Archive for Jesus

Supper With Jesus

Posted in Atheist, belief, Christianity, faith, random, religion, scriptures with tags , , , , , on April 10, 2014 by chouck017894

Long before the rise of Christianity in the Roman Empire, the Gnostics in the city of Antioch understood and taught that the evolving and self-advancing creative energies out of Source were active as the Life Principle: this they referred to as the Chrest. (See post Birthplace and Delivery of Christianity, March 2013.) This understanding, which had been taught (using the twelve major constellations for illustrative focus) became lost–intentionally lost. In those ancient pre-Christian lessons, “crucifixion” was symbolic terminology used to distinguish the event of aware-consciousness willingly taking on–or nailing itself to an identity in matter-form (energy into matter). As such, the example of crucifixion was the principal image to illustrate the Creation lessons in which life energy passes over into a self-aware entity.

The events leading up to the NT version of crucifixion, beginning with the Last Supper, strongly indicate that the story is drawn upon those pre-history lessons on Creation. Jesus personifies the Life Principle, and so in the NT version Jesus instructs both Peter (who personifies densest matter, and thus cast as the “rock” of the church), and Jesus’ favorite disciple John (who personifies light) on how to find the place where they are to have supper, “…for the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called Passover.” (Luke 22:1) Unleavened bread always symbolized pre-physical elements which are to pass over–or manifest into defined matter-forms. To find where they were to “prepare” for the meal, Jesus instructs these two apostles, “…behold, when ye enter into the city (into the energy phase leading into matter manifestation), there shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher of water (the sign of Aquarius, the water bearer with which the ancient lessons of Creation began); follow him into the house (into the involving energy planes) where he entereth in” (Luke 22:10). The Life Principle would naturally “desire” to “…eat this pass over with you before I suffer” (Luke 22:15). The Life Principle, personified as Jesus, has to partake (or gather together) with the Patriarchal Principles of Creation in order to manifest out of primal energies and manifest as a self-aware matter form.

The Last Supper is presented in Christian interpretation as the preamble to what is inaccurately presented as a physical crisis, but in the ancient Creation lessons it had taught how Creation energies transform into matter form. There are, therefore, differing accounts of the happenings surrounding the alleged Last Supper, and biblical scholars have long been stymied by the numerous puzzles that these versions of Jesus’ last days present. For example, was the supper supposed to be the Jewish Passover meal for which Jesus and his disciples had gathered as Luke presents it? In John 13:1 and 19:14, however, the text is clear that the supper took place the day before Passover, with Jesus conversing and praying with his disciples. In the other Synoptic Gospels (Mark, Matthew and Luke), however, each differ from John’s account in numerous ways more than they differ from each other.

A strong clue that the Last Supper was not a historic happening rests in the fact that the earliest mention of the Last Supper was not given in the Synoptic Gospels at all, but only appeared later in letters (allegedly penned by Paul) some twenty to thirty years before the “Gospels” had been collected into a dogma-styled scriptural text. The avowed writings of Paul were drawn upon by the author primarily from ancient Creation-cosmology texts, which had used star groupings (constellations) as illustration. Elements from these ancient lessons were reworked to fit in with and smooth over the conflicting Peter-was-the-Christian-church-foundation dogma as implied in Mark, Matthew and Luke. Gnostic teachings were certainly available in the timeframe in which Paul is said to have preached, but those older teachings had focused more on the involvement of primal energies, after which each self-aware consciousness enters upon its matter-form identity. This developmental energy of the Life Principle responsible for this transformation into matter was known to the Gnostics in Antioch as the Chrest.

According to the St. John version, however, which was written in a later timeframe (c. 105-106 CE), Jesus was making ready for his crucifixion–to supposedly exit (not enter) this energy plane of matter. It is not pure coincidence, therefore, that the Last Supper and Passover are jumbled together in Christian myth: both observances are based upon the same ancient scientific teachings on how energy manifests or passes over into matter form. Both traditions intentionally recast the prehistory Creation lessons of manifestation of energy into matter by disguising the order of development. In Jewish myth, the Israelites are the personifications of the elemental energies which allegedly fled Egypt, with Egypt symbolizing the abundance out of Source from which they were to go forth to claim the “Promised Land” (energy as matter). But in the Roman version Jesus is portrayed as about to exit this temporary energy-as-matter plane.

In the St. John version of Jesus presiding over the Last Supper, it can only be properly understood as the dramatization of spirit (the Life Principle) making ready to take on its matter experience–not departing from its temporary matter form. This is why so many little details differ in the four Gospel versions. All do agree on one thing: that the twelve apostles were present at the supper. That agreement of plot is because the apostles represent the twelve patriarchal principles of Creation which are necessary for Creation to occur, and which were illustrated in the ancient teachings with the twelve major constellations. Thus Jesus, personifying the Life Principle, is portrayed as breaking unleavened bread–the symbol of the energy-substance of life–and saying, “This (energy-substance) is my body which is for you.” (This was not in the original Mark or 1 Corinthians or Luke texts, but inserted later.)

Jesus is then portrayed as taking up the cup, saying, “This cup is the new testament in my blood…” (1 Corintians 11:25–written in a later 94-100 CE timeframe). Other versions have it as “This cup is a new covenant…” The “cup” is clearly drawn upon the ancient pre-Gnostic lessons which used constellations as illustrations for the lessons. The “cup” was part of the Leo lessons and was given with the associate constellation Crater–“cup”, which taught of the water/wine of life (energies which are to ferment into self-aware life), and this energy activity is the “blood”, which is the true covenant with life.

The Romanized version of Jesus’ crucifixion which then follows was fashioned upon Gnostic versions of the more ancient Creation lessons which taught of formation activity in the Creation process where energy becomes active as matter. This also explains why the “saviors” of numerous other religions were also said to have been crucified–or nailed upon the cross of physical life. These include the Persian Mithras, the Babylonian Tammuz, the Druid Hesus, the Chaldean Criri, the East Indian Krishna, and others.

When reading the Gospels, there is nothing that provides any clear indication of where or at what point Jesus became transfigured into Christ. The four storylines spun out in Mark, Matthew, Luke and John do little to set things in reasonable perspective. But in those pre-history lessons, scientific principles and spiritual understanding always reinforced each other.

Three Crosses, Earthquakes and Darkened Skies

Posted in Atheist, belief, Christianity, faith, life, prehistory, random, religion, scriptures, theology with tags , , , , , on October 24, 2013 by chouck017894

Christian faith became symbolized by a severe cross only after the 300 CE timeframe. Before that general timeframe the cult from which a corporate-style church would be founded had represented themselves by two arced lines which resembled a fish. This was partially due to an understanding that Earth’s full entry into the Age of Pisces had occurred c. 60 BCE. It was seen as an auspicious time for a gentler faith than had been represented in the previous zodiacal ages of bull sacrifice (Age of Taurus) and ram (lamb) sacrifice (Age of Aries).

In the events that allegedly led up to the crucifixion, there is the token offering allegedly made by Pontius Pilate to the Jews in honor of their feast day (Passover) giving amnesty for a criminal: Jews were to choose between Jesus and another criminal to be pardoned from execution. The name of the pardoned man is given as Barabbas, which happens to mean “son of the father.” Something is implied here, for that name would seem to be more appropriate reference to Jesus if he was, as claimed, the “only begotten son of God.”

We should remember that two thousand years ago the sentence of crucifixion was the punishment handed out to persons of the Roman Empire who had been involved in some traitorous or violent antigovernment activity. Ordinary thieves, for example, did not merit that sadistic punishment of political crimes. So the dramatic touch of three crosses on the apex of a hill with Jesus, the personification of the Life Principle, in the center carried coded meaning to those who shared secret ancient teachings; the alleged scene did not adhere to standard procedures.

In the passion drama of the Christian crucifixion it is related that Jesus was crucified between two thieves. The book of Matthew 27:38 relates, “Then there were two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.” In the later book of Saint John 19:18 it is explained, “Where they crucified him, and two others, with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst…” Note: The two are called “thieves” here. In Greek texts, we should note, the men on each side of Jesus were described as lestai, which means “thugs” or “brigands”—or what we might think of as resistance fighters. This certainly makes it sound more politically authentic, but despite the more plot-worthy Greek version the fact remains that no official records of such a happening have ever been found. On the other hand, official record offices were often burned down in the many Jewish rebellions.

As the drama is traditionally accepted, the question of who was really responsible for the execution of Jesus hangs uncertainly between the Romans and the Jews. Crucifixion was the Roman method of disposing of political rebels, but Pontius Pilate washed his hands of the setup. The argument is put forth by some that Jesus was associated with Zealots who rejected Roman rule: the Zealots were indeed most emphatic that they did not recognize the legitimacy of Herod-appointed priests serving in the Temple of Solomon. So the blame for the death sentence is (conveniently) a toss-up. And where did the tradition of three crosses at one specific hilltop on Earth originate? Gospel accounts of Mark, Matthew and John provide differing and very few details much like a passion play formula, and, as pointed out, two common thieves (or even lestai) would not be crucified, which was primarily the punishment for political activists against the Roman government. There was in these sparse story elements an extremely important message to those who had privileged access to knowledge taught in mystery schools of that timeframe which explained the involving energy processes of Creation. Knowing the ancient teachings that were once given with constellation illustrations explains why Jesus, the Life Principle, was portrayed as telling only one of the “thieves” that he would enter Heaven with him. Luke 23:43 tells us that Jesus told the thief on his right, “This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.”

In this Christianized version refashioned from prehistory teachings, Jesus personifies the Life Principle; thus the “thief” on his left represents the involving primal elements which amass into defined energy-as-matter-form, and the “thief” on the right represents the transcendence of those creative energies into higher frequency dimensions: hence the “thief” on his right would “enter Heaven.” This is the Life Principle speaking to the evolutionary side of the Creation process. If this is not true then it means that the savior was guilty of dispensing conditional love, and that is not considered to be a divine attribute! From this manufactured holy account, however, the faith system acquired another “saint,” and the so-called “good thief” is addressed as “Saint Dismas.”

In the book of Matthew, the second Gospel to be written, in verse 27 referring to the crucifixion it is elaborated, “And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom, and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent…” Then it is alleged in Luke 23 that following the crucifixion there was “…a darkness over all the earth”, which is claimed to have lasted from the sixth hour to the ninth hour. Oddly, the first written Gospel, Mark, said nothing of such traumatizing happenings. And strangely, these unusual and frightening events were never mentioned in any contemporary records or chronicles. This despite the fact that Roman officials (such as Pontius Pilate) kept some of the most detailed records of events of any era. Nor did any noted Roman historian ever report on such abnormal happenings. The reason for these claims of supernatural happenings, which are not recorded in any legitimate chronicle, is that the whole episode, as with the three crosses, is drawn upon ancient teachings of elementary energies as source of Creation which were once explained using constellations as their illustration. These lesson divisions are represented even today with the zodiac signs, a clock-like diagram, so the “hours between six and nine” refer to the lessons which covered the span of self-aware matter-life that were given with the signs Leo, Virgo and Libra. (In those ancient Creation-cosmology lessons, Aquarius, the water sign, was at the twelve o’clock position—and represent the same waters of Creation spoken of in Genesis.) These lessons, “the sixth to ninth hour,” concerned Creation’s energies at the developmental stage where defined physical matter-forms with self-awareness are made manifest. In other words, the darkening (or congealing) of energy into matter (as “all the earth” referred to in Luke.)

The next prehistory lesson that followed the matter signs was presented with constellation Scorpio, which concerned transfiguration. The “veil of the temple” which Matthew said was rent apart refers to the further division of Creation energies—the primal energies of undefined prototypal matter formation (spoken of as Involution) being transformed with aware-consciousness which is to be tempered and refined in limited matter form from which it is to transcend. Essentially this energy dimension continues the same process which was allegorically depicted with God parting the waters in Genesis when Creation was activated.

This point also clarifies a curious story element found in Luke 23:34 where Jesus allegedly said from the cross, “Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.” Even as divine as Jesus is declared to be, the physical agony endured in crucifixion makes it unlikely that he could have spoken lucidly. Furthermore, the distance from the noisy milling crowd would have made such a speech virtually inaudible. But the alleged words do adhere to the ancient teachings, for here is depicted the Life Principle suspended upon a symbol of matter forgiving the primal circumstances that delivers aware-consciousness into its evolutionary potential. The forgiveness expressed in this incident is therefore from the perspective of divine indifference, which is to say there is nothing in these evolving energy processes that is to be condemned.

But that non-condemning aspect of those ancient teachings provided no faith system career opportunities.

More details on prehistory teachings are available in the books The Shiny Herd (Ancient Secrets Hidden in the Sky), and in The Celestial Scriptures (Keys to the Suppressed Wisdom of the Ancient), both by this author.

Jesus and Roman Empire Documents

Posted in Atheist, belief, Christianity, faith, history, random, religion, thoughts with tags , , on May 7, 2012 by chouck017894

There was no lack of dedicated writers and historians in the Roman Empire at the time when Jesus is said to have lived.  In fact that is probably one of the most distinguished and documented periods in western man’s history.  It is logical, therefore, that genuine historians and literary commentators in that timeframe would help clear up any uncertainties that Gospels may present.  It is certain that any reports of a wonder-working savior in the Jewish populated region of the empire would have been of prime interest to any culture representatives of the empire.  Listed here are ten historians and writers who were of, or near the timeframe when the events of Jesus’ life are said to have occurred.

Seneca, Lucius Annaeus (4 BCE-65 CE), Roman statesman, philosopher and playwright, born in Spain, educated in Rome, and tutor to the youthful Nero.  He is credited with inspiring the moderation of Nero’s first five years of rule.  One of the most eminent writers in Latin literature.  With such credentials it seems unlikely that he would never have incorporated events of such a miraculous man into a dramatic play.  Perhaps that lack is because there were already various mystery-cult passion plays with similar plotlines in existence.  Seneca died by commanded suicide in 65  following participation in an insurgent plot, known in history as the Pisonian conspiracy, against Nero’s detrimental rule.

Livy, Titus Livius (59 BCE – 17 CE)  A Roman historian who sought to produce in his 142 books a lifelike and moving representation of the empire and time in which he lived.  But Livy never recorded any information on some miraculous star over a Palestinian region, nor of a virgin birth of a demigod.  If he heard of these things at all, he recognized them for what they were; mythology, not history.

Tacitus, Publius Cornelius (55?-117 CE)  The last twenty years of Tacitus’ life, from 97 on, were devoted chiefly to historical writings.  The great strength of Tacitus as a historian lies in his psychological perception and character portrayals.  His focus was more on the men who were active within some eventful time than in the event itself.  It is this writing strength that makes it peculiar that Tacitus never gave any space to some Jewish wonder-worker named Jesus.  (Tacitus was friend of Pliny the Younger, q.v.)

Plutarch (46-120 CE)  A Greek biographer and essayist who resided in Rome for a while during the reign of the emperor Vespasian (from 69 to 79).  In more than eighty essays Tacitus included treatises on subjects of ethics and religion, but strangely he had nothing to say concerning any spiritual leader named Jesus who followers spoke of as Christ.

Pliny the Elder (Gaius Plinius, 23-79 CE)  Roman statesman, soldier, author of numerous historical and scientific works, and a genuine contemporary of Jesus, yet Pliny never mentioned the man Jesus.  This is odd: as a soldier of rank and renown he would be seriously interested in any potential center of disruption in the empire that such a man might inspire.

Pliny the Younger (Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus, 62-113 CE)  He took the name of his adoptive father, Pliny the Elder.  Roman statesman, orator and master of the epistolary  style of writing.  There is an eerie correlation between Pliny’s letter writing style and the epistles of Paul given in the New Testament.  In his writings, Pliny the Younger never referred to any divine founder of some Christ cult, but commented only on their beliefs.  Oddly, Pliny never indicated that he even knew of the self-proclaimed apostle of Jesus named Paul either, although both had supposedly traveled in the same regions of the empire.

Philo Judaeus (late first century BCE and early first century CE)  A Jewish-Hellenist philosopher; he  had received a comprehensive education in Greek literature, especially the teachings of the Pythagoreans, Plato, and the Stoics.  Philo regarded the divinity of the Jewish law as the basis and test of true philosophy, so any rumor of the birth of a divine Jewish man would have reached him.  He provides no hint of any such awareness.  If any man in this list should certainly mention Jesus, it would be Philo; he was Jewish and he lived before and after this alleged Jewish wonder-worker.

Juvenal (Decimus Junius Juvenalis, c. 55-128 CE)  Roman satirist.  Having once been poor, his satires often skewered the rich and sympathized with the impoverished.  During the reign of Domitian (81-96), he described the conditions of life that existed in Rome.  Nowhere in his writings did he ever mention a gentle teacher named Jesus who was said to have blessed the poor, nor did he write of any injustices or impoverishment of “Christians” in Rome.

Martial (Marcus Valerius Martialis, first century CE)  Roman poet, writer of satiric epigrams.  He went to Rome Around 64 CE, and through his writings earned the favor and patronage of the Emperors Titus and Domitian.  His later epigrams, in twelve books, covered a great variety of subjects, so it is surprising that he never referred to Jesus’ miracles in his works.  This is especially noteworthy since his epigrams are a valuable source of information on the manners, morals and beliefs in the empire between the reigns of Nero and Trajan.

Epictetus (real name unknown, active in the first century CE.)  A freed Greek slave proficient in Stoic philosophy who went on to teach philosophy at Rome until the year 90.  His doctrines are preserved in two works which show that his primary concern was the problem of man’s morals and principles.  His teaching was that all men have moral weaknesses, so each person must strive to be tolerant of each other.  It is strange, therefore, that in his works he did not make use of the similar teachings attributed to Jesus if there was wide knowledge of such a divine man.

All these men were intellects and well-informed on vital concerns of the empire in their day.  The fact is that there is not a single legitimate reference to Jesus, historical or secular, that dates from the first century CE.  There is, however, one exception known as Flavius Josephus, who is claimed to have been born in the year 37 in Jerusalem.  In a work attributed to Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, it is implied that a son of God named Jesus the Christ was crucified.  One thing is certain; if Josephus, supposedly a faithful Jew, wrote this in the timeframe of the alleged happenings, he would have quickly met death by stoning.  The book credited to Josephus is not accepted today as legitimate by serious students or theologians.  It is a forgery by some second century Jesus-cult activist.

Saints and Religious Propaganda

Posted in agnoticism, Atheism, Atheist, belief, Bible, Christianity, culture, faith, history, politics, prehistory, random, religion, thoughts with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 30, 2010 by chouck017894

Religious adherence, like any marketable product, needs a variety of representations and catch phrases to keep sales active and appealing.  In western religious practice one of those tools, especially as taken over in Christian practice, is the use of the word “saint.”  That word is commonly traced back as translating some derivative of the Hebrew qados and/or the Greek hagios.   In both cases these words were applied primarily to the gods that inspired awe and therefore rightly warranted adoration.  Of course those in the business of selling belief found it profitable to extend the meaning to include those persons or things that allegedly had a unique relationship to the gods.  The advertising ploy was that this special relationship of certain persons or things had been set apart from the unhallowed world and made sufficiently clean (rendered holy”) by man-concocted rites so that they could be used for sacred theatrics. 

Thus in religious phraseology the political minded priests of Yahweh at work in Jerusalem c. 850 BCE (their works would not be codified until the early 5th century BCE) declared anyone devoted to their god made up the “holy people” of Israel.  This necessitated that the priests indulge themselves in a bit of flim-flam, for “holy” in this use did not imply any moral sense: it was simply the priestly claims of being specially selected as God’s people.  Behind this priestly indulgence of smoke and mirrors, the true purpose had nothing to do with people’s personal spiritual advancement; it was totally focused on attaining and maintaining material advantages for their “faith” project.  Thus the followers of the Yahweh priests were declared “holy people”—or what we are taught to think of as “saints”—in their  meaning a nation set apart (self-segregated) for worship or service to God under priestly administration.

This false sense of spiritual entitlement that was introduced in the “faith” that was being manufactured in Jerusalem cultivated characteristics that guaranteed the faith could never reflect the all-embracing, liberal power that they claimed to serve.  By their self-serving interpretation of material  existence the incalculable diversity displayed throughout Creation is said to be manage through a system of favoritism and discrimination.

The rise of a counter doctrine was inevitable, especially since the  devotees to the priestly politics of spirit in Jerusalem had made for unending skirmishes through the young muscle-bound Roman Empire.  The invention of Christianity occurring in this timeframe was primarily a political undertaking, not some miraculous intervention of heaven to “save” the (Roman) world.  It is for this reason that the starring character in the new movement was cast as a Jewish rebel, whose name was derived from the Torah‘s brutal messiah named Joshua.  Thus in the anthology that became the New Testament there is found a heavy draw upon things Jewish in hope of clearing away at least some of that gang mentality that was the core of Judaism. 

The new faith movement was conceived and fleshed out primarily in Rome, not Jerusalem, but the authors had a certain amount of familiarity with the governing families in Jerusalem.  As the Christian counter movement evolved, borrowing strong attributes from other religious cults active in Rome at that time, the emphasis remained on a more moderated and less special interest understanding of things that function  beyond human comprehension.  But various authors brought different colorings to the new cult, among which was  the absorption of the notion of special category of persons that supposedly pleased heaven and which also appealed to the egos of converts.  Thus, as the people of Israel had been presented as “holy ones” or “saints,” there had to be allowance made that placed the competing “faith” movement in Rome on an equality basis with the unruly Jews.  Consequently God suddenly found himself possessed with a whole new variety of “favorites.”

The political minded authors of the Christian cult therefore cleverly incorporated into the new holy works the idea that those who comprised the church were “holy” and “saints” because they were set apart for God (not by God), and the church itself was the alleged new Israel.  So we now read in Romans 1:7, written 100 CE when the authors were restructuring the  earlier Christian strategies, that Christians are referred  to as God’s own people.  This theme is also implied in 1:1 Philippians undoubtedly written much later that the 64 date commonly insisted upon.  By this time Roman annoyance at the Jews spiritual arrogance was being channeled toward a practice of spiritual intimidation—which reached its orgiastic conclusion in Revelation (written c. 135 CE) where a new Jerusalem is lowered to Earth.

As the Christian movement grew and its tentacles spread from Rome across Europe, the movement became the replacement  for the collapsed Roman Empire.  It cannot be said to have been a true blessing for the world.  But its “saints” had amazing self-breeding capability.  The first “saints,” of course, were the supposed disciples;  the church could not have been built if they had not been systematically put in place.  In this is found the clue for church respect for all those it has promoted as “saints.”  From that starting point every figure ever presented as a “saint” throughout Christian history has been so honored because that “saint” in some manner advanced the corporate church itself.  In no way did any of those church approved “saints” ever advance man’s understanding that the universe responds directly to each person if each person learns to approach it in true humbleness.

So how have religion’s “saints” advanced the spiritual potential of mankind?  A look at the many schisms in every organized religion suggests that the evil so railed against by all of them is actually nurtured primarily within those practices of imagined superiority.  But the magic acts are still being indulged in even as we pass through the front hall of the 21st century—a calendar dating system, incidentally, based on a “holy” character whose existence has never been proven.  Amazingly, the Roman Catholic Church is still indulging in the old self-promotion scams, and plans are in place to elevate the late Pope John Paul to “saint” status.  All that is needed is a miracle that can be credited to him.  As the old adage goes, necessity is the mother of invention.

Institutional Faith

Posted in Atheist, Bible, Christianity, history, religion with tags , , , , , , , , on April 14, 2009 by chouck017894

In the timeframe in which Jesus is accounted for in the New Testament there was no word for an institutional-type place of worship. The closest approximation to that idea was the Greek word ekklesie, Latinized as ecclesia, meaning assembly or gathering–from which we give respect to the word ecclesiastical, now used to pertain to church or clerical things. From ekklesie there also evolved the Ecclesiastiucus, a book of the Apocrypha that is also known as “Wisdom of Jesus, the Son of Sirach.” And we should not forget the word ecclesiology was coined to mean the study of the Christian Church as an institution. Nor can we ignore the word eccelesiolatry which is a reference to worship of the church, especially extreme devotion to its principles or traditions.

The point of this is that nothing was ever suggested in NT presentation (or OT) that instructed the establishment of an institutional complex where faith could be utilized as a business venture to be presided over by a dogma-mesmerized and material-minded hierarchy. The Christian “fathers,” based in Rome and inspired by the Roman Empire manner of governing, contrived to choose church personnel in a manner that paralleled the “chosen people” of the Old Testament.

Christianity was then presented and marketed by the “founding fathers” as a new revelation of truth, and those men in supposed attendance of Jesus have been characterized as enlightened men and saints by generations of faithful. That the average Christian does not pay any attention to their claimed “holy word” is disclosed by passages in the NT that spoke of the disciples as “unlearned and ignorant men.” The faithful also refuse to note that the disciples brought before Jewish judges were judged to be idioti–idiots. And various cultures within the Roman Empire spoke of the early Christian movement as a “vulgar faith.” Celsus, the second century Platonic philosopher, spoke of the Christians as, “The rude and menial masses, who had hitherto been almost beneath the notice of Greek and Roman culture…”

Many, many men who influenced the early church did not have any particular respect for those whom they attracted. Jerome, for example, called a “saint,” spoke of the fierceness of the followers’ ardor which so frightened those who came to join that they fled in fear saying “…it is better to live among wild beasts than with such Christians.” And Julian (331-363), the Roman Emperor, renounced Christianity comparing them with “…the deadliest wild beasts (that) are hardly so savage against human beings as most Christians are against each other.” Julian also noted, “There is no wild beast like an angry theologian.”

The fanatical Christians, believing in literal mythology, went on to smother rationality, and Europe was plunged into centuries of darkness as the church institution, never dreamed of by Jesus, reigned supreme. Is it any wonder that Jesus chose not to return?

The Jesus Model

Posted in Atheist, freethought, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on March 8, 2009 by chouck017894

Nothing has ever been presented that can be said to give historical authenticity to the earliest biblical characters (Adam, Eve, Moses, Abraham, etc.,etc.); and that is equally true of the New Testament characters of Jesus and his apostles. For millions of persons this is blasphemy; but be honest, is it not strange that in over two thousand years nothing has ever been unearthed to verify that the “son of God” once dwelt on this little planet?

In the case of Jesus, there is enough characterization presented to suggest that, if nothing else, some person must have at least served as an example. A strong possibility of who that might be was a man of whom real records remain; he is known as Apollonius of Tyana, a neo-Pythagorean philosopher and magician who was born in Tyana, Cappadocia early in the first century CE.

Apollonius adopted the doctrines of Pythagorias early in life, abstaining from animal food and living in the simplest manner. He traveled to India, becoming initiated into the doctrines of the Brahmans. He visited Nineveh, Babylon and traveled through Ethiopia, Spain and Italy, eventually settling in Greece where he opened a school. His contemporaries regarded him as a worker of miracles, and his reputation spread to influence the aristocrats and literati of Rome.

There was another possible model in this same period, a verified man named Simon Magnus who is actually spoken of in the NT book of Acts. Still another possible model was a real man named Celus who was regarded so highly that a 15th century Swiss physician and alchemist, Paracelsus (like Celus), fashioned his own name.

But it is Apollonius who seems to stand out. He was so proficient in the arts of deception that even the Christian apologist Justin Martyr would later marvel at his “miracles.” “How is it,” Martyr lamented, “that the talismans of Apollonius have power in certain members of creation, for they prevent, as we see, the fury of the waves, and the violence of the winds, and the attack of wild beasts; and whilst our Lord’s miracles are preserved by tradition alone, those of Apollonius are most numerous and actually manifest in present facts.” Apollonius was venerated for his wisdom throughout Greece, and in the first century CE he was regarded by many as the rival of Christ. The major difference is that one can be historically verified and the other cannot.

There is more in favor of Apollonius’ contribution to Christianity than having produced the illusion miracles though. By some accounts, while Apollonius was traveling through the East c. 38-40, in the general region of present Singapore, he came upon a mythological account of Krishna (sometimes spelled Chrishna). That literary work is credited to a very great sage of India called Deva Bodhisatoua. Apollonius was so impressed with the story that he translated it into his own language, making some changes according to his own philosophy. He carried the manuscript back to Antioch–a favorite city among the Roman aristocrats and literati–and where there happened to be a well-established Greek cult that spoke of themselves as Chrestianoi, or sometimes as Chrestians. Perhaps we should remember that the spelling of the title Christ was not standardized until the mid-third century.

Christian: Fish or Cross

Posted in Astronomy, Atheist, freethought, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on March 6, 2009 by chouck017894

When the movement that was to grow into Christianity was being initiated out of Rome (not the Palestine area), the Earth had only recently (c.60 BCE) entered the Age of Pisces. An “Age” is the period of time during which the Sun rises and traverses across a dominant constellation at the vernal equinox, a period of time that lasts some 2160 years. This slow shifting viewpoint of Earth’s relationship with the cosmos is known as Precession of Equinoxes.

Earth had just exited from the Age of Aries (c.2220 BCE to c.60 BCE), during which the ram and lamb had played prominent roles in various religious movements of the world. Prior to that, in the Age of Taurus (c.4380 BCE to c.2220 BCE), the bull (and cow) had been focus of much of the world’s religious attention.

In the early years of the Christian movement the symbol used by the cult as an indicator to other followers was of two arched lines that suggested the form of a fish. The arched symbol would be the standard for the struggling society well into the third century CE. (How, where and why this early cult symbol was replaced by the cross is given in detail in Time Frames and Taboo Data.) The cross as emblematic of Jesus’ death, allegedly for world salvation, was not regarded to be symbolic of the instructive teachings of the master that were held central to the earlier emerging society.


Proof of the importance given to the fish symbol was uncovered not long ago at Megiddo Prison, Israel, where the remains of an early church were discovered under rubble being removed from a planned site of a new prison ward. There was much awe and excitement at finding two mosaics, one of which had as its central focus a depiction of two fishes, each facing opposite directions–acknowledgement of spiritual movement into the new Age of Pisces.


Considerable hype was given to the ancient Christian symbol of the Fish in the mosaic as predating the stark cross, and that the Greek writing used in inscriptions revealed that the money for the church and the mosaic were donated by a Roman officer and a woman named Aketous. The depiction of the two fish forms indicate that the church was active up until the fourth century–or just before Constantine, who recognized the political clout of the fanatical converts to Christianity, legalized Christian observances across the Byzantine Empire.


After the fourth century CE, altars also began to be used in Chrisian churches for priestly theatrics, and focus was deliberately altered from the fish symbol to the cross to emphasize the claimed physical sacrifice given for the believers. With Jesus’ death thus installed as the central theme of the movement, ritual and circumstance were made to overshadow all the early attention that believers had given to the teachings that had once offered a means of experiencing inner peace.