Original
Christian Texts citing Jesus Barabbas
According
to Jerome (On Matthew), the name in the apocryphal Gospel According
to the Hebrews was filius magistri eorum -- i.e., "son of their
teacher." (Jerome, Commentary on Matthew )
Syriac manuscripts
of Matthew present Barabbas' name as Jesus bar Abbas.
The
Caesarean group of texts
,
which have been identified as possibly being the origin of many parts of
the New Testament present Barabbas' name as Jesus bar Abbas.
The
Sinaitic Palimpsest
[ a late 4th century manuscript of the four canonical gospels of the New
Testament.], present Barabbas' name as Jesus bar Abbas.
Manuscripts used by
Origen
,a distinguished Father of the early Christian Church., in the 3rd
century present Barabbas' name as Jesus bar Abbas.
All these ancient sources cite the fact
that Barabbas' name was originally Jesus Barabbas. Origen censored the
reading in the manuscripts he was working with deliberately. . He would
not tolerate the name Jesus being associated with anyone depicted as a
sinner. "In the whole range of the scriptures we know that no one
who is a sinner [is called] Jesus."
The corrupted version Modern Christians utilize reads
Matthew 27:17 "So
when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, "Which one do you
want me to release to you: Barabbas, or Jesus who is called
Christ?"
In
actuality the original texts read
Matthew 27:17 "So
when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, "Which one do you
want me to release to you: Jesus who is called the son of the
father, or Jesus who is called the anointed one?
" {anointed one referring to a
Worldly claim to the throne of David and Solomon or King of the
Jews}
What the gospels are
asking us to believe is that Pilate offers the crowd the choice
between " Jesus Bar'Abbas , the criminal " or "Jesus Bar' Abbas the
prophet /King
This of
course would render the entire passage very confusing to say the least
for the average unitiated reader. To fully comprehend the Biblical
crucifixion one must also consider the possibility that this entire
crucifixion scenario may have been a symbolic / ritualized / Gnostic
equation .
The Gnostic / Allegorical Crucifixion
Origen, a Christian scholar and
theologian and one of the most distinguished and influential of
the early Church Fathers rejected the reading of "Jesus-Barabbas" in the
manuscripts he had, he and others deliberately edited out
"Jesus-Barabbas", for reverential reasons. Origen didn't believe
the name Jesus should be associated with a sinner, and his school of
religious thought did not understand nor endorse the concept of the
Gnostic crucifixion.
. "Jesus"
comes from the Greek Ιησους [Iēsoûs] found in the Greek text of the
Gospels, and is assumed to be translated from Aramaic or Hebrew (Yehoshua
or Yeshua other Alternative spellings/translations include Jehoshua,
Jeshu). The Greek to English equivalent would be Joshua. The
Greek is a Hellenized form of the Aramaic name Yeshua (ישוע), a short
form of Hebrew Yehoshua (יהושע). Christian Arabs to this day refer to
Jesus as "Yasu' al-Masih" . Why then did the original translators
of the Gospels choose to call Barabbas "Jesus- Barabbas" when
"Joshua Barabbas" would have sufficed? Because , to do so, would
have undermined, if not destroyed the Gnostic - Allegorical value of the
Crucifixion scenario of which original Christian initiates of the
Mystery Schools were well aware.
In
The Jesus Mysteries
Timothy Freke & Peter Gandy
bring to light an interesting facet of the early Christian Tradition
of Martyrdom and crucifixion . Crucifixion being somewhat symbolic of
executing ones "lower self" ,to crucify the false ego or "crucify" ones
lower nature/ animalistic self in order to "born again" or resurrected.
Getting back to the original Greek
texts of the New Testament one finds a totally new interpretation of the
Crucifixion of Jesus. One finds the possibility that the real meaning of
the crucifixion is to crucify the lower self and be "Born again" .
Further support of this argument is derived from
The Christ Myth
and
also The Legend of Saint Peter
Arthur
Drews claims that a long standing feature of the Semitic world was a
sacrifice of a "Son of the Father" — a Barabbas, originally -Jesus
Barabbas. [1]
["The real meaning of crucifixion
is to crucify the false self that the true Self may rise. As long as
the false self is not crucified, the true Self is not realized."
-Hazrat
Inayat Khan / The Soul's Journey
]
In this Allegorical version of the
crucifixion, when the Jews clamored for Pontius Pilate to "free Bar
Abba" they meant Jesus the anointed one The King of the Jews, their
King. When Greek and Roman translators who did not fully comprehend
Aramaic and many of the Gnostic implications and inferences retold
the story, they included the petition for freedom, but bar-Abbas became
a separate entity making the Romans less culpable, and the Jews more so.
The release of a separate person - Barabbas shifted blame for
the Crucifixion towards the Jews and away from the Romans. Naturally the
Gospels were written/rewritten to entice a Roman Audience of Gentiles to
the new Religion, there was little interest in appeasing the Jews who
after all had lost the war. The War being the insurrection in
which Barabbas had committed his crimes.
Mark 15:7
A man called Barabbas was in prison with the insurrectionists
who had committed murder in the uprising.
Luke 23:19
(Barabbas had been thrown into prison for an insurrection in
the city, and for murder.)
As per Christian tradition Barabbas
was a thief, murderer, and criminal. But if you read more closely it
appears that he was a freedom fighter against Roman Authority.
Possibly a zealot such as Simon Peter and others among the recognized
apostles of the Gospels. If Barabbas was Jesus "son of the
father", or the higher self as opposed to "Jesus the anointed one "
..lower self it would not be advantageous to depict him as an adversary
of Rome, if one were seeking Roman converts.
In addition, if Barabbas was Jesus, the
description of him in Mark 15:17 and Luke 23:19 as an insurrectionist
would go along with the descriptions of Jesus of Gamala, Jesus Ben
Shaphat, Jesus Ben Sapphias, Jesus Ben Ananus , and Judas of
Galilee which the contemporary
Historian Flavius Josephus
recorded in his
writings.
[1] Drews cites a statement from Jewish historian
Philo
according to which, on the entry of the Jewish King Agrippa into
Alexandria in 38 A.D.
, a fool / village idiot was chosen
by the mob to be the Jewish King. He was covered with a robe and
bore a crown of papyrus on his head and a reed in his hand as a scepter.
A group of men surrounded him, forming a bodyguard, and others
approached him to hail him as the king of the Jews. Philo’s report
suggests that karabas may have been a popular expression used to
describe someone impersonating a king. But it also may have been
a corruption of the Hebrew name Barabbas,- "Son of the Father."
Mr Drews goes on to trace, or attempt to trace this tradition to
Babylonian and Persian rituals whose origin resides in primitive nature
worship relative to the changing of the seasons. See
:Hoffers'
Lecture on Arthur Drews .
Further notes on Jesus Barabbas
{In the acts of the
apostles,1.23 and 15.22 we have a Joseph barsabas and a Judas
barsabas, both first names claimed as brothers of Jesus}. As per
Acts 1:23 Joseph Barsabbas was surnamed Justus so we can safely
assume that barsabbas is actually bar sabbas or son of sabbas and is
very close to barabbas . It is also very possible that at one
time these two barsabbas brothers , being equated with the Holy/Royal
Jesus family were referred to as the sons of Abbas or bars
abbas, and the word simply mutated over time and translation to
barsabbas.
The Early Western text manuscripts of the New Testament are
very similar to that of Early Christian texts of Rome, they
generally however contain longer passages and additional details not
found in the the Roman versions which comprise our New Testament of
today. In at least two Western texts, the Gospels appear in a
variant order: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark.
Acts 15:22 in the Modern Bible reads .."Then the apostles
and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own
men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas
(called Barsabbas) and Silas, two
men who were leaders among the brothers. "
In the Western Texts Barabbas
is used in place of Barsabbas
Paul [Pol]
the apostle also used the word "Abba" in his epistles , " Abba , Father.
"(Romans 4:15) " Abba, Father." (Galatians 4:6) .
Galatians 4:6
Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our
hearts, the Spirit who calls out, "Abba, Father."
The procedures of Roman crucifixion
adhered to a precise procedure. Upon being convicted the prisoner would
be flogged , his outstretched arms would be fastened to a heavy wooden
beam placed horizontally across his shoulders and neck . And the victim
would be led to the place of crucifixion where he raised by the beam on
a vertical post. This put intense pressure upon the victim's chest and
made it impossible for him to breathe unless his feet were fastened to
the stake. Leg breaking , such as portrayed in the biblical accounts,
was a form of mercy to avoid prolonging the agony - with no support the
victim would die of asphyxiation much faster. According to the gospel,
Jesus' legs were never broken, he should have survived several days
longer. but he dies, after a few hours on the cross. Even Pilate
is surprised upon learning of his death
[Mark 15:44].
Pilate was surprised to hear that he was already
dead. Summoning the centurion, he asked him if Jesus had already
died.
Religious scholars agree that Jesus modeled his life {At least as per
the Gospels} and movements to coincide with ancient Jewish writings that
spoke about the coming of a Messiah and the tribulations he would
undergo. It is not impossible for Jesus to have died on the cross
so soon , but highly improbable that he did. the death of Jesus comes
very conveniently, it occurs just as soldiers are about to break his
legs.
John 19:33 – “But when they came to
Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs.”
Which maintains the Prophecy
concerning a Messiah in Psalms
Psalms 34:20 “He
keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken.”
In the Gospels Jesus, hanging on
the cross, says that he thirsts and is given a sponge soaked in vinegar.
Matthew 27:48 Immediately one of
them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on
a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink.
Mark 15:36 One man ran, filled a
sponge with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus
to drink. "Now leave him alone. Let's see if Elijah comes to take
him down," he said.
John 19:29 A jar of wine vinegar
was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk
of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus' lips.