Between 1901 and 1906, the Jewish Encyclopedia published an article about
Philo Judeaus which lists twenty-one rules for exegesis teased from extant
writings. In 2002, independent researchers P.J. Gott and Logan Licht devised
an experiment to test their potential value to modern exegesis. In the
process they found evidence that Philo’s method of interpreting scripture
was the heresy about which Church Father Irenaeus (c. 130 – c. 202 CE)
wrote:
…
collecting a set of expressions and names
scattered here and there, they twist them … from a natural to a non-natural
sense. In so doing, they act like those who bring forward any kind of
hypothesis they fancy, and then endeavor to support them out of the poems of
Homer, so that the ignorant imagine that Homer actually composed
the verses bearing upon that hypothesis, which has, in fact, been but newly
constructed.
The Jewish
Encyclopedia article parallels a chapter in Histories of Interpretation:
Eight Lectures, published in 1886. The Eight Lectures had been
written and delivered by the late Rev. John Bampton
(1689-1751). Bampton listed six rules, which he called
"Philo's Rules,"
and he, like
Irenaeus, also found them to be useless, if not dangerous: “All this
‘madness’ is reduced to ‘method’ by a set of rules, half Haggadistic, half
Stoic, but entirely inapplicable.”
However, Irenaeus,
Bampton, and the Jewish Encyclopedia provided enough information that a
reasonable facsimile of Philo’s Method could be reconstructed and tested for
efficacy and repeatability. In 2015, Gott and Licht published the results of
their twelve-year study. Their research led
to a plethora of new information that brings into question nearly everything
previously assumed about Philo.
Their methodology
consisted of using the Jewish Encyclopedia’s twenty-one rules to examine
unsolved mysteries in the New Testament; for example, Mark’s omission of two
important prophesies about Jesus: that he would come from Bethlehem and be
born to a Virgin. Philo’s Rules identify a likely interpolation (Mk 1:9)
where striking just one word and replacing it with another removed
both the "little town of Bethlehem” (Hebrew BTLHM, BeTLeHeM) and the
“Virgin Mother” (Hebrew BTLHM, BeTuLa eM) from Mark’s introduction to
the story of Jesus.
This revelation
that “Bethlehem” was removed and replaced by “Nazareth” demanded an
investigation into Matthew’s claim that a sojourn in Nazareth was the reason Jesus
was called “the Nazarene” (Mt 2:23). This verse, and the interpolation at
Mark 1:9, they argue, suggest an anti-Nassarean agenda that took hold
after Mark’s gospel was written and circulated among the early churches.
The Nassareans were
a heretical sect that early Church Fathers went to great lengths to
discredit.
The first NZR in Hebrew scripture is found at Gen 49:26, Rachel's son Joseph
whose son was Manasseh. However, the Fathers claimed the Nazarene heresy was
a reaction to Paul's Christianity, not the precursor and inspiration. In
spite of their efforts, it was one of their own who exposed their
motives. Jerome (c. 347-420)
identifies Isaiah 11:1 (Hebrew, netser, translated "branch" of Jesse) as the source of the appellation, “The Nazarene,”
inadvertently disputing the earlier claims – and Mt 2:23 – that “Nazareth”
was its etymology.
Gott and Licht also
tested Philo’s reconstructed rules on unsolved biblical contradictions, such
as the birth of Jesus “when Herod was King” (Herod died before 4 BCE) and
“at the time of the first census of Quirinius” (c. 6 CE). This ten year
difference had never been explained to the satisfaction of a consensus of
scholars. Philo’s Rules lead to a simple solution, and it is found in
several Bible verses, including Mt 27:16; Mk 15:7; Lk 23:18; Jn 18:40; Acts
13:6. “Jesus” was born c. 13-15 BCE when Herod was King; “Jesus bar-Jesus,”
also called “Son of the Father” (Hebrew, Bar Abbas) was born c. 6 CE at the time of the Census.
Philo provided a
clue that was critical to the successful application of the method.
Describing Essenes, one of the three sects of Judaism, Philo notes:
“Then one takes up the holy volume and reads it, and another of the men of
the greatest experience comes forward and explains what is not very
intelligible, for a great many precepts are delivered in enigmatical
modes of expression, and allegorically, as the old fashion was.”
By focusing on solving “enigmas,” rather than trying to
explain “allegories,” the authors show how the method was also used to
produce enigmatic stories about historical people identified as gods
and goddesses.
Following Philo’s
Rules to solve enigmas leads to the Old Testament, as might be
expected. But, as Irenaeus complained, it also leads to other first century
texts: Homer, the works of Josephus, Plutarch, Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus, as
well as Vergil, Ovid, and other poetry and prose.
Plutarch’s
contributions identify a source dated five hundred years earlier than Philo:
“Pythagoras greatly admired the Egyptian priests, and, copying their
symbolism and secret teachings, incorporated his doctrines in enigmas.
As a matter of fact, most of the Pythagorean precepts do not at all fall
short of the writings that are called hieroglyphs … Whenever you hear the
traditional tales which the Egyptians tell about the gods, their wanderings,
dismemberments, and many experiences … you must not think that any of
these tales actually happened in the manner in which they are related.
If you listen to the stories about the gods in this way … you may avoid
superstition which is no less an evil than atheism.”
This subtle hint
raises the question: Did Plutarch’s “histories” of Julius Caesar, Antony and
Cleopatra, Octavian and the Battle of Actium, “actually happen in the manner
in which they are related”? In other words, does the literal account reveal
what actually happened to them? Plutarch answers the question: “Not if they
were gods.”
In
Aeneid, written between 29 and 19 BCE, Vergil honors the deified Julius with this
catchy little phrase: “Go forth with new value, boy: thus is the path to the
stars; A son of gods that will have gods as sons.”
Plutarch identifies Antony as “The New Dionysus”
and Cleopatra as “The New Isis.”
Evidence of
Octavian’s divinity comes from inscriptions left by Dynamis
Philoromaios,
Queen of the Bosporus Empire.
In Phanagoria
(a peninsula in the area of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov), Dynamis
dedicated an inscription honoring Octavian
as, “The emperor, Caesar, son of theos, the Theos
Augustus, the overseer of every land and sea.”
Plutarch warned his
readers, including historians, that they should not assume his stories about
“gods and goddesses” actually happened as he related them. In fact, he
warned they should not be read literally but solved enigmatically.
Philo’s rules applied to Plutarch’s “histories” reveal what actually did
happen. Julius was not assassinated, Antony and Cleopatra did not
commit suicide, and Octavian did not execute their children. First century
historians, members of their family and working in coordination with each
other, continued writing about them but assigned them different names, some
of which are well known: Emperor Tiberius Julius Caesar; Herod the Great;
Mariamme; Germanicus; Agrippina the Elder; the Jewish sage Hillel the Elder
and his grandson Nasi Gamaliel, and others.
And this leads back
to Philo and a revised biography which Gott and Licht document using Philo’s
own method for solving enigmas:
“Alexander the
Alabarch” was Philo’s step-brother. Alexander’s “unknown parents”
were the Herodians, Alexander III and Glaphyra. (Alexander III was Herod’s
son with the Hasmonean Mariamme). After Alexander’s death, Glaphyra married
Philo’s father Juba II. Philo’s biological mother was Cleopatra Selene,
whose mother (Philo’s grandmother) was Cleopatra VII Thea Philo-pater.
“Philo of Alexandria” also received this name, traditionally given to
Ptolemaic daughters.
Philo was neither
the first nor the only ancient philosopher to pose as a male in order to be
heard. In fact, according to the Gospel of Thomas Saying 114, Jesus proposed
the same for Mary:
“Look, I myself will lead her to make her male, so that even she may become
a live spirit, like you males…”
Philo married her
step-brother Alexander and bore him two sons; therefore, Tiberius Julius
Alexander and Marcus Julius Alexander were her “nephews,” but she was also
their mother. Julius Caesar was their great-grandfather.
Evidence collected
from first- and second-century historians reveals that Philo was younger
than previous estimates. She was born c. 10 BCE and died in Rome c. 74 CE,
at the age of 84, as “Antonia Caenis,” Vespasian’s alleged mistress.
“Caenis” was the Greek goddess who was transformed into a man.
After her stint as
“Philo” and before her death as “Caenis,” she was in Rome advising Emperors
Claudius and Nero. From c. 41 to 62 she was known as the “freedman Pallas,”
as in Homer’s goddess, “Pallas-Athena,” the heroine of The Odyssey
who frequently disguised herself as a man. As “Pallas the freedman,” Philo
served as Claudius’ secretary and chief advisor, along with another
freedman, Narcissus. His name is also borrowed from Greek mythology, and
Ovid features Narcissus in his fifteen-book narrative, Metamorphoses:
“When, looking for his corpse they only found, a rising stalk with yellow
blossoms crowned.”
When Nero succeeded
Claudius, Pallas remained as secretary until c. 62. She reemerged in
69 to accompany Vespasian to Rome where she allegedly amassed great wealth
prior to her death five years later.
But it is Philo’s
role as “Mary Magdalene” in annual festivals that is the most unexpected
discovery coming from the study. The authors point to the Porta Maggiore and
the Baker’s Tomb in Rome to seal their case. By all accounts, they can best
be described as a replica of Jerusalem’s East Gate and a “House of Bread” (BeT
LeHeM). They were erected to honor a “Virgin Mother” (BeTuLa eM), who was
also a “Daughter of El the Mother” (BaT eL Ha eM).
Philo’s Method
reveals that “Jesus and Mary Magdalene” were mythological characters created
to fulfill Micah’s Prophesies (4:8-5:3). Like gods and goddesses before them
- Osiris and Isis; Attis and Cybele - Jesus and Mary Magdalene were
resurrected each year in annual Passion-Passover Plays.
The couple who
played the starring roles also participated in creating “The Golden
Age of Rome” and “The New Jerusalem.” Claudius’ “East Gate” and Vespasian’s
“House of Bread” were constructed to celebrate these accomplishments and to
honor the couple that brought them to fruition.
Pilgrimages of
faithful Nazarenes and Nassareans to these sacred structures came to an end a few decades
after the Council of Nicea. Between 390 and 405 Emperors Theodosius and
Honorius destroyed virtually everything that did not support Nicene
Christianity. What couldn’t be destroyed they hid from view. The Porta
Maggiore and the Baker’s Tomb were buried beneath a massive structure,
Honorius’ Tower.
Fortunately, in
1838, Pope Gregory XVI had the Honorius Tower removed, and the evidence can
now be examined by anyone fortunate enough to be able to travel to Rome. The
Porta Maggiore and the Baker's Tomb aren’t easy to find, but they are well
worth the effort.
Return to
The
Nazarene Way main menu
