century but I do not know if it related to the crucifixion story or the other saint peter connection I'm about to cite or any other story -) the itinerarium says: "fountain of saint peter,where his jail was".

Remember? The fountain. The jail. All over again.

What is going on here?

1. the notice in the itinerarium einsiedlense completely gainsays the crucifixion legend for san pietro in montorio, instead attesting to the memory of peter's jail cum fountain there

2. the tullianum was a death chamber not a normal jail so it would have made no sense to bring saint peter to the tullianum and then crucify him elsewhere.

3. it makes instead complete sense that the real "saint peter" that is our simon bar jair upon arriving in rome with his fellow 700 "martyrs" which would never have fit into the small tullianum anyway would have been brought first to a safe isolated prison then on the edge of town awaiting the parade whose final stage was the execution of the enemy chief in the tullianum

4. the san pietro in montorio location is perfect for a maximum-security prison facility of the time because it was on the edge of 71 ce rome and on top of a steep hill surrounded by deep crevices on 3 sides as you will easily see when you visit - there are marvellous views of rome from up there.

I am not aware that archaeologists have ever dug under san pietro in montorio but if they haven't they definitely should.

It's absolutely impossible rome wouldn't have powerful watchtowers and garrisons at such a strategic spot .

As for the fountain, nearby there still is the marvellous fontana paola built by the popes but originally a roman aqueduct called aqua alsietina that is from the bracciano lake north of town.

No wonder there were fountains in the area.

And from san pietro in montorio it's not far down to the beginning of the triumphalis pompa of 71 - the triumphal parade commemorated in the arch of titus in the forum which according to joseph flavius started in the campus martius near the tiber near today's campo dei fiori square and then proceeded winding its macabre way thru the circus maximus to reach the via sacra in the forum and finally the capitol where vespasian the massmurderer and his 2 bloodthirsty sons titus the destroyer of jerusalem and domitian waited for the news of simon bar jair's tullianum execution upon which they sacrificed to juppiter and called it a day.

Before reaching the tullianum simon says joseph had been dragged like an animal with a rope around his neck and beaten - and probably spat at - by the gleeful savage and barbaric roman public -: sounds familiar from the story of gospel jesus mishandled after his trial?

The crucifixion story for saint peter might also have been boosted by the real crucifixion documented in ancient sources mentioned by eisenman of another simon, simeon bar clopas or cleopas or cleophas who according to eisenman was jesus' brother and successor as head of the jerusalem church.

This other piece of the new testament collage was crucified reportedly in palestine under trajan at the age of 120 .

The old age, exaggerated or not, of simon bar clopas when he died accounts for peter always being pictured as old on the cross in the history of painting. Whereas flavius' simon bar jair is a young man...in his thirties just like the "jesus" of christian lore.

So again you see what a lying mosaic the new testament really is - but the single pieces of the puzzle were real - only again taken out of the original context and given a completely inverted proroman meek antijewish pacifist meaning.



12.23.2005



BIBLIO:

1. robert eisenman

james the brother of jesus vol.I

faber and faber 1997

2. gospel jesus never was

http://utah.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/12723.php

3. the nazareth lie

http://utah.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/12692.php

4. E cristo cascò dalla croce

http://italy.indymedia.org/news/2005/11/933728.php

5. nestle/aland

novum testamentum graece et latine

deutsche bibelgesellschaft 2002

6. patrizia fortini

carcer-tullianum

electa 1998

(guide electa per la soprintendenza archeologica di roma)

december 23, 2005

3.28.2019 edit

Schein