All of mankind’s faith systems happen to have been fashioned by drawing upon Earth’s astrophysical backdrop. Indeed there are prehistory and ancient monument structures such as Sumerian-Babylonian ziggurats, Stonehenge, the pyramids of Egypt and other innumerable detailed sites which openly attest to their having been aligned with astronomical phases. For those who could not understand the intricacies involved in the studies of astronomy’s mechanics, a bridge of understanding was attempted by painting the heavenly exhibition with a polish of myths. Ancient cycles of heavenly display were even recorded, such as the Age of Virgo (13,020-10,860 BCE), the Age of Leo (10,860-8,700 BCE), the Age of Cancer (8,700-6540 BCE), etc.
Our Age of Pisces can be dated as having begun c.60 BCE. Zodiacal “Ages” span 2,160 years, so the much touted “Age of Aquarius” is now on Earth’s doorstep and will enter for an extended visit by modern calculation c. 2100. Early in the Age of Pisces, as social and cultural systems were shifting gears, it was a timeframe of roaming “prophets,” mystics, diviners, messiahs, and teachers of spiritual mysteries. In the regularity which could be witnessed in heaven and nature’s movements the concept of divine law had long been accepted by humankind. Interpreting that divine law for human conduct had opened the opportunity for manipulative men to establish themselves as having been called upon by a higher force to guide followers in heaven-approved disciplines. Not surprisingly not all those who claimed for themselves the mantle of heavenly messenger interpreted what they saw in the same way.
Early into the passage of Earth into this Age of Pisces timeframe, around 30 BCE, there flourished a Jewish rabbi and teacher named Hillel (to 09 BCE). Hillel was the first Jewish scholar to systematize the interpretation of scriptural law, becoming a leading authority on law. An interesting fact to be considered is that Hillel was born in Babylonia and migrated to Jerusalem when he was forty years old. Thus he brought with him the more moderate spiritual influence that had fashioned that culture. In that general timeframe the greater part of Palestine (districts of Judaea, Samaria, Galilee, etc.) were administered by Herod and his successors.
In 30 BCE Hillel was elected president of the Sanhedrin, the supreme council of the Jews. It should be noted that Herod had captured Jerusalem earlier in 37 BCE, and upon taking power had forty-five members of the Sanhedrin executed. This severely weakened the hardline influence of the Jewish supreme council. In this calamitus situation Hillel founded the school of Scriptural interpretation which expounded a liberal view of Mosaic Law. There was, however, another school which was ruled over by an eminent doctor of the Jewish law named Shammai who was rigidly insistent upon a harsh, merciless interpretation of the Priest-composed “Mosaic” laws. This, of course, made for complications. Shammai happened to be vice-president of the Sanhedrin (the supreme council) under Hillel. The conflict between the two schools of interpretation of Mosaic Law was to endure for nearly one hundred years after Hillel died. It is certain that any member of the Herod family in Jerusalem and the aristocrats and literati in Rome were also well aware of this conflict of law interpretation within the Jewish faith system. Also, Hillel would have taught at the Temple in Jerusalem in the period just prior to the time in which the character of Jesus would supposedly have been a boy. Thus there are allegations that Hillel had been a great influence upon young Jesus. This seems understandable, for many of the sayings that are attributed to Jesus are startlingly similar to those recorded of Hillel.
The Gospel story of Jesus thus just happens to characterize the anxieties of the timeframe in which the Roman army occupied the Palestine region. Jewish resistance to the language, laws and Roman way of life is understandable, but their spiritual elitism and reliance on hymns and prayer to Yahweh to defeat the battle-hardened Roman soldiers led to the eventual destruction of Jerusalem under Hadrian in 70 CE. Even through many defeats, the Jews continued to believe that they, as God’s “chosen ones,” were spiritually superior to everyone. To explain why the “chosen ones” had not been spared all the indignities of suppression, the great anthem of suffering, as payment for God’s divine love, was hammered into place, which allowed them a sense of false dignity in the face of heavenly indifference.
The Romans, despite their obsession to rule over all people, sought more to absorb differing cultures into a broad “family” rather than destroy all individuality. In fact there were even temples to the gods of other cultures within the heart of Rome. Indeed, the Persian cult of Mithraism was favored by Roman emperors because Mithras was the god of victory and served as a contributory discipline for political ends. The intellects of Rome understood that variety and diversity make for healthy economic and academic circulation. So it is not so surprising that a Jew name Jesus, a name derived from Joshua the alleged Jewish dispenser of holocaustic warfare, became the subject of Roman interest around 55-60 CE, during the reign of Nero, with the appearance of the book entitled Mark. It is alleged that John Mark, a Hellenist, wrote this “Gospel” while visiting in Rome, and it is asserted to have been based on the teachings of Peter. There remains the peculiarity, however, that a text known as Ur Markus, which dealt with ancient occult cosmology, had been in circulation among the Roman literati from at least 34 CE. Whoever set out upon a literary counter-movement to the Jewish writings had to have access to Judaic and prehistory literary examples. Equally important, they also had to have the social standing and financial means to have the works copied and distributed. The construction of Jesus as Christ would evolve from the initial Mark text and continue well into the third century. Unlike his murderous namesake, however, the Gospel Jesus was promoted as the Prince of Peace. What the additions to the Jesus storyline reflects is the sporadic rebelliousness and the spiritual narcissism of the Jews in that timeframe of history.
As noted, Jesus was introduced to the Roman public in the book of Mark around 55-60: a second revised version appeared c.70. In this earliest evangelical work there is nothing which suggests that the author was personally acquainted with Jesus. It is obvious also that the author lacked familiarity with the geography of the region. So why is the book revered as “Gospel”? Because it had been penned with the intention of attracting people (principally the Jews) into a more compassionate form of belief. Unfortunately the successive Roman authors of supportive books laced their texts with beaming idioms that were common in propaganda of their timeframe, which further disguised the ancient astrophysical content that had first inspired the author of Mark.
Time Frames and Taboo Data Blog 