Tag Archives: Apiru

Rape, abortion, God, Bible, Tea Party Republicans and psychology

Richard Mourdock (R-IN) claims God intends for there to be rape

On Tuesday, October 23, 2012, Republican U.S. Senate candidate Richard Mourdock (running for the U.S. Senate seat in Indiana, against Democrat U.S. Congressman Joe Donnelly, the Tea Party Republican who defeated incumbent Republican Senator Richard Lugar in a surprise upset in Indiana’s primary election for U.S. Senate) declared that children born of rape are “God intended.”  Furthermore, draconically denouncing women who protest rape or abort the zygotes generated by rape as “baby [sic] killers”, Mourdock claimed that pregnancies because of rape were special gifts.  No such passage, term or phrase in relationship to rape is found in any Judeo-Christian literature, scripture, scroll or writing—nor does it appear in Mitt Romney’s Book of Mormon nor the Qur’an. 

Amarna Letters (tablets c. 1399-1313 BCE)

The passages that proclaim a god telling ancient Apiru/Habiru (proto-Hebrews, a word that does not appear until Genesis 14:13) come from ancient Akkadian sources that record their mercenaries (2350 – 2150 BCE) found in the Amarna Letters (1399 – 1310 BCE that discuss campaigns in Canaan) petitioning the gods of Assyria and Babylon for women to replenish their “supply” of male fighters (women were not considered worthy) and the gods of the ancient Middle East responded by telling the Apiru to “carry off” and rape women to gain additional males.  In the cuneiform scripts the function of rape was dual in purpose.  First,  there was the idea that rape will “silence dissent” and lead to pregnancy. Second, pregnancies and subsequent births were understood to be “chattel” (equivalent to property / cattle and thus the ownership of the births belonged to the rapists who could do as he wish with the offspring that included the slaughter of female infants.  Such infanticide was common throughout the Mediterranean world, especially in ancient Rome, Akkadia, and elsewhere). 

Child labor — 6.4 million under age 14 (lowest age is 4)

Killing female infants allowed males to “harness” young  males (children and teenagers) to do male labor much in the same way as the robber barons (also known as captains of industry) enslaved children during the industrial revolution and as late as the 1930s, especially in textile factories and slaughter houses.  Some male children served with female slaves as Qadesh in ancient temples as prostitutes to invoke divine blessings.

Psychologically, psychoanalytically rape has never been about sex or about procreation. Sexual rape is the link between pathological personality traits of narcissism and psychopathy and indicates sociosexual stereotypes of indoctrination by male authoritarian figures such as fathers, other family male members, priests, pastors, bishops and others who proclaim, wrongly, that the male is superior to the female (cf. Mouilso, Emily R.; Calhoun, Karen S. (2012). “A mediation model of the role of sociosexuality in the associations between narcissism, psychopathy, and sexual aggression”. doi: 10.1037/a0026217. Psychology of Violence, Vol 2(1), January 2012, 16-27).  Rape is also about domination especially when it results in the rape of males of any age, as seen commonly in war zones (Vikman, Elisabeth (2012). “Review of Sexual violence and armed conflict”. doi: 10.1037/a0028104  Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, Vol 18(2), May 2012, 199-

NATO soldiers rape prisoners and civilians

200), hostile camps and among gangs (Swartout, Kevin M. (2012). “The Company They Keep: How Peer Networks Influence Male Sexual Aggression”. doi: 10.1037/ a0029997Psychology of Violence, September 24 , 2012; and, Seto, Michael C.; Lalumière, Martin L.; Harris, Grant T.; Chivers, Meredith L. (2012). “The sexual responses of sexual sadists”. doi: 10.1037/a0028714Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol 121(3), Aug 2012, 739-753) in street conflicts, especially with the rapes of males (Turchik, Jessica A.; Edwards, Katie M. (2012). “Myths about male rape: A literature review”. doi: 10.1037/ a0023207. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, Vol 13(2), Apr 2012, 211-226).  Rape has always been about violence—but not in religion where most religions, especially those that came with the ascent of the Emperor Constantine I who created his “catholic [universal] church” at his war council in Nicaea in 325 CE when he attempted to unify the nation with a single religion over which he stood as Pontifex Maximus (the high priest of the state religion) in addition to being the civil war leader, rape was initially ignored and then canonized as being the fault of the woman.

Mourdock, speaking as a pope or emperor within the Tea Party Republican extremist group told an audience at the Tuesday Indiana US Senate debates:  “I came to realize that life is that gift from God; even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.”  He quickly was denounced by the Republican Party, officially, then saw numerous Republicans race to fill his war chest to defeat Donnelly in the

Tagg Romney said he wanted to punch him. Ann Coulter called him “the retard.” And now, Sarah Palin says Obama “shuck and jive”

November contest.  The duplicity of the corrupt Republican Party in the USA is now legendary with such effete afficionados as Sarah Palin exposing her extreme racism when Twittering about President Obama’s “Shuck and jive” on Libya that won her tremendous support among American’s racists and renewed support by organized hate groups.

Yahweh’s wife Asherah was edited out of the Bible

When the Apiru ultimately invaded the far more advanced culture of Canaan and conquered its people, they brought with them their legends and lore and used it to craft the ultimate Torah and Prophets, incorporating their lust for rape to obtain new foot soldiers.  It is for that reason we read of the vile, vicious, vitriolic gods (one of whom, the agricultural god Yahweh would “marry” (by rape) the fertility goddess of the legitimate owners of Canaan, Asherah, before her people (Palestinians) were murdered and raped with but a few (the virgins who were young) being allowed to survive to serve as breeders for the Apiru mercenaries. 

1699 Qur’an showing Abram sacrificing Ishmael his first born son

The priests of the Apiru, whose specialty was taking young boys into the desert or up into the mountains and sacrificing them on altars stoked with fire (fancifully retold in the myth of Abram taking “his first born” to be sacrificed to the gods of his tribe), called on the gods from the Apiru hell and thundered rape to be justified. We find these accounts in most of the Torah, including in the last book written: Genesis—which became the backbone for the Old Testament and the Hebrew Bible. 

 In the Old Testament, rape was a means of subduing people, repopulating the Hebrew community that had been decimated in war, and a way to extract vengeance.  These accounts are nothing less than records of past Apiru violence, rape, and murder, as is found throughout the Old Testament, as in Numbers 31:7-18 (NLT):

    They attacked Midian just as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed all the men.  All five of the Midianite kings – Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba – died in the battle.  They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword.  Then the Israelite army captured the Midianite women and children and seized their cattle and flocks and all their wealth as plunder.  They burned all the towns and villages where the Midianites had lived.  After they had gathered the plunder and captives, both people and animals, they brought them all to Moses and Eleazar the priest, and to the whole community of Israel, which was camped on the plains of Moab beside the Jordan River, across from Jericho.

    Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp.  But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle.  “Why have you let all the women live?” he demanded[Moses was among the most bloodthirsty butchers of the ancient Apiru who originally worshiped the gods of ancient Egypt and then fashioned from fantasy the gods of what would become Israel [Is-Ra-El from the secondary Trinity: Isis-Ra-El, Isis (the goddess of creation), Ra (the god of the Sun), and El (the god/father/husband who became in Babylon and Canaan Baal: who was a father who consumed his children as a cannibal)] “These are the very ones who followed Balaam’s advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor.  They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD’s people.  Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man.  Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.

Clearly Moses and God approves of rape of virgins.  The same scenario exists in Deuteronomy 20:10-14):

     As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace.  If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor.  But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town.  When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town.  But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder.  You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.

And in Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (NLT) there is the sole proviso on rape:

    If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

If she was married and did not protest fearing the rapist would kill her, the rape victim was to be killed (Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB; plagiarized from the records of Marid (Arabic: مارد‎) who were djinn or pre-Muslim deities):

    If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife.

The woman was nothing more than property as later glossed in Judges 5:30 (NAB):  They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera’s spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil.   (Judges 5:30 NAB).

The gods of the Old Testament in cruelty (deisidaimonia), and spite declared that Polygamy, Rape, and the ending of a fetus’ life was pleasant and merited the gods “Forgiveness” (2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB; cf. Avalos, Hector (2005). Fighting Words: The Origins of Religious Violence. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, and Regina M. Schwartz (1998). The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. University of Chicago Press):

    Thus says the Lord: ‘I will bring evil upon you out of your own house.  I will take your wives [plural] while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor.  He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight.  You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.’

    Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.”  Nathan answered David: “The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die.  But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die.”  [The child dies seven days later.]

Women were marketable commodities: slaves and sex slaves or whores (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT; cf. Ide, Arthur Frederick (1992). Moses: The Making of Myth and Law: the influence of Egyptian sex, religion, and law on the writing of the Torah. Las Colinas, TX: Monument Press):

    When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.  If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.  But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her.  And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter.  If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife.  If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.   

Judges 21:10-24 (NLT) which is plagiarized from the far more ancient story of the Rape of the Sabine women (c. 750 – 752 BCE; Livy, Ab urbe condita, 1:10, Latin; Benjamin Vincent (1874).  Haydn’s Dictionary of Dates (New York, BY: GP Putnam & Sons, p. 572):

    So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children.  “This is what you are to do,” they said. “Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin.”  Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan.

    The Israelite assembly sent a peace delegation to the little remnant of Benjamin who were living at the rock of Rimmon. Then the men of Benjamin returned to their homes, and the four hundred women of Jabesh-gilead who were spared were given to them as wives.  But there were not enough women for all of them.  The people felt sorry for Benjamin because the LORD had left this gap in the tribes of Israel.  So the Israelite leaders asked, “How can we find wives for the few who remain, since all the women of the tribe of Benjamin are dead?  There must be heirs for the survivors so that an entire tribe of Israel will not be lost forever.  But we cannot give them our own daughters in marriage because we have sworn with a solemn oath that anyone who does this will fall under God’s curse.”

    Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem.  They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, “Go and hide in the vineyards.  When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife!  And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, ‘Please be understanding.  Let them have your daughters, for we didn’t find enough wives for them when we destroyed Jabesh-gilead. And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.'”  So the men of Benjamin did as they were told.  They kidnapped the women who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance.  Then they rebuilt their towns and lived in them.  So the assembly of Israel departed by tribes and families, and they returned to their own homes.

These women were repeatedly raped. It was excused on the pretext of religion, as the gods of the Old Testament take an active role in rape and plunder (Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB):

    Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst.  And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city.  

The sole exception is if the girl is “engaged” (a public announcement of betrothal is made):

But if in the field the man finds the girl who is engaged, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lies with her shall die. But you shall do nothing to the girl; there is no sin in the girl worthy of death, for just as a man rises against his neighbor and murders him, so is this case. When he found her in the field, the engaged girl cried out, but there was no one to save her (Deuteronomy 22:25-27; cf. Schroeder, Joy A. (2007). Dinah’s Lament: the Biblical Legacy of Sexual Violence in Christian Interpretation. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, Press; and, חיון, חיים (2011). ותצא דינה : קריאה בסיפור המקראי ועיון בזיקותיו. הוצאת ספרים ע״ש י״ל מאגנס, האוניברסיטה העברית, Yerushalayim : Hotsaat sefarim a. sh. Y.L. Magnes, ha-Universitah ha-Ivrit.

On the other hand, abortion is not condemned nor denied in the Bible.  If it occurred during the time of war or other conflict it was merely an accident for which a monetary price had to be paid; Exodus 21:22 reads:

When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman’s husband demands, paying as much as the judges determine.

While there is no word for abortion in the Bible, the gods of Old Testament delighted in the slaughter of fetus and new born children:

  • Numbers 31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones.
  • Deuteronomy 2:34 utterly destroyed the men and the women and the little ones.
  • Deuteronomy 28:53 And you shall eat the fruit of your own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters.
  • 1 Samuel 15:3 slay both man and woman, infant and suckling.
  • 2 Kings 8:12 dash their children, and rip up their women with child.
  • 2 Kings 15:16 all the women therein that were with child he ripped up.
  • Isaiah 13:16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished.
  • Isaiah 13:18 They shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children.
  • Lamentations 2:20 Shall the women eat their fruit, and children.
  • Ezekiel 9:6 Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little children.
  • Hosea 9:14 give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.
  • Hosea 13:16 their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.

“Fruit” (וּפְרִי־) was another word for fetus (cf. Isaiah 13:18:  וּקְשָׁתֹות נְעָרִים תְּרַטַּשְׁנָה וּפְרִי־בֶטֶן לֹא יְרַחֵמוּ עַל־בָּנִים לֹא־תָחוּס עֵינָם׃) he destruction of the fetus was not knew in the ancient world, but was especially common among the save polytheists known as the Apiru (Hebrew), especially when fighting for the Akaddians.

Even Jesus noted that women would come to the day in their life when they wished they had not been pregnant nor give birth to future generations: “For, behold, the days are coming, in which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the womb that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck” (Luke 23:29: ὅτι ἰδοὺ ἔρχονται ἡμέραι ἐν αἷς ἐροῦσιν· μακάριαι αἱ στεῖραι καὶ αἱ κοιλίαι αἱ οὐκ ἐγέννησαν καὶ μαστοὶ οἱ οὐκ ἔθρεψαν).  The antiabortion position does not demonstrate love for humanity, or compassion for real human beings, but glories in the suffering of woman in testimony to Genesis 3:16 (KJV): “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee”.

The biblical injunction “Thou shalt not kill” (KJV: Exodus 20:13, copied into Deuteronomy 5:17; cp. Numbers 35:27; 1 Kings 21:19; Hosea 4:2, ref. Deuteronomy 4:42) forbids killing anyone outside of the womb.  When the fetus is mentioned it is mentioned as “fruit” that is not fully ripened or formed.  Pregnancy was “to be fruitful” and if the zygote developed into a fetus, that fetus was referred to as “fruit of the womb.” The Greeks were equally explicit as to the timetable of the development of the fetus (see: Ide, Arthur Frederick (1993). Catechism of Family Values Based on the Bible (Arlington, Liberal Arts Press), pp. 241ff).

Abortion is considered a valid alternative to slaughter: “…but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born (Matthew 26:24). Abortion was common throughout the ancient world. While many medical professionals would administer certain herbs to expel the fetus, women of station who were raped committed suicide to protect their “honor”—a practice that last beyond the beginnings of the Christian church (c. 325 CE) and was a mark of martyrdom for many who ultimately were canonized as saints.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) does find cases where abortion is accepted, however reluctantly:Some exceptional circumstances may justify an abortion, such as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. … Those who face such circumstances should consider abortion only after consulting with their local Church leaders and receiving a confirmation through earnest prayer“. 

In 2011, two out of three women having abortions in the U.S. identified as Christian.  Few women capriciously elected abortion.  Most of the women who had an abortion showed their understanding of the responsibilities of parenthood and family life. Three-fourths of women cited concern for or responsibility to other individuals.  Three-fourths say they could not afford a child; the Qur’an forbids “the killing of a child for lack of food in the home (Al-Israa 17:31 and Al-An’aam 6:151: And kill not your children for fear of poverty. We provide for them and for you. Surely, the killing of them is a great sin” but says nothing about abortion; this is mentioned only in Hadith – Sahih Bukhari 8.732 that mentions only a “blood price” if the woman herself kills the fetus; a woman who strikes another woman who is pregnant and kills the fetus is to be put to death in Hadith – Abu Dawood 4555 but says nothing about a voluntary abortion; a similar sentence is at Hadith – Al-Muwatta 43.5) and three-fourths said that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents. No less than half said they did not want to be a single parent or were having problems with their husband or partner (Finer L. B., et al. (2005). “Reasons U.S. women have abortions: quantitative and qualitative perspectives”, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2005, 37(3):110–118.).

Richard Mourdock (who claimed that God intends rape to occur can be seen here). “Mourdock’s belief that there should be no exception that allows a woman to end a pregnancy is shared by the GOP platform and at least 40 Republican candidates for the House and Senate including Rep. Paul Ryan, the GOP nominee for vice-president, and Rep. Todd Akin,”) comes from the Paul Ryan (who sponsored Fetal Personhood and opposes family planning, read here), Todd Akin (who claims that it is impossible for a woman who is raped to conceive; watch here, and read Jason Sattler at The National Memo), Joe Walsh (read here:  “there is no need for an abortion to save the mother’s life”,  with update), Rick Santorum (who carried a dead fetus to his children for them to play with and opposes all abortions in all cases (althought his wife, Karen, had one) and claims that their is no constitutional right to privacy, opposes birth control (read here and here), and is equally equated with the Afghan Taliban being for the mind control of Opus Dei and stagnating education (read here and here), Sharron Angel (against abortion claiming that her god has a plan for babies born as the product of rape; read here) wing of the GOP that believes in abortion for zero percent of all cases — no abortion, no exception for rape, incest, life of the mother, or health of the mother. Period.

It is a great shame that none of these men are raped.  If these men could become pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. despite the ignorance of Timothy Dolan, Bryan Fischer or the German Joseph Ratzinger.

4 Comments

Filed under abortion, Bible, Old Testament, Republican Party, Roman Catholicism, separation of church and state, Tea Party

Inventing Christianity

The words Jesus (Latin: Iesus; Hebrew: ישוע; Arabic: عيسى‎ Isa; Greek: Ἰησοῦς Iēsous born c. 7-2 BC/BCE and died c. 30–36 AD/CE) and Christ (ancient Greek: Χριστός, Khristós, meaning ‘anointed’ as a king; (Hebrew: מָשִׁיחַ, ; Aramaic: משיחא, Greek: Μεσσίας,  Arabic: المسيح‎, al-Masīḥ, Latin: Messias. It is a translation of the Hebrew מָשִׁיחַ (Māšîah), for Messiah) only of late became the name of a man recorded in the Christian New Testament.  Christ was a given title, not a last name.

Originally, the word Messiah had two meanings: warrior and final prophet. They are not the same nor do they mean the same thing.  The title Christ was never used by the man Jesus in the New Testament.  It has always been used by others: e.g. Matthew 1:1, 1:18; Mark 1:1; John 1:17; 17:3; 9:22; Mark 9:40; Luke 2:11; 22:2. As a title it was bestowed on the New Testament Jesus by Peter, a non-relative and a rather minor disciple, in Luke 9:20.

The engraving reads DIA CHRSTOU O GOISTAIS. It is interpreted to mean either “by Christ the magician” or “the magician by Christ”. Bowl c. 200 BCE.

We have actual artifacts that the word Christ appeared at least by 200 BCE and was always accompanied by the message “the magician” and was the leader of a group of wise men and a conjurer of White Magic. The 200 BCE bowl has numerous subsequent bowls that are found as late as 100 CE, and in each they are associated with a magician titled The Christ and used for magical ceremonies.

The bowl, recently found, is very similar to one depicted on or with two early Egyptian earthenware statuettes that are thought to show a soothsaying ritual.  This ritual was common around 3000 BCE and sometimes included the drinking of blood, but generally was used to hold wine that all soothsayers shared as a “common cup”.  The bowl is not that old, and there are many problems with its too-clear inscription after being under water for 2000 years: it does not show the wear of time.  Der Spiegel noted in an article, that Chrestos  was a rather popular Greek name at that time: “Chrestos war in Griechenland ein gebräuchlicher männlicher Vorname”, erklärt der Historiker Manfred Clauss aus Frankfurt am Main, “das muss nichts mit Jesus zu tun haben.”  It would have nothing to do with a New Testament Jesus, for the translation is: “Chrestos was commonly a man’s given name in Greece,” explains the historian Manfred Clauss of Frankfurt am Main. “That need not have anything to do with Jesus.”  In this instance, the name Jesus would be more of a name used in soothsaying or some magical ritual, such as attempting to raise the dead (singularly or as a group).

It is a weak argument to say that chrestianos and christianos are interchangeable, as Tertullian registered disappointment, if not anger, when he was called a chrestianos. Tertullian was abrupt when he reiterated that he is a “Christian” not a “Chrestian.” (Tertullian, Nat. 1.3.8-9).

The engraving might be a dedication, or present, made by certain a “Chrestos“: a group that became popular in Rome, migrating from Alexandria during the reign of Julius Cesar. They were primarily a passive people, and entered Rome with a firm belief in an afterlife that included respect for the dead by burying each person under a headstone. 

This headstone translates as:

“D.M.” (is an abbreviation of “Diis Manibus”)
“to the gods of theunderworld”
[The following text is difficult to interpret as it is missing “essential” words, and requires an interpretation of  M. (and) T. that would mean]
father/fathers of Drusus, dedicate the tomb to his/their first born son
who lived for 42 years and seven days
and Faustus, the son/slave/freedman of Antonia
the daughter/wife of Drusus, bought the right for the urn [with cremation ashes] to be putin a certain columbarium or other burial place from Jucundus, the Chrestian.

(Lodovico Antonio Muratori (1739-1742).  Novus Thesaurus Veterum Inscriptionum, Vol III. Class. XXIII, Mediolani (Milan), p. 1668, no. 6. Rendered here after Manni, Gaetano, Principi della religion cristiana in Firenze :appoggiati a’ più validi monumenti o si dica monumenti appartenenti alla medesima religione, 1764, p. 3).

This is unlike the militant christianos who argued for a warrior god who would cleanse the world.  It is based on the marginalia of Matthew 10:34 that would be later incorporated into the gospel.  It has been suggested that it belongs to a possible religious association called Ogoistais, but the term or name christianos does not appear anywhere before the reign of Nero who wrongfully has been indicted for supposedly accusing (approximately 64 CE), the Chrestianos of starting the fire that “burned [the wooden ghettos of] Rome, but then it was a perjorative word (1 Peter 4:16).

Chaldees – map of modern day Iraq with Ur of the Chaldees pointed out (where Noah and Abraham allegedly came before invading Canaan)

The word “Ogoistais” could be connected to known religious groups that worshipped early Greek and Egyptian gods and goddesses, such as Hermes, Athena and Isis.  Isis was a popular deity throughout the Roman world, and is at times related to or synonymous with Asherah, Astarte, and other deities. Her devotion was part of the word that Hittite mercenaries, known as IS-RA-EL-ites, later used to distinguish themselves from other mercenaries as they were a more violent group most coming from the Chaldees (Iraq from which the mythological figures of Abraham and Noah come in quest of conquering Canaan–the reason for Noah’s infamous curse) and parts of India.  There are numerous records of ancient Jews being warrior mercenaries throughout Egypt, numbering more than 30,000 at the time of Ptolemy I (Ludovici Mendelssohn schedis usus edidit Paulus Wendland (1900). Aristeae ad Philocratem Epistola etc.  (Leipzig, Deutschland: Teubner  § 13)

If it is a part of another cult, then the “word” could actually be a mélecture for ὁ γεύστης, “the one who tasted”? This would preclude it being salted, or a disk that would come from a “pot” but would rather be a ceremonial cup from which one would sample wine. Much of the wine would be “new wine” and invites a remembrance of the myth of the drunken state of Noah and Lot, both of whom were intoxicated and had sex in defiance of their own prohibitions.

Noah is drunk on new wine and naked

Noah is accused in the Bible of being drunk on wine and cursing Canaan (his grandson) without giving a reason, but most likely it was because of masturbation that stopped further fathering of warriors at that time, as the Bible clearly states that Noah was drunk, which later Apiru (Hebrews) would declare to be the “sin” of seeing a parent naked (Genesis 9:20-27: ). In the original text the word is used as exposing his genitals, and naked means arouse and passion; nude, on the other hand, is a state of being, as with a child and denotes innocense, purity, and union with the divine). 

Lot commits incest with his daughters (Genesis 19)

It is also from this place that Lot and Abraham come.  Lot is an unwelcomed guest in the city of Sodom and refuses to register with the city council strangers who sneak into the town while the community was at war.  Lot leaves with his two daughters and travels to another City of the Plain (Zoar) where he is equally unwelcomed and flees to a cave in the surrounding mountains.  In the cave Lot falls drunk on new wine and then commits incest with his two of his four daughters “so that they preserved his seed within them” (Genesis 19:36).  The two who were married stayed in Sodom and perished with their bridegrooms, indicating rather recent and even hurried marriages since foreigners (the daughters) were suspected of treason and passing secrets to the enemy (Gen. Rabbah 50:9; פרקי רבי אליעזר : מהדורה מדעית Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer, ed. Higger, Michael, and Horowitz Chaim M.  בית המדרש למורים של ישיבת ר’ יצחק אלחנן, New York : Horev, 704-708 [1944-1948] chap. 25).  Lot was considered the evil one.  According to the midrash (Tanhuma, Vayera 12), Lot, from the moment he moved into the city, in fact before that when he told his uncle Abraham that he wanted to move to the city, Lot was determined to dwell in Sodom because he wanted to engage in the licentious behavior of its inhabitants: drinking excessively, engaging in gluttony, ignoring the poor, and so forth (Ezekiel 16:49). His self-righteous, ego-centric and barbaric behavior becomes clear when the townspeople mill about his door, demanding that he hand over the angels.  Instead of doing what Jewish law and custom required, Lot offers his daughters to the mob. The Rabbis observe that a man usually allows himself to be killed in order to save his wife and children, while Lot was willing to allow the townspeople to abuse his daughters.  It is for this reason that the gods of Lot told Lot: By your life, the improper act that you intended to be done to your daughters will indeed be committed, but to you.  Nowhere in the original scrolls is Lot defended for protecting the messengers, nor does it use in any instance the sentence of homosexuality. It shows that Lot was totally depraved and beyond true redemption.  In another midrash (אגדת בראשית : מדרש אגדה על ספר בראשית ריכא (רב) … midrash agadah ʻal sefer Bereshit meyuḥas leha-tana Aba Arikha[ed. Buber, Salomon; מנורה, מכון למחקר ולהוצאת כתבי־יד וספרים עתיקים, New York : Menorah, Makhon le-mehkar ule-hotsaʼat kitve-yad u-sefarim ʻatikim, 719 [1959] 25:1) regards the daughters’ act as punishment for their father’s own sexual promiscuity.

It is not surprising that later Rabbis praised the two daughters who seduced their father, as they were “preserving his seed” and the future of Judaism (Pesikta Rabbati 42). This was common in those days, as civilization depended on children to become fighters and preserve the “houses” (states) that existed.  Another part of the story shows that Genesis was written without consideration of the Laws of Moses in Leviticus, as there is no condemnation of nudity nor of seeing one’s father naked (Leviticus 18:6-18).

The legend of Lot indicates a less sophisticated group who observed rituals and rites but not in the manner intended.  Devotees would have sipped wine and “tasted it” with the injunction “taste from this cup that is the blood of the deity” and it would limited to “true believers” who would “taste it” but not drink it as with the chrestianos in Alexandria.

Idrimi, king of the Hapiru

Guzzling wine and drinking blood has been the description of a blood-thirsty group was known as Apiru (or Habiru, an Egyptian word the sprung from pr.w).  was the name given by various Sumerian, Egyptian, Akkadian, Hittite, Mitanni, and Ugaritic sources (dating between 1800 BCE and 1100 BCE).  It is a reference to a group of people living as nomadic invaders in areas of the Fertile Crescent from Northeastern Mesopotamia and Iran (ancient Persia) to the borders of Egypt in Canaan and was the land fought over, plundered, and its villages destroyed by Abraham and Lot.

Cuneiform of Sumerian SA.GAZ and corresponding West Semitic ha-bi-ru

The Hittite forces called the IS[is]-Ra-El-ites after the goddess, the god of the sun, and the Lord over the family who was a minor god. The Apiru came from Sumeria or other parts bordering on the Fertile Crescent and are designated by a two-character cuneiform logogram transcribed as SA.GAZ that translates as ‘murderer, robber’, literally ‘one who smashes sinews’, is an original Sumerian nominal compound attested as early as ca. 2500 BC. It is later equated with Akkadian habbātu ‘plunderer, bandit’ and šaggāšu ‘murderer’ and are identified with the mythological judge known as Lot in Genesis.  AS a group, are recorded in letters written by Canaanite scribes who had mastered the art of cuneiform-based characters or letters of the Akkadian language.  

Scribes noted that Akkadian leaders complained about attacks by armed groups willing to fight and plunder for anyone who would given them war equipment including shields, swords, and sabers, food and drink provisions, and places where they could rest and quarter their lifestock.  A second devious trick of the Apiru was for chieftains to sell of their wives as prostitutes (Genesis 12:10-20 and Genesis 20:1-7) and then reclaim them saying that their gods were offended; Abraham was a liar, pimp, and sacreligious at best, but in reality it is a story of no less than three men on a mission to establish a new kingdom and rule over it when they had sufficient people, Apiru, to conquer established cities and take control.

Apiru in hieroglyphs

Apiru were known as common thieves, their reputation advanced even by Egyptian pharaohs, such as Thutmose III. Amenhotep II boasted of capturing 89,600 people, of which 3,600 were Apiru, in his campaign in Canaan in 1420 BCE.

The Apiru were quick to take to magic rituals and employed “cups” to hold “the source of life”: usually blood or sperm that was consumed in “sacrifice to the gods of old”: the elohim (a plural noun that would be incorporated into the Hebrew language and theology: אֱלֹהִ֔ים).  Ultimately the “source of life” became a ritual drinking of wine, with “new wine” reserved for leaders and gods.

Ancient Roman theater in the modern city of Alexandria, Egypt

The fact that the bowl was found at Alexandria in Egypt is significant. Alexandria was a cosmopolitan center where new and different faiths were always appearing while older faiths and religions were fading fast.  Alexandria was a religious entreport, where faiths were constructed as rapidly as they appear and disappear on the universal landscape.  Each faith claimed to be unique. Each religion was pure fraud, fashioned to make the priests and preachers rich at the expense of the poor, the miserable, the tired, who hoped for a better life–at least in the world to come. 

The sole purpose of religions in Alexandria was to propose solutions to the problem of mortalkind, to offer a fleeting fancy of what might be but never had been.  The mystery religions that rose faster than any Pentecostal group anywhere in the world offered a strangeness that was inviting and yet terrifying.  It was a proto-Adventist colony looking for the return of any number of crucified saviors, a world that held many mysteries that could not be answered as education was denied.  Education was only for a privileged few and not for the masses.  If the laborers learned that they were being fooled into thinking that there was some being who  truly looked after them but did not exist, the masses would rise up and throw off its predatory prelates prattling while dining on the fatted meats sacrificed to the gods (cp. 1 Corinthians 8:1). 

The pontiffs of the ancient world were, without exception, claiming that the mysteries that true science could explain, such as earthquakes, storms, locust infestations, and more were the work of some god or goddess (both in singular and plural form). Myths like burning coals dropping from heaven, rivers running red with blood, and other curses were created for the gullible and enrichment of the priestly class (cp. Exodus 7:9, 8:2-4, 16 ff that can all be explained through natural science and the result of global warming) .

Education in the ancient world, universally, was weak at best, and was not meant nor permitted for everyone to experience.  Religion presumed to have the answers to all questions asked and not asked.  These magical answers were guarded by a self-serving priestly class that infected the thinking of many while robbing the poor for their “daily needs”.  

Jesus: High Priest-King

Those who controlled the people were called priests or kings.  Many had dual hierarchy being priest-kings who controlled religion and politics and some even proclaimed themselves professors (teachers) of science (with ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamians arguing that the earth was flat as did Thallas and other Greeks, according to Aristotle (Burch, George Bosworth (1954). “The Counter-Earth”. Osirus (Saint Catherines Press) 11 (1): 267–294; cp. Rawlinson, George (1886).  Ancient Egypt. London: T. Fisher Unwin, pp. 288-297).  The Greek King installed on the Egyptian throne, Ptolemy and others, taught that the sun moved around the earth: Lawson, Russell M. (2004). Science in the ancient world: an encyclopedia. New York: NY: ABC-CLIO. pp. 29–30) and mathematics and philosophy but for the elevation and pseudo-intellectualism of an elite or royal class, for education was to advance fortunes not minds. Rote memorization was imperative for indoctrination; education was not meant to spur the conduct of inquiry as the city of Athens demanded when it called on Socrates to commit suicide matching any Christian family that attacks its members as being “different” or “queer” or “not Christian” leaving the attacked the singular option of suicide to escape their Christian or Mormon family’s bullying “in the name of Christ”.

The primary purpose of education was primitive: it was to indoctrinate not educate.  All but the rulers were to follow unquestioning the dictates of kings and priests, whatever was commanded.  It is the very heart of the word “islam” (الإسلام‎  an active participle) that enjoins all to total submission.

All civilizations held the belief that their deity or his profit if it was paternalistic and patriarchal would be sacrificed so that they might live (either in this world or the next, and from it came the invention of an afterlife).

The cults of Isis, mysteries of Mithra, Krishna in India, and early Christianity bear witness to this as each had a crucified savior who journeyed with a special discipleship of twelve (each member actually representing a sign in the constellation as the magi were star-gazers seeking out messages and answers for what was not know) to spread “the news” of regeneration, resurrection or ascension. Each enlightened leader would end up being sacrificed for the presumed transgressions of the people or world.  This was promised in the performance of a ritual requiring the eating of some form of bread and drinking from the cup or bowl that held the “fluid of life”.

The problem is with the inscription on the bowl that was found in Alexandria.  Many fervent Christians today argue that it stands for Jesus Christ, seeking any form of “biblical [a book that means “book” of any religion that is considered scripture] archaeology” that would confirm their beliefs.  The faithful, the gullible read into the inscription “DIA CHRSTOU O GOISTAIS,” but that is in error.  There are no spaces in ancient Greek.

Christ in ancient Greek was normally spelled XRICTOC.  There are a few inscriptions where H is used. However, XPHCTOC is also an adjective meaning ‘excellent’, ‘meek’, ‘useful’, ‘noble’. It is the antecedent for Chrestos and for his following Chrestianos.  The Christ who was meek and mild, who invited little children to come to him, who had time for the weak and weary, the homeless and destitute, those who knew hunger or thirst, would not be the Christ of the church when it was created by the Emperor Constantine.  This patient and tender Christ was added only as a reference point to give hope to the huddled masses, not as a real person but as a good story, to be replaced with the vengeful, hate-filled Jesus of Paul–a god only an emperor and warrior bishops could appreciate when they stood to gain armies and coin of the realm to build luxury churches and abodes while the poor suffered.

These facts, alone, significantly increases the number of interpretations of the inscription, as the O GOISTAIS may be a secret code for GOHC.  GOHC means “charlatan” or “magician”, and are more in keeping with the Christos than the Chrestos.  It refers, possibly, to a thief who cursed the magician (Christ) before his death–which would make sense grammatically as found in the phrase Gestas, through Christ [was saved or damned]; while some claim that the saved and repentent thief was Dismis, there is no record of the non-repentant thief in the imperially sanctioned canon being restored or taken to a special place of forgiveness and cleansing, but we still do not have all of the gospels and other writings that Constantine sent to the flames in fear that their content would lessen the faith, and more importantly the obedience, of the masses that he redefined as christianos.  We do have the total Nag Hammadi scrolls or others still secreted in large earthen jars safely buried in the hills.  They would be too controversial and too much like the exposure of the popes Innocent I-XIII who had little to offer but much to take.

The fact that the bowl was not made from any precious metal (gold or copper, and so forth) indicates that it was used by a small and impoverished community of magicians who had it created for one of two purposes.  First, it was in this earthen bowl that special elixirs were concocted and mixed with wine to symbolize blood.  To drink the potion would bring, it was hoped, the promise of eternal life. Second, the other possibility was that the bowl was created for a poor community that found poverty especially powerful when communicating with the gods who looked upon mortals as being made of clay or earth and thus creating a link between the two, especially if it contained some form of native hallucinogenic drug.  Thus the Christos would proclaim, “Blessed are the poor” (Matthew 5:3), and continues to this day among Christians, who followed their ancient ancestors in hatred and venomous insults  especially within the Roman Catholic Church and its Hitleresque attack on Liberation Theology (read here and here where the Roman Catholic Church under the mismanagement of Opus Dei  Juan Luis Cipriani Thorne is destroying the nation of Peru), but that was not that way with Chrestos or chrestianos.

Jeweled chalice

The fact that the bowl was not fashioned from special substances or ornamentation shows that it was not used in mainline religious functions by more popular theologies, as compared with the jewel-encrusted cups found in today’s Orthodox, Catholic or some Protestant services. This gives a greater definition of the two groups in Rome: the chrestianos and the christianos.

The chrestianos came long before there were christianos.  Chrestianos were an ancient people from Alexandria, Egypt, and were a people identified by the name based on their action.  Originally they were a cosmopolitan class of people that included members from various parts of the world when the Roman Empire was founded.  While legend has Rome founded on April 21, 753 BCE by twin brothers Romulus and Remus.  Legends has it that they were born in 771 BCE and had a life similar to Cain and Abel.  Romulus killed Remus after a quarrel, with Romulus being the first King of Rome. As King of Rome, Romulus created the foundation for what would be the Roman Empire, with Cesar Augustus being considered the first Roman emperor of what then was considered a republic in 27 BCE. 

The Chrestianos were passive, caring, and considerate—the reasons for their downfall, as they became slaves (another definition of chrestianos) until sufficient time and abuse (especially by christianos) brought them to rebellion. It was the Christianos who were the violent, hot-tempered, self-righteous Pentecostalists who were determined to convert the world by force, intrigue and lies.

The word Chrestianos is a derivative of the adjective Chrestos. It is indicative, by definition of “that which is fit for use” and means “good”, “kindly”, “generous, “mild” and “pleasant”—the attributes that their leader Chrestos had and the message he delivered to those who would accept the rule of a secular prince or Cesar, “by rendering to Cesar that which belonged to Cesar, and to god that which belonged to god”.  It is the word that the Hellenic Greeks used for their slaves who were “service oriented” or were “profitable” to their masters, and is copied in Romans 2:4: ἡ τοῦ πλούτου τῆς χρηστότητος αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς ἀνοχῆς καὶ τῆς μακροθυμίας καταφρονεῖς, ἀγνοῶν ὅτι τὸ χρηστὸν τοῦ θεοῦ εἰς μετάνοιαν σε ἄγει to denote goodness (καλοσύνη), closely related to katachraomi: meaning to “use to the fullest extent.” 

Metropolitan Bishop Nikolai of Plovdiv, Representative of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church

The authors of “Paul” were determined to keep the chrestianos subservient to meet their needs and desires much the same way that the unholy Inquisition of the Middle Ages and the unholy Synods in the East (Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece) are determined to wear golden miters and carry jeweled crosses on their chests as they roar out condemnation and curse those they find wanting, demanding that they be stoned to death as is so common in Bulgaria in the Mephistophelean metropolitan Plovdiv Bishop Nikolai who deliberately lied and added yet another falsehood to the Bible when he proclaimed: “The task of the Orthodox Church assigned by our God Jesus Christ himself, is to protect the moral and ethical principles of scripture”. More vicious and vitriolic than Nikolai  is Father Evgeni Yanakiev from the town of Sliven and a member of the unholy Synod of Bulgaria. 

Benedict XVI (2012)

While the Jesus of the New Testament wore the poorest clothing (Luke 9:58 f), and John the Baptist (יוחנן המטביל) lived nude as there was no church to tend to any physical needs, the priests and bishops from the days of Constantine I wore raiment shot with gold and sewn with precious stones from 325 CE to this day.  Cnstantine’s “catholic [universal] church” became the richest institution in the known world, with abbeys and monasteries and churches laying mortmain (dead hand) and frankalmoin (gifts to god; cf. Henrici Bracton, De Legibus et Consuetudinibus, cp. Kirkalfy, A. K. R. (1962).Potter’s Historical Introduction to English Law and Its Institutions. London: Sweet and Maxwell, p. 212) over the worldly goods of those who died “in the faith” and remains in control of the coffers of people and nations (read here and  here and here).

Chrestos has nothing in common with Christos.  The latter is translated and defined as “one who has been anointed or smeared with chrisma that is a psychotropic unguent reserved for kings and people of special hierarchical rank.  The original inclusion of Chrestos in the scrolls was a statement that Jesus was a slave to his father (Mark 14:35-36 35, Matthew 26:39, 42, Luke 22:42; the original source is the Gospel of Mark, the oldest gospel), and not a king (Mark 15:2, Luke 23:3, which Jesus of the New Testament never claimed), but subjected individual will to one higher (not equal to as Constantine I pushed through his obliging bishops in their creation of the fabricated  Abaddon Nicene Creed).  The role of Constantine I was well known among his subjects: that he would be emperor-pontiff- priest and god (cf. Paul Stephenson (2009). Constantine: Roman Emperor, Christian Victor. Chapter 11 notes:  The Emperor established and enforced orthodoxy for domestic tranquility and the efficacy of prayers in support of the empire).

It is easy to find a reference to the Chrestianos even in the forgery of Titus 3:1-4: Ὑπομίμνησκε αὐτοὺς ἀρχαῖς ἐξουσίαις ὑποτάσσεσθαι, πειθαρχεῖν, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἑτοίμους εἶναι, 2μηδένα βλασφημεῖν, ἀμάχους εἶναι, ἐπιεικεῖς, πᾶσαν ἐνδεικνυμένους πραΰτητα πρὸς πάντας ἀνθρώπους. 3Ἦμεν γὰρ ποτε καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀνόητοι, ἀπειθεῖς. πλανώμενοι, δουλεύοντες ἐπιθυμίαις καὶ ἠδοναῖς ποικίλαις, ἐν κακίᾳ καὶ φθόνῳ διάγοντες στυγητοί, μισοῦντες ἀλλήλους. 4ὅτε δὲ ἡ χρηστότης καὶ ἡ φιλανθρωπία ἐπεφάνη τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν θεοῦ, where the various redactors use the word chreia (χρηστότης)in the form or meaning of “good works” in keeping with the chrestianos.  The passage reads “all our people are to learn to occupy themselves in doing good works for their practical needs”: to be “good slaves who are useful to the community.” This is furthered in 2 Timothy 2:14f, where to be “saved” a person must prove to be “profitable” to the community: “There is to be no wrangling about words: all that this ever profits is the destruction of those who are listening. Do all you can to present yourself … as a man who has no cause to be ashamed of his work … Have nothing to do with pointless philosophical discussions…” as that would be outside of blind faith—but one that the later church of Constantine would give permission to follow in their “teachings”.  Augustine of Hippo the frequent visitors to whores by whom he had a bastard he called Adeodatus, by this definition, was a heretic, as he was not following the rubric that to be saved, one had to remain silent, work hard and never think for oneself.

The chrestianos devolution comes with the invention of Paul and the release of the group-work Letters to the Corinthians, especially as seen in I Corinthians 9:12.  The writers of Corinthians are blunt in stating that they have “sown spiritual things” and would “harvest your spiritual things”.  This theft from the people is what led to the uprising of the Alexandrian chrestianos, the burning of the wooden huts in Rome, and the attack on the nobility and the presbyters who were using religion to enrich themselves. It was equal to the Greek masters ordering slaves to work, then harvest, and sell it for the enrichment of the owner (the future church that within one hundred years following its official creation by the Emperor in 325) is one of the richest institutions on the planet while the people fall deeper into debt and peonage until they have to beg for slop and remains from the fattened clergy as their bishops build monstrous churches, basilicas, monasteries, etc. that house their god like the ancient temples housed their deities as the poor lived in thatched huts that were burned in sport by rogue illiterate nobility. Their sole claim to any respect was having their name changed to christianos: bound slaves to a leader of fiction to justify the existence of a church that was birthed from a foul womb of faith. 

11th century forgery of Tacitus’ “Annals”

It was the chrestianos who Tacitus was referring to in his Annals Book XV (the earliest known extant manuscript of Tacitus was not written until the 11th century CE at the monastery of Monte Cassino; it is kept in the Laurentian Library (Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana).  Medieval forgeries have the chrestianos changed into christianos in an effort to proclaim a group following the traditional Jesus of the New Testament, but this a Latinized koine Greek word with a meaning and etymology wholly separate from Christianoi. The fabrication is seen in this line auctor nominis eius Christus Tiberio imperitante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat…Christus, which is to be translated as from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus

The gross inaccuracy lies in the mention of Pilate as ‘procurator,’ when in fact Pilate was prefect of Judea. Tacitus himself had risen through the magisterial ranks to the status of proconsul, and therefore would have had a precise knowledge of the proper terminology as well as the succession of administrators.  Even more absurd is that none of the early Christian writers, as later redacted and/or defined by the apologists make any mention of Tacitus.

Tacitus, Annales, XV.44 with marginalia

Tacitus refers to the chrestianos, not the christianos in his Annals XV:44 as being the vandals who set fire to Rome, and for their arson suffered numerous indignities and ultimate death.  While references to Tacitus blog the church from the eleventh century to the present (with a rare citation from the eighth century redaction by zealous monks eager to improve on the original text and to give strength to their religious convictions), references to Tacitus’ claims of christianos do not appear before the eighth century CE, another clue as to their late creation.

Tacitus originally wrote “chrestianos” as can be seen with the erasure.

The obvious forgery that has not eluded any serious scholar of the Tacitus manuscript is in the erasure of the original ‘eta’ in Chrestianos and the differently-inked ‘íota’ has rather noticeable counterparts elsewhere in the literature of early Christianity. This was the appraisal of then-director of the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana Dr. Teresa Lodi, who wrote «The “e”, written originally, of which there are still signs left at the erased area [Italian: rasura], was changed into “i” taking out the upper circle and the horizontal line, while the remaining part was corrected, in my opinion, with the same ink and the same hand, towards an “i”. Another hand added the dot above the “i” and the hyphen between “i” and “s”». Dr. Ida Giovanna Rao, head of the manuscript office (Responsabile Ufficio Manoscritti) at Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana concurred, noting: «with a great effort [Italian: “con molta fatica”] it is possible to hypothesize that there was an “e” under the actual “i”, because the correction is really very clean and the only real pieces of circumstantial evidence—and not proofs—are the apex on the “i” and the hyphen linking “chri” with “stianos”, drawn with a less dark ink, identical to the one that makes the marginal correction [which is rather a bookmark, she says] “Christiani”, beyond to the “i”, which is overdrawn and darker than the other letters, in which the ink in general is more vanished.» She adds (in English): «By “con molta fatica” I mean that the correction was made with accuracy, so that it is not “visible a prima vista” [at first glance] but only if one looks exactly.»

Codex Sinaiticus (divided into four institutions) c. late fourth century

This is especially true in the Codex Sinaiticus, the world’s oldest extant manuscript of the alleged Christian ‘Holy Bible,’ handwritten in Egypt in the fourth century and contains three closely identical and equally obvious forgeries.  Nearly all of these forgeries occur around or immediately after the Emperor Constantine I of the Eastern Roman Empire called his bad of cutthroat bishops to his Council of Nicaea in 325 CE.  It was then that the Emperor, not any bishop, had the assembly proclaim that the Jesus of the New Testament was the “son of god”—an ancient title reserved for Horus of Egypt who was born to Isis and Osiris.

The term, name or title Christianos is of recent invention.   The invention of Christian/Christians is used only three times in theNew Testament – twice in the Acts of the Apostles, and once in the First Epistle of Peter.  Both are forgeries.  In Acts 11:26 it is printed: “in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians.”  In the oldest copies of these references, Acts 11:26 and 26:28, 1 Peter 4:16. In the earliest extant complete bible, Codex Sinaiticus (fourth century), the Greek words are even spelled out in the customary way, i.e. Chrestian/Chrestians that were hastily and clumsily reprinted Christian/Christians.  Acts 26:27 is unaceptable as it is an insertion as noting the speech of Paul by his “intimate friend” Luke.  Peter 4:16 “Christian” is used as a perjeroative and the writers of Peter use it to shore up the resolve of the faithful to persevere in the faith.

1 Peter 4:16 (forgery)

The invention of Christianos in the Bible is most easily seen in 1 Peter 4:16. The text, however, does not follow closely, and can be erased by a careful reading and studying of the original text of Acts 11:26.

Acts 11:26 (forgery)

Jesus is a shortening for the word Joshua: a nickname.  At the time that Jesus allegedly lived and died, the name Jesus was extraordinarily common.  It is true that there are numerous prophecies about a Messiah, but this warrior chief is never named.  An historical Jesus is almost impossible to find in any historical record. 

The established Church (the see at Constantinople that falsely claimed precedence over the one at Jerusalem and the other at Antioch) created the myth of a “forever virgin” Mary whereas in the original scrolls the word παρθενικός merely means “young girl” or “maiden” from the Hebrew word ‘almah that is taken from Isaiah 7:14 and means only that the maidenhead (the hymen) was broken and natural sperm entered to fertilize a released egg (ova).  The Biblical Greek παρθένα became Παρθένος (parthenos)is incorrect and was pushed in the Septuagint (of LXX) by the Greek, Bulgarian, and Serbian Orthodox communities without any legitimate support; it was followed by numerous editions until it was corrected in the Revised Standard Version.  Her “perpetual virginity” or Mary being “ever virgin” (Ancient Greek: ἀειπαρθένος  aeiparthenos) that is held by the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and numerous Protestant churches and their original leaders (Calvin as noted on Pierre Puvis de Chavannes (1882). Extraits des manuaux du Conseil d Lausanne, 1512 á 1536, Publiés et annotés par Ernest Chavannes p. 426, but in the end neither supported it nor rejected it as recorded in McKim, Donald K. and Wright, David F. (1992) Encyclopedia of the Reformed faith. Louisville, KY, USA: Westminster/John Knox Press; Edinburgh, Scotland: Saint Andrew Press, page 237; Zwingli was more emphatic: Zwingli, Ulrich; Egli, Emil; Finsler, Georg; Zwingli-Verein, Georg; Zürich (1905). “Eini Predigt von der ewig reinen Magd Maria.” (in German). Huldreich Zwinglis sämtliche Werke. 1. Berlin, Germany: C. A. Schwetschke und Sohn. p. 385; Luther as found in Pelikan, Jaroslav and Lehmann, Helmut T., eds. (1955). Luther’s Works (Philadelphia, PA, USA: Fortress Press, Vol. 43, p. 212); John Wesley as described by Coulter, A. C. (1964). John Wesley.  New York, NY: Oxford University Press, p. 496) and Zwingli) is plain fraud, as is her exaltation into heaven nothing less than a plagiarism from ancient Egyptian theology that has Isis (known throughout Egypt as “Queen of Heaven”) rising to the sky to have the moon beneath her feet and stars above her head; for historical older antecedents, read here; for sacred texts read here).   

The first mention that Mary was “ever virgin” does not appear before 374 CE, in the apologetics of Epiphanius. Mary had numerous children, by no less than two husbands (there is no historical nor Biblical proof that Joseph was an old man; cf. Tabor, James D. (2006). The Jesus Dynasty. New York, NY, USA: Simon & Schuster, pp. 65 ff) with Jesus’ brothers even acknowledged by the church historian Eusebius (Church History, II:23, III:19 relying, in part on John 2:12 patterned after Mark 3:31-32 and confirmed in Acts 1:14, cp. Mark 15:47, 16:1, cf. 6:3). 

The account of Jesus in the New Testament is not the record preached by contemporary Christians of any affirmation, and distinctly not that of Pentecostals, Adventists, Southern Baptists or most evangelical extremists, Orthodox or Catholics of any branch.  The New Testament Jesus dies one week before Passover, not the week of Passover.  The original scroll of Luke (22:14-16) states that “I earnestly wanted to eat this Passover with you before I suffer but I won’t eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”  A copyist inserted the word “again”—a word that appears nowhere in the early records.  To argue that Jesus died during the Holy Week is not only bad scholarship, poor translation and inadequate interpretation, but shows the total lack of biblical knowledge of the history of the time, place, and political factors. This is buttressed by the comment that Jesus shared “a loaf of bread” (άρτοςor atros: ordinary bread that contains “leaven” or yeast) with his disciples, and not the bread of Passover.  The bread of Passover is quite different.  Passover bread is unleavened flat bread (matzos).  Matzos can be “broken”, but atros bread must be torn or cut. 

The absurdity of today’s translations have more in common with the character of Paul and nothing in common with the Jesus of the New Testament.  Paul mentions in 1 Corinthians 11:23: Ἐγὼ γὰρ παρέλαβον ἀπὸ τοῦ κυρίου, ὁ καὶ παρέδωκα ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὁ κύριος Ἰησοῦς ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ᾗ παρεδίδετο ἔλαβεν ρτον. Cp. The Bulgarian: Защото аз от Господа приех това, което ви и предадох, че Господ Исус през нощта, когато беше предаден, взе хляб, ref. the Romanian: Căci am primit dela Domnul ce v’am învăţat; şi anume că, Domnul Isus, în noaptea în care a fost vîndut, a luat o pîne, with the Hebrew: כי כה קבלתי אנכי מן האדון את אשר גם מסרתי לכם כי האדון ישוע בלילה ההוא אשר נמסר בו לקח את הלחם׃. Passover was the following week, after the pre-Passover meal was eaten and the bread torn apart, the wine consumed, and no goat meat mentioned.  It was one week after Jesus of the New Testament had died, and was buried.  Everything else is a repeatition of the prophets in the Old Testament without referencing anything found in Q or other destroyed gospels. It is from the Old Testament prophets we read about Jesus wandering in the desert, immersion baptism in the nude for John the Baptist “walked down into the water” so there was no sprinkling (cp. Mark 1:5 with 2 Chronicles 22:2-5; cf. Matthew 3:1; 11:11 and Josephus Antiquities 18.5.2 with modern calibration in Beasley-Murray, G.R. (1975), “Baptism,” Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Colin Brown, Ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan), Vol. I, p. 144), riding into the city as King on the foal of an ass, and symbolically removing the “traders” from the “house of God” as “prophesized” by Zechariah, but more important his comment “One of you who is eating with me will betray me” (Mark 14:18) is directly lifted from Psalm 41:9, that reads “Even my bosom friend, in whom I trusted, who are of my bread, has lifted the heel against me”: Hebrew: גַּם־אִישׁ שְׁלֹומִי ׀ אֲשֶׁר־בָּטַחְתִּי בֹו אֹוכֵל לַחְמִי הִגְדִּיל עָלַי עָקֵב׃; Greek (Septuagint): και γαρ ο ανθρωπος της ειρηνης μου εφ’ ον ηλπισα ο εσθιων αρτους μου εμεγαλυνεν επ’ εμε πτερνισμον; Bulgarian: Да! самият ми близък приятел, комуто имах доверие, Който ядеше хляба ми, дигна своята пета против мене; Russian (Synodal translation with different numbering): (40:10) Даже человек мирный со мною, на которого я полагался, который ел хлеб мой, поднял на меня пяту; which created the Finnish: Niin myös minun ystäväni, johon minä uskalsin, joka sai minun leipääni, se tallasi minun jalkainsa alle, and Polish: Także i ten, z którymem żył w pokoju, któremum ufał, który chleb mój jadał, podniósł piętę przeciwko mnie. Just one hundred years earlier, according to the Dead Sea Scroll community, the Teacher of Righteousness had quoted the very Psalm when one of his inner council of twelve betrayed him (Dead Sea Scrolls, Thanksgiving Hymns 9:23-24).

The greatest fraud is the communion service (“Last Supper”).  It has no complement or correlation with anything Jewish.  Jesus in the New Testament was a Jew–and proud of his heritage and religion.  The passages in Mark and Matthew are based on Luke, the unapologetic advocate and “intimate friend” of Paul, who also, allegedly, authored the Acts of the Apostles.  The  cautionary note “allegedly” must be used as there are too many variations in the handwriting, word choice, and so forth to be the work of one person. 

The words “eat my body” and “drink my blood” care from far older theologies, including those of ancient Egypt.  This is shown in the Didache, dating back to the early second century CE.  It is in the Didache that we find the ceremony of the Eucharist, but it reads this way:

With respect to the Eucharist you shall give thanks as follows: First, with respect to the cup [say]: “We give you thanks our Father for the holy vine of David, your child which you made known to us through Jesus your child. To you be the glory forever.” And with respect to the bread [say]: “We give you thanks our Father for the life and knowledge that you made known to us through Jesus your child. To you be the glory forever.” (Didache 9:1-3, in Bart Enrman, trans. (2003). The Apostolic Fathers, Loeb Classical Library 24, vol. 1 (Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press), p. 431).  There is no mention of the wine representing or transfiguring into blood, nor is there a mention of bread representing or transfiguring into body.  In short, there is no Transubstantiation (Roman Catholic and Orthodox), nor Consubstantiation (Lutheran and other Protestant sects).  It shows that the early communities of Christians( neither chrestianos nor christianos) had any concept or knowledge of a man called Paul.  The legendary Paul, furthermore, through those who wrote in his name, had no familiarity with the brummagenic Last Supper, for Paul’s accounts reverse the order of the celebration. 

In Paul we read that Jesus blessed first the bread, and then the wine.  Luke, however, reports that Jesus first blessed the wine and then the bread. This faux pas is a strong indication that Luke did not know the Paul of the Letters.  Based on the calligraphy in the text is most likely the result of at least two or three generations working on the composition of the imperial synoptic gospels and have no external authenticity. 

In Luke’s account the “fruit of the vine” (Luke 22:18) has more in keeping with the intoxication of Noah than it does with the Last Supper, but whereas Noah awakens naked in a tent beside a vineyard after having drank the wine and curses a young boy (his grandson Canaan), Jesus drinks the wine before he goes into a Garden is followed out of the garden by a young and handsome boy who is naked who “the soldiers lay hands upon” (Mark 14:51: Καὶ εἷς τις νεανίσκος ἠκολούθησεν αὐτῷ, περιβεβλημένος σινδόνα ἐπὶ γυμνοῦ· καὶ κρατοῦσιν αὐτόν οἱ νεανίσκοι in the Greek Orthodox Church impression, cp. Greek New Testament Tischendorf 8th Edition with Diacritics: Καὶ εἷς τις νεανίσκος συνηκολούθει αὐτῷ περιβεβλημένος σινδόνα ἐπὶ γυμνοῦ, καὶ κρατοῦσιν αὐτόν· the word νεανισκοι is not included, and note the difference in the 1551 edition: και εις τις νεανισκος ηκολουθει αυτω περιβεβλημενος σινδονα επι γυμνου και κρατουσιν αυτον οι νεανισκοι, with the Ukrainian including a notation: А один якийся молодець ійшов за ним, одягнений полотном по нагому, й хапають його молодці (воїни); at best the story of the mental agony of Jesus is a repeat of the Noah story of whom there is no record of any suffering prior to drinking the wine).

After Jesus died and was buried (twice), his organization or community (now rendered as “church”) was taken over by his brother James—not by Peter, as Eusebius wrote in Church History. II:23-24, preserving the testimony of Hegesippus (Ἅγιος Ἡγήσιππος c. 110 — c. April 7, 180 CE, writing at least 150 years after the death of the Jesus of the New Testament):

The succession of the church passed [the Greek here is διαδέχομαι or diadexomat, meaning “to succeed”] to James the brother of the Lord, together with the Apostles [of whom Paul was not numbered]

See the Syriac Ascent of James that has been embedded in the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions I:33-74 that is discussed in Van Voorst, Robert E. (1989). The Ascent of James: History and Theology of a Jewish-Christian Community, SBL Dissertation Series 112 (Atlanta, GA, USA: Scholars Press).  James was called the “Just” by all men from the Lord’s time until ours, since many are called James, but he was holy from his mother’s womb.

There are numerous civil records against grave robbing and the movement of corpses from imperial decrees, as with “Ordinances of Caesar (which Caesar is uncertain; it may be Emperor Tiberitus (14-37) or Claudius (41-54)”:

it is my pleasure that graves and tombs remain undisturbed in perpetuity for those who have made them for the cult of their ancestors or children or members of their house. If, however, any man lay information that another has either demolished them, or has in any other way extracted the buried, or has maliciously transferred them to other places in order to wrong them, or has displaced the sealing of other stones, against such one I order that a trial be instituted, as in respect of the gods, so in regard to the cult of mortals. For it shall be much more obligatory to honor the buried. Let it be absolutely forbidden for anyone to disturb them, in case of contravention I desire that the offender be sentenced to capital punishment on charge of violation of sepuiture [early non-Christian writings on death of Jesus]. 

A page from a 1466 copy of Josephus’ “Antiquities of the Jews”

One of those who wrote about the non-historical Jesus, in fact, not in redaction, is Josephus who penned: “”(Ananus) assembled the Sanhedrin of the judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned” (Antiquities XX 9:1).  This was later echoed by Suetonius (c. A.D. 120), a Roman Historian and court official under Hadrian made two references to Christ. In the Life of Claudius (25.4) he wrote

“As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome.”

In the Lives of the Caesars (26.2) Suetonius wrote:

“Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition.”

Most of the people who heard the legend of Jesus of the New Testament were amused.  Most had a better command of science of nature than the christianos—leading Paul to denounce those who studied philosophy.  Paul’s brief mention was used by the pagan Thallus (c. 52 CE, who was a Samaritan-born historian and wrote that the sky turned black when Jesus died, the earth moved (an earthquake), and other “wondrous” happens occurred, relying on the gospel tradition of a “darkness” at the death of Christ (see Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44; and Matthew 27:51-53, whose account includes an earthquake, split rocks, and the rise of zombies). 

Thallus appalling disregard for reality, formalized in his book Histories, was legendary in his own day as a solar eclipse should mark the death of a king as was common lore among Greeks and other Mediterranean peoples (Herodotus, History, 7.37, Plutarch, Pelopidas 31.3 and Aemilius Paulus 17.7-11, Dio Cassius 55.29.3, John Lydus, De Ostentis 70.a), as were such events that corresponded with earthquakes were also a scientific superstition (Aristotle Meteorology 367.b.2, Pliny Natural History 2.195, Virgil Georgics 2.47.478-80; cp.  Jacoby, Felix (1923-1958).  Fragmente der griechischen Historiker [Fragments of the Greek Historians,] Berlin, Germany: Weidmann, 1923-1958). 

The Gospel of John makes no mention of any such events, nor does Paul or any other New Testament author.  Thallus was basically ignored, until the day of Julius Africanus (c. 221 CE) who re jected Thallus doubting the eclipse because Easter happens near the full moon and a solar eclipse would have been impossible at that time, as was well-known.  Africanus wrote:

Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Cæsar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth – manifestly that one of which we speak. But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe? . . . And calculation makes out that the period of 70 weeks, as noted in Daniel [9:24-26a], is completed at this time.” (Julius Africanus, Chronographia 18.1) Here, as with others, the insistance was that all marks in the life of Jesus, from birth to death, has to be a fulfillment of Old Testament lore that sprung from Assyrian and Babylonian antecedents–as is the case with the Book of Daniel.

Africanus’ writings were restored by Eusebius and brought his mythology to light, writing with some contempt:

“Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away this darkness [at the time of the crucifixion] as an eclipse of the sun-unreasonably, as it seems to me.”

At the time of the paschal there was a full moon, and an eclipse would have been impossible when Christ died. Furthermore, there is no other scientific explanation, but literature does show select saviors dying when the sun or moon is overhead.

The possibility that Jesus was a real man, but no god, nor a savior or messiah was especially punctuated in the Jewish Talmud that was completed by 500 CE. The Babylonian Talmud reference to Jesus reads:

“On the eve of Passover they hanged Yeshu [of Nazareth] and them herald went before him for forty days saying [Yeshu of Nazareth] is going to be stoned in that he hath practiced sorcery and beguiled and led astray Israel. Let everyone knowing aught in his defense come and plead for him. But they found naught in his defense and hanged him on the eve of Passover” (Sanhedrin 43a, “Eve of Passover”).

Many refer to Josephus as attesting to the historicity and manhood of Jesus, but their citations overlook critical words:

“At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. . . . Pilate condemned Him to be condemned and to die. And those who had become His disciples did not abandon His discipleship. They reported that He had appeared to them three days after His crucifixion and that He was alive; accordingly, He was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders” (Antiquities, xviii.ch. 3, subtopic 3, Arabic text).

The Greek text is highly suspected as it was copied down by Greek Christians and does not match the original texts and appears centuries later; it reads:

“Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works–a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew ever to him both many of the Jews, and many Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestions of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to be condemned and to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and the ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day” (Antiquities, xviii.ch. 3, subtopic 3, Greek text).

This is clearly apologetic plagiarism as nowhere does Josephus claim that he believed that Jesus was “the Christ”, in keeping with his writings.  Josephus remained a Jew and no unbelieving Jew would make such statements about Jesus.  The name Jesus Christ does not appear in the New Testament (it is either Jesus or Christ) but does appear in the Old Testament as Yeshua Ha’Mashiach (מְנוֹרָה) which is a part of a Menorah, but today’s apologists misuse a word for an object rather than for a person.

The works of Josephus refer to at least twenty different people with the name Jesus.  In chapter 9 of Book 20, there is also a reference to Jesus son of Damneus who was a High Priest of Israel and is distinct from the reference to “Jesus called [the] Christ” mentioned along with the identification of James.  There are an increasing number of scholars who question the authenticity of the reference, based on various arguments, but primarily based on the observation that various details in The Jewish War differ from it (Habermas, Gary R. (1996). The Historical Jesus, Joplin, MO: College Press Pub. Co., pp. 33-37, and Wells, George Albert (1986). Did Jesus Exist?  London, UK: Pemberton Publishing Co., p. 11; cp. Ed. London : Elek, 1975).  The earliest known reference to Josephus’ work is found in the writings of the third century patristic author Origen.  Origen, however, does not provide any direct reference to the passages involving Jesus.  The three references found in Book 18 and Book 20 of the Antiquities do not appear in any other versions of Josephus’ The Jewish War, except for a Slavonic version of the Testimonium Flavomium (at times called Testimonium Slavonium) that surfaced in the west at the beginning of the 20th century, after its discovery in Russia at the end of the 19th century. 

Josephus’ tracts are, primarily, forgeries cleverly crafted by Christian monks in the eleventh century (Van Voorst, Robert E. (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence.  Grand Rapids, MI, USA: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., pp. 508-509).  The Jews did not preserve the writings of Josephus because they considered him to be a traitor (Flavius Josephus; Leeming, Henry; Osinkina, Lyubov V.; Leeming, Katherine (2003). Josephus’ Jewish War and Its Slavonic Version: A Synoptic Comparison of the English Translation by H. St. Thackeray with the Critical Edition by N.A. Meščerskij of the Slavonic Version in the Vilna Manuscript Translated into English by H. Leeming and L. Osinkina.. Leiden: Brill, p. 26).

Outside of the spurious sentences sung by later apologists for Jesus the Christ, there are no primary sources that claim Jesus of the New Testament lived, died, or ever rose from the dead.  Jesus is now, and was then, a myth.

As Jesus is/was a myth, so too is the very fabrication of Christianity.  It does not come into being until the Emperor Constantine I hand-crafts it into being a bulkwark against mercenaries the empire hired but never paid, and were at that time banging against the gates and walls that provided protections to Roman citizens and their slaves.  While there were communities of believers (chrestianos and christianos) thre was no Christian church as the Emperor had not yet created it.  The favored line in Matthew 16:18 (καγὼ δέ σοι λέγω ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς) is poorly read and far worse understood (notice the play on Πέτρος and πέτρᾳ).  The word ἐκκλησίαν actually is “assembly”–not a building nor an institution.  As assembly can be gathered together–not a group of building–as we find in συναγαγόντες τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ἀνήγγελλον ὅσα (Acts 14:27) and refers to a group of people who can be greeted: ἀσπασάμενος τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, κατέβη εἰς (Acts 18:22), or dismissed: ἀπέλυσεν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (Acts 19:41).  A shepherd can feed people, not buildings or organizations: ποιμαίνειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ (Acts 20:28), and greet people (not churches) in homes: οἶκον αὐτῶν ἐκκλησίαν. ἀσπάσασθε (Romans 16:5, Colosians 4:5) as the Jesus of the New Testament love people not buildings or institutions: ἠγάπησεν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ ἑαυτὸν (Ephesians 5:25).  Even Paul admits he persecuted people, not institutions: διώκων τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, κατὰ δικαιοσύνην (Philippians 3:6).  There was no church until Constantine created one; there was no set organization of Christianity as there were various sects and cults, each proclaiming it had the ultimate answer, some killing others while there were also suicide cults willing to die to hurry the End Times promised by so many charlatans. 

Coin of Roman Emperor Constantine I depicting Sol Invictus Apollo (Constantine I was hailed as a god after he died–not as a Christian)

There was no Roman Catholic Church before 325 CE.  It was not until 325 CE that the Emperor in the East, Constantine I, called his council of warrior bishops to meet with him in the city of Nicaea (Νίκαια in contemporary Iznik, Turkey; it was the ancient city of Bithynia in northwest Asia Minor, and ultimately, before the advent of Christianity, was given to the Thessalian general Lysimachus (Lysimakhos) (circa 355 BC-281 BC) in 301 BC as his share of the lands after Antigonus (who had served under Alexander the Great) was defeated. Lysimachus renamed the city Nicaea in tribute to his wife Nicaea, who was a daughter of Antipater:  Macedonian general and a supporter of kings Philip II of Macedon and Alexander the Great).  There he announced the formation of a “catholic [universal] church”—with no representative (presbyters) from Rome present.  There were no recognized Popes of Rome, until much later, by the emperors.

The first list of “popes” [i.e. “fathers”] of Rome does not appear until St. Irenaeus, writing between 175 and 190, prepared a highly questionable list of pontiffs.  This list appears not many years after his Roman holiday that lasted longer than he anticipated.  Irenaeus (Εἰρηναῖος), (2nd century AD – c. 202; he was bishop of what today is Lyons, France) enumerates the series from Peter to Eleutherius  in his  Adversus Haereses (Against Heresies) III.3.3, which is used 150 years later by the bishop Eusebius of Cesaraea in his Historia Ecclesiastica : Church History V.6).

Irenaeus had a specific object in mind when he created this list that most contemporaries knew was false.  The list was created to establish the orthodoxy of the traditional doctrine as defined by second century bishops after the original Council of Apostles (that did not include Paul) had died.  It was used as a tool to fight what Irenaeus referred to as heretical novelties, by showing that the bishop of Rome (based on a myth by misinterpreting Matthew 16:18-19), and all bishops, was the natural inheritor of the Apostolic teaching. 

The fraudulency of Irenaeus’ claims can be seen within his imaginary list as the bishop of Lyons gives only the names of the pretend or reputed bishops (pontifex maximus was a title (read here)  reserved for the emperor who did not always go to war but who perform sacrifice [ῥέζειν] for victory acting as chief intercessors to the gods: γεφυροποιοί) alone, not the length of the various episcopates.  It has been noted that one of the greatest absurdities in the emerging church and crystallizing fully in the medieval church was the Roman bishops assuming the title of pontifex maximus despites its pagan and civil context, uses, and understanding (“In the matter of hierarchical nomenclature, one of the most striking instances is the adoption of the term pontifex for a bishop” (Paul Pascal (1966). Medieval Uses of Antiquity in The Classical Journal, Vol. 61, No. 5 [February], pp. 193–197).).  Judas, by early records was no traitor and betrayed no one; it was a plan that backfired.

To grant Paul space in the invention of Christianity is unusual and short sighted, showing a contempt for the absense of any record in civil order (it is a grave error to attempt to use the Bible to prove the contents of the Bible, and is bad scholarship without supporting primary sources).  Paul condemns himself in his words as being knowledgeable about and an instrument of Jesus of the New Testament, as Paul only twice refers to the sayings of Jesus in all the letters (epistles) that are ascribed to his authorship. These references are in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 and 9:14. 

The bulk of Paul’s letters reflect an abrupt and un-Jesus-like message.  For example, whereas Jesus warned his followers against judging others (Matthew 7:1), Paul had no problem with it (Romans 1:18-28 although only verses 26-27 are pounded out on pulpits and in pernicious preaching today, whereas the entire condemnation is for those who are educated and consider themselves wise in the first century through today, while verses 29-32 spell it out even more in opposition to Acts 10:34.  The festering infection that is synonymous with the Epistles of Paul are best seen in the vociferating umbrage of the authors of Romans who wrote:  that evil people are filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them [29πεπληρωμένους πάσῃ ἀδικίᾳ πονηρίᾳ πλεονεξίᾳ κακίᾳ, μεστοὺς φθόνου φόνου ἔριδος δόλου κακοηθείας ψιθυριστάς 30καταλάλους θεοστυγεῖς ὑβριστὰς ὑπερηφάνους ἀλαζόνας, ἐφευρετὰς κακῶν, γονεῦσιν ἀπειθεῖς, 31ἀσυνέτους ἀσυνθέτους ἀστόργους ἀνελεήμονας· 32οἵτινες τὸ δικαίωμα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπιγνόντες ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες ἄξιοι θανάτου εἰσίν, οὐ μόνον αὐτὰ ποιοῦσιν ἀλλὰ καὶ συνευδοκοῦσιν τοῖς πράσσουσιν. None of this is found in any Gospel, the sayings of Jesus recorded in Q or in any other scroll (Thiede, Carsten Peter and D’Ancona, Matthew (1996). The Jesus Papyrus. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson).  It is a later fiction, much like the redactions of Josephus and Tacitus]; cp. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and 1 Timothy 1:10)

One thing is clear in the original scrolls: Paul never knew Jesus.  He wrote about the Jesus of the New Testament no less than twenty to thirty years after Jesus died, and during this time period all biblical scholars agree that there are no surviving records.  Even then, as with the Letter to the Galatians, the work is more autobiographical than biographical.

Paul, patronizingly, admits “I did not see any other apostle except James the Lord’s brother” (Galatians 1:19). Paul does not refer to James as “an apostle” but accords him greater dignity as “the Lord’s brother.” 

The list of actual apostles is clearly stated in Acts: 1:13, detailing the leaders present in the Upper Room in Jerusalem: “Peter, and John, and James, and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Mathew, James son of Alphaeus, and Simon the Zealot, and Judas brother of James,” and then notes emphatically in verse 14: “All these [the Eleven] were constantly devoting themselves to prayer together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus as well as his brothers” (Compare the brothers with Acts 12:17; cp. Tabor, James D. (2006). The Jesus Dynasty: the Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity. New York, NY, USA: Simon & Schuster). The brothers included Simon the Zealot and Judas the brother of James.

Mary, definitely, was not a virgin in reference to a hymen or by youth.  In the New Testament she is given special dignity, not just as the Mother of Jesus, but also within the Council of the Twelve. This matches ancient Egyptian theology where Isis is accorded superiority over her son Horus and the Twelve gods who assist him.

Paul gives James superiority, over Peter and John (Galatians 2:9).  The order of the brothers and other apostles reflect not mortals but members of the constellation that would iconize the mother Mary, similar to the way Isis had been enshrined. There is no proof that Paul (or Peter) ever died in Rome.

Paul was the antithesis of ancient Christianity. Diabolical and sinister those who created Paul did everything to undo the simple message that the Jesus of the New Testament had and instructed his seventy disciples (Luke 10:1) to spread “to all nations” the words of the Old Testament, not a novel New Testament (cp. Jeremiah 31:31 and Luke 22:30). Paul had not obtained any authority from Jesus, for Jesus was dead and never knew Paul, and Paul had little contact with James, the leader of the new Jewish-Christian community in Jerusalem. Paul showed only contempt for the leaders of the community in Jerusalem, noting that “what they were means nothing to me” (Galatians 2:6, 9). Furthermore, Paul did not hesitate to hide his condemnation and rejection of the religion of Jesus, scorning the Torah (Galatians 3:24-25, Philippians 3:2-3) and denounced those who underwent the required Jewish ceremony of circumcision (Galatians 5:12) even though the Twelve in Jerusalem followed the lead of Jesus’ brother James who said it was not necessary for the Gentiles to follow the Jewish way (Acts 15:19-21).  To make his separation more cutting, Paul uttered what would later be considered a heresy, by claiming that Jesus Histories was not truly born but had existed from all time (Philippians 2:6).

Whereas the emerging church, belching breathlessly out of the community of believers into a stratified, stagnant and sordid institution, had once be thought to argue that Paul was next to or even coequal with Peter, the Letters of Paul show the contrary.  Paul hated and diminished Peter in word and deed, working harder than all of the other Apostles (1 Corinthians 15:10) and suffering more than Jesus suffered, stating that he was “filling up what was lacking in Christ’s suffering” (Colossians 1:24: Νῦν χαίρω ἐν τοῖς παθήμασιν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ ἀνταναπληρῶ τὰ ὑστερήματα τῶν θλίψεων τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου ὑπὲρ τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ, ὅ ἐστιν ἡ ἐκκλησία,) as he “opposed Peter to his face because he stood condemned” over a dispute involving Jewish and Gentile table fellowship (Galatians 2:11: Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν Κηφᾶς εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν, κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην, ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦν and the Armenian Սակայն երբ Պետրոս եկաւ Անտիոք՝ ես դիմադարձեցի անոր, որովհետեւ պարսաւելի էր:). Paul labels Peter a hypocrite with vitriol in Galatians that is more repugnant and pathetic than all the prattling of Paul in other epistles. To strengthen his lies, Paul more than likely created the two letters attributed to Peter as they sound more like Paul than anyone else.

There is no tangible, incontrovertible proof of a Peter or any immediate successors of Peter or popes during the first one-hundred years in the city of Rome.  The lack of proof, that constitutes evidence, is found in the liturgical tradition of the fourth-century Roman Church, because it was only at the end of the second century that any special feast of martyrs was instituted and there is no first century “popes” recognized, especially Linus who allegedly followed the mythological Peter.  For that reason no Linus, nor any of his alleged successors, appears in the fourth-century lists of the feasts of the Roman saints.

According to Torrigio (Le sacre grotte Vaticane, Viterbo, Italy: Discepoli 1618, p. 53; text is in Italian) when the present confession was constructed in St. Peter’s (1615), sarcophagi were found, and among them was one which bore the word Linus. The explanation given by Severano of this discovery (Memorie delle sette chiese di Roma e di altri luoghi che si trovano per le strade di esse, parte prima in cui si tratta dell’antichita di dette chiese, Roma, Italy: per Giacomo Mascardi, 1630, p. 120) is that probably these sarcophagi contained the remains of the first Roman bishops, and that the one bearing that inscription was Linus’ burial place. This assertion was repeated later on by different writers. But from a MS. of Torrigio’s we see that on the sarcophagus in question there were other letters beside the word Linus, so that they rather belonged to some other name (cp. Aquilinus, De praescriptione, xxxii Anullinus). The place of the discovery of the tomb is a proof that it could not be the tomb of Linus. (De Rossi, Giovanni Battista and Silvagni, Angelo (1935) Società romana di storia patria.; Pontificio istituto di archeologia cristiana. Inscriptiones christianae urbis Romae séptimo saeculo antiquiores, Vol. II: Coemeteria in Viis Cornelia, Aurelia, Portuensi et Ostiensi. Romae : Pontificium institutum archaeologiae christianae, pp. 236-7, in Latin).  Even more condemning is Tertullian’s argument that St. Clement followed St. Peter (De praescriptione, xxxii), yet confusion reigns even here especially with Irenaeus of Lyons. Iremeus (as he is styled in the original Catholic Encyclopedia but should be Irenaeus) has Linus, Anacletus, and Clement; whereas Augustine and Optatus put Clement before Anacletus. On the other hand, the “Catalogus Liberianus”, the “Carmen contra Marcionem” and the “Liber Pontificalis”, all most respectable for their antiquity, make Cletus and Anacletus distinct from each other; while the “Catalogus Felicianus” even sets the latter down as a Greek, the former as a Roman. Among the moderns, Hergenröther, Joseph Adam Gustav (trans. Belet, P abbé) Histoire de l’Eglise. Paris, Delhomme & Briguet [1878?]-1892, Vol. I, 542, note) pronounces for their identity, cf. Johann Joseph Ignaz von Döllinger (1868). Christenthum und Kirche in der Zeit der Grundlegung, 2. verb. Aufl, Regensburg, Deutschland: G.J. Manz, p. 315) declares that “they are, without doubt, the same person”; and that “the `Catalogue of Liberius’ merits little confidence before 230.” Duchesne, Louis Marie Oliver (1889). Origines du culte chrétien: etude sur la liturgie latine avant Charlemagne. Paris, France: Thorin, 1889, in French, ranges himself on that side also.

The dating of papal rule does not appear until 354 and then in the controversial and easily disproven Liberian Catalogue (actually entitled Catalogus Liberianus, after the last pope named: Liberius; it is part of an illuminated manuscript known as Chronographus anni 354 [Chronography of 354])   apparently written by one Furius Dionysius Philocalus.  (The copyists did include the rampant anti-Semitism, especially that of St. John Chrysostom in his Homilies 1 through 8, etc.  The history of the Roman popes can be read in Monumenta Germaniae Historica:  Chronica Minora I (1892 text in Latin; Berolini : apud Weidmannos, 1892-1898), pp. 73-76) Not only does this late list start with a minor apostle, Peter, but ends with a nondescript pope Liberius, but it does include the assumed length of their respective episcopates (citing no records or other data to firm the tome, its research faulty at best), the consular dates, the name of the reigning emperor (both which have numerous public citations), and in many cases other details that cannot be proven nor disproven as most are falsified from legends without even eye witness verification.

Today, scholars recognized that the Liberian Catalogue earlier part was crafted as far as Pontian (230-35) by Hippolytus of Portus, as it is close to his work Chronica Minora (Lipsiae, in aedibus B.G. Teubneri, 1892; text is in ancient Greek [to 1453]).  The highly respected Anglican theologian  Lightfoot bishop of Durham who, from 1854 to 1859, edited the Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology, argued that this list originally contained nothing but the names of the bishops and the duration of their episcopates (Ramsey, Arthur Michael. From Gore to Temple.  London, UK: Longmans(1960) p. 1616). Lightfoot argues that the remaining notes were additions by a later hand, most likely by zealous copyists.  Several inaccuracies occur; for example, the list of popes in the Liberian Catalogue is identical with that of Irenaeus, except that Anacletus is doubled into Cletus and Anacletus (creating two popes out of one), while Clement appears before, instead of after, these two names. Then, too, the order of Popes Pius and Anicetus has also been interchanged, thus weakening any relevance of the document. All later lists, such as the list by Eusebius, come no less than three hundred years after the alleged first pontifical reign—and are at best staging of a lie.  For example, Eusebius in his Church History IV.22 writes that in the middle of the second century (at least one hundred or more years after Peter allegedly was crucified in Rome—that has no historical basis) Hegesippus, a Hebrew Christian, visited Rome and drew up a list of bishops as far as Anicetus for his own use.

The Liber Pontificalis, long accepted as an authority of the highest value, is now acknowledged to have been originally composed at the beginning of the fifth century, and, as regards the early popes, to be dependent on the “Liberian Catalogue”. This list is haphazard and includes both popes and antipopes. As the New Catholic Encyclopedia notes, previous “to the middle of the eleventh century, the information is of uncertain value” (Joyce, G. (1911). “Chronological Lists of Popes.”  The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company).

Emperor Nero

As for there being any active church before Constantine, that is a well-placed fable.  It is similar to the legend that Christians/Chrestianos were singled out for persecution.  There were no persecution of Christians, but of chrestianos until the fire (Magnum Incendium) that swept the slums of Rome in 64 CE, and the few Christians who did “confess,” confessed under torture but their confession is unclear if they were admitting to being arsons lighting their homes in a drunken stupor or they were proclaiming themselves to be chrestianos to set the sect apart from christianos and thus bear the wrath of the empire (Tacitus, Annals XV.44).  Arson in Rome, deliberate or accidental, was not new in the imperial city at this time, as there were other such conflagrations  under Vitellius in 69 during the seige of Vespasian (where the culprits were his troops) and under Titus in 80 (Suetonius, Lives of Twelve Caesars, Life of Titus, 8).  The fact that Tacitus’ copyists were quick to blame the Christians and create a false aura of martyrdom were to be subject death rather than acknowledge that Chrestianos being a people eager for martyrdom can be seen in the earliest extant manuscript, the second Medicean, as the e in “Chrestianos”, the Chrestians, has been changed into an i; cf. Gerd Theißen, Annette Merz (2001). Der historische Jesus: ein Lehrbuch. Göttingen, Deutschland: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht (originally published in 1996), p. 89 so as to place blame on both sects. The reading Christianos, Christians, is, therefore, doubtful.  There are no primary accounts (written by Fabius Rusticus, Cluvius Rufus and Pliny the Elder) are described as contradictory and gross exaggerations in keeping with Constantine’s desire to show the Christians being wrongly persecuted and singling them out as the True Faith-keepers, and their scrolls burned in the emperor’s holocaust of writings when the works of Arius were also consigned to the flames (ref: Tacitus, Annals XV.38-39 where Tacitus claims the fire was an accident. Nero was in Antium, so could not have set drunkards out to ignite the homes of the poor while he played a lyre on a hill and watched as we read in Cassius Dio, Roman History LXII.16-17 and Suetonius. “Life of Nero”. Lives of Twelve Caesars. p. 38).

During the Ante-Nicene period following the Apostolic Age (from the death of the last official Apostle, until the reign of the Emperor Constantine I), there was a great diversity of views among the various community that emerged nearly simultaneously with strong unifying characteristics lacking in the apostolic period. The most popular views were those held by the Docetics who taught that Jesus did not appear in the flesh, but as a ghost, and thus could not die; what died was the shell of a man that the ghost had invaded (Ignatius, Trallians 9-11).  The Gnostic movement had far more intelligent thinkers, teachers, and preachers than did the movement within Paulinity; these greats included Satornilus of Antioch, who labored before 1500 and Basilides, who taught in Alexandria around 130; and, most important of all, Valentinus, who was active in Rome from c. 135-165 and was regarded as the most gifted figure and thinker of his day.  There are no historical records (outside of the Christian Bible which has no foundation in provable and documented history) that lists a Peter.  Valentinus was far more important in real life than the imaginary initial betrayer of the Jesus of the New Testament.

Maricon made a distinct impact on Rome.  He showed how the New Testament Jesus was far superior in kindness than the violent-enraged Old Testament god.  This made people think and encouraged many to give up Judaism.

Since Marcion preached a message of a loving Jesus, he quickly became unpopular with the rise of the militant community that sought the return of a marshal military Jesus proclaimed in Matthew 10:34.  A struggle broke out and the presbyters that controlled churches in Rome in the name of Paul (nt Peter), demanded the ouster of Marcion.  Their action further alienated the believers and caused one of the first rifts in the community that had not yet been solidified into a single church: a collective community recognizing a single head.

The struggle was intensified with the rise of Montanism that distinctly and sharply followed the teaching of the New Testament Jesus.  The Montanists denounced the worldliness of the church and condemned the priests who claimed they were ministers of Jesus for their lavish living and corrupt secular lifestyle.  Those who denounced the worldliness of the church and its leaders were categorized as “fallen” people: apostasia (“ἀποστασία”) meaning defecting, departuring, revolting or being in rebellion against the church.  Once the Roman Catholic Church had a forceful stranglehold on Western Europe in the nefarious form of the Inquisition (restored by Pope Paul VI (1963-1978) and embellished by Benedict XVI in the manner of Scott Lively, Bill Donahue of the Catholic League, Maggie Gallagher of NOM (read here and here), Brian Fischer (American Family Association) and the two most vile cardinals in history: Timothy Dolan of New York and the wretched Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco with others who despise freedom), Pope Innocent III declared: “Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God that conflicts with church dogma must be burned without pity.”

While the Roman Catholic Church was the most worldly and among the richest and wretched in western Christiandom, the Eastern Orthodox was the epitome of any organization under criminal control with the patriarchal throne of Constantinople frequently sold to the highest bidder, while new patriarchal investiture was accompanied by heavy payment to the government (read here and here). To recoup their losses, patriarchs and bishops heavily taxed the local parishes and their clergy to the point of bankrupting most.

The Greek patriarchal throne was never secure. Few patriarchs between the 15th and the 19th centuries died a natural death while in office, instead there was a plethora of forced abdications, drowning, exiles, hangings,  and poisonings of patriarchs from Constantinople to Sofia and into Moscow. The hanging of Patriarch Gregory V (Γρηγόριος Ε΄, born Georgios Angelopoulos) from the gate of the patriarchate on Easter Sunday 1821 for becaming a member of the Filiki Eteria (Φιλική Εταιρεία: Friendly Society; cp. Alison, Phillips W. (1897). The war of Greek independence, 1821 to 1833. London, UK: Smith, Elder. pp. 20, 21) that was preparing for a revolt against the Turkish rule; his execution was accompanied by the execution of two metropolitans and twelve bishops, leading to whole-scale burnings of the Bible and the writings of clergy.

The official christiano movement was trotted in by Irenaeus of Lyons, who had little knowledge of the Bible and even less of history—much like the bishops of today, especially those sitting on the Council of Bishops of the USA, and the Perú Council of Bishops.  Irenaeus, writing about 185 CE, claimed that the Gospels of Matthew and John were actually written by the Apostles (which has been repeatedly proven to be false), while Mark (on which all synoptic gospels are based) was claimed to have reproduced the message of Peter and Luke. Irenaeus went so far as to claim that the Gospels said nothing about Gnosticism, further proving his ignorance of the Bible, either rejecting or more likely not knowing 1 Corinthians 2:6 (cp. Irenaeus, Heresies 3.4.1). Still the early movement in Rome thrived as the Gnostic movement was far more open and generous than Pauline Christianity that most considered to be a barbaric transmogrification of anything Jesus said, did, or wanted to occur. It was especially popular from 135-160 CE that it threatened to destroy Paulinity that was being cultivated by Imperial Rome as a way to foster and gain adherents to the empire as it argued for spiritual knowledge (γνωσις) over physical or philosophic knowledge and being more passive led to the legalization of Christianity in 313 CE.

Many of those who had entered the early church also left it, such as Tertullian (Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, c. 160-225 CE), the first ecclesiastical writer of prominence to use Latin in his letters (even the presbyters of Rome used Greek), and unfortunately authored the absurdity of their being an “original sin” (Tertullian, Anima 41, that could only be undone by the power of the grace of God: verse 21).  Tertullian also popularized the Egyptian concept of a Trinity (Tertullian, Praxeas 2), although it was a term that was used earlier than Tertullian by Theophilus of Antioch in Ad Autolycum 2.15 to refer to God, God’s Logos (Jesus), and God’s Sophia (Holy Spirit).  Tertullian and his wife abandoned Christianity for the more views of Montanism. Cp. J. Kaye, Bishop of Lincoln (1845, third edition) The Ecclesiastical History of the Second and Third Centuries, illustrated from the writings of Tertullian. London: Rivington.

Part of the unifying trend of chrestianos and christianos among Gentile was an increasingly harsh rejection of Judaism and Jewish practices. Early Christianity gradually grew apart from Judaism during the first two centuries and established itself as a predominantly Gentile religion in the Roman Empire causing many to leave the new cult. Christianity only became the official religion in 325 CE and then because of the order of Constantine and the support of the army of Rome (Paul Stephenson (2009, 2010). Constantine: Roman Emperor, Christian Victor. New York : Overlook Press, 2010.Chapter 11).  Constantine’s Catholic Church that emerged as today’s Roman Catholic, Orthodox of Protestant Christianity rejected, totally, the words of Jesus of the New Testament: “Take My yoke upon you and learn of Me, for I am gentle [meek] and humble [lowly] in heart, and you will find rest (relief and ease, refreshment, recreation and blessed quiet) for your souls. For My yoke is wholesome [useful, good — not harsh, sharp, or pressing, but comfortable, gracious, and pleasant] and My burden is light and easy to be borne” (Matthew 11:29-30).

2 Comments

Filed under Ancient Egypt, Apostolic Succession, Bible, Bishop of Rome, Church history, Education, Homosexuality, Jesus Christ, Roman Catholicism

Resurrection, Immortality, Trinity

Christians today argue that Jesus was the first and only person resurrected from the grave, that immortality is part of Jewish and Christian theology, and that the concept of three-gods-in-one-god (the Trinity) is unique to and with Christianity.  None of that is true.

Resurrection, immortality, and the Trinity are thousands of years older than Christianity or the establishment of the Christian church by the Emperor Constantine at his Council of Nicaea in the fourth century CE (325 CE).  We find the accounts of all three theological concepts going back to ancient Egypt (see Pleyte and Rossi, Papyrus de Turin. Facsimilés par F. Rossi de Turin, et publiés par W. Pleyte de Leideplates. Leide, E. J. Brill, 1869-76, plates 31, 77, 131, 138; cp. Wiedemann, Die Religion, p. 29, with summaries in Erman, Adolf (1934). Die Religion der Ägypter, ihr Werden und Vergehen in vier Jahrtausenden, Berlin, De Gruyter; and Erman, Adolf (1923). Aegypten und aegyptisches leben im altertum, von Adolf Erman; neu bearb. von Hermann Ranke, mit einem farbigen titelbild, 100 abbildungen auf 42 tafeln, sowie 276 strichzeichnungen, 2 karten und Schriftproben im text. Tübingen, Mohr, p. 359; cp. Maspero, Gaston Camille Charles (1901?). Histoire ancienne des peuples de l’Orient classique”, [1] Les origines, Égypte et Chaldée. [2] Les premières mêlées des peuples. [3] Les empires. London, The Grolier society [1901?], Vol. 1, pp. 162-164; original English translated from the French published under the title of Life in ancient Egypt and Assyria. From the French of G. Maspéro. With one hundred and eighty-eight illustrations, New York, D. Appleton and company, 1892: an abbreviated version).

We read the account of the resurrection in the Papyrus of Nekht (British Museum, No. 10471, Sheet 21): O Ra, who are Heru-Khuti, the divine man-child, the heir of eternity, self-begotten and self-born, king of the earth, prince of the Tuat [Other World] … you are the god of life, you the lord of love, all men live when you shine, you are crowned king of all the gods … [You are the] lord of eternity, the prince of everlastingness, you sovereign of all the gods, you the god of life, you creator of eternity, you maker of heaven wherein you are firmly established.  The Company of the Gods rejoice at your rising, the earth is glad when it beholds your rays; the people who have been long dead come forth with cries of joy to see your beauties every day [as they resurrect from their earthly graves] in this rapture:

Papyrus of Kekht (British Museum No. 19471 Sheet 21)

While the Trinity (Osiris, Isis, and Horus) have always played a unified role in ancient Egyptian theology, they are not unique.  The Trinity, however, had a special role in preserving the body and guaranteeing the faithful immortality. This ran from the first dynasty up to and including the Ptolemaic period were there was a common theme: “Soul to heaven body to earth” (5th dynasty), “The essence is in heaven, your body to earth” (sixth dynasty), to “Heaven has your soul, the earth has your body” (Ptolemaic period).  All of these are reflected in the Papyrus of Ani, Chapter LXXXIV (Plate XXVIII.1.15) which reads: “I am Shu or divine company. My soul is God [and] my soul is eternity.” (Cp. Recueil de travaux relatifs à la philologie et à l’archéologie égyptiennes et assyriennes. 1870-1888: Paris : F. Vieweg, Libr., [1870-1923], t. IV, p. 71, l. 582, and V, p. 45, l. 304; an online translation, minus the hieroglyphics, is at http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/ebod/ebod05.htm; the original was printed in 1866 in Paris; my copy is to fragile from constant reading and reference to reproduce for this blog).

The concept of the soul appears in the Hymn for Sunrise (Papyrus of Ani pl. 21):  [26b] “You mould your limbs as you advance, you bring them forth, you who never was brought forth in the form of Ra [you are eternal], who ascends into the highest part of heaven.  Grant that I may reach the heaven of eternity [everlasting life], and the region where your favored ones dwell. May I unite with [l. 28] those holy and perfect Spirit-souls of Khert-Neter. … [l. 29] My two hands are raised to you in praise and thanksgiving [l. 30] when you set in life  (i.e. as a living being, or in the Land of Life]. Behold, you are the Creator of Eternity (or Eternal Creator), who are adored when you set in Nu [deified celestial waters: holy waters]. I have set you in my heart, without [l. 31] wavering, as You are more divine than the [other] gods”, with the papyrus as presented here:

"Hymn for sunrise" (Resurrection of the dead), Papyrus of Ani pl. 21

 The Holy Egyptian Trinity:

While Egyptian theology believed in immortality, few others did, and no tribe in the Middle East had a concept of an afterlife. The Apiru (who would become the Hebrews) saw death as opening to darkness.  Ancient Arabs saw life as stopping and consciousness evaporating. But one thing all cultures had in common, save for the most backward in the Middle East after the fall of the advanced civilization of Babylon, was the concept of a Trinity–which began both in ancient Egypt and India and spread outward but did not take hold in what would become ancient Israel until after the fifth century CE.

All ancient civilizations in Africa, Asia and Europe had three gods leagued together: one was always a child who was growing in intelligence and thus considered to be Knowledge (logos).  Statues of these Trinities are common place.  The most common came out of India and Hindu theology. 

Trimurti (Hindu Trinity)

YHWH weds Asherah (ancient Canaanite art)

From India came the Apiru, a disgruntled agricultural lot of migrant marauders led by a mythological father known as Abraham (the Hindu god Brahma) who sold his wife only to reclaim her with demands of extortion to gain cattle, sheep, and other forms of wealth. Even the Apiru came to Cana they came with their gods, the favored being the agricultural god YHWH (2 Kings 18:4; 21:7; cf. http://blog.eteacherbiblical.com/2008/05/25/married-deities-asherah-and-yahweh-in-early-israelite-religion/).

Yah of Samaria and his Asherah (old potsherd)

 There were many Yah gods throughout the lands of Egypt (where the word originated), Canaan,  and Assyria.  Yah is associated with the moon-god of Egypt and is symbolized with the heifer/cow gods of Jeroboam reflecting the ancient India cultural theology of worshipping the cow (in Egypt the cow was associated with the goddess Isis and a part of sexual ritual that included homosexuality and bestiality–both which were commonly accepted formats of worshipping the deity and not condemned), and accompanied by goats (those easily led).  The consort of Yahweh was not the one playing the flute–but the cow (which is why some societies still refer to the wife as a cow or heifer).   There is no validity to the claim that Yahweh was unique nor the real God of Israel–as archaeology and ancient texts shows that Yah belongs to the pantheon of Egyptian deities. 

Babylonians used an equilateral triangle to represent this three-in-one god. Babylonians worshiped a trinity of gods: Ea – the god of water, Anu – the god of the sky, and Enlil – the storm god. Later, a second trinity developed – Sin, Shamash and Ishtar.

King Melishipak I (1186–1172 B.C.E.) presents his daughter to Shamash, the sun, represented at the right, next to Nanna and Ishtar.

From the Babylonian culture came the ontology and theology of the Sumerians.

Sumerian gods (wings depicted rapid movement in flight)

According to the Sumerians their gods came from a distant planet they were told was called Nibiru (Planet of the Crossing.)  The Assyrians and Babylonians called it ‘Marduk’, after their chief god.  Sumerians left a long history of these space travelers, whom, they were told, developed their astrology and told the Sumerians that one year on planet Nibiru, a sar, was equivalent in time to 3600 earth years.  The Nibirus also claimed that Anunnaki lifespans were 120 sars which is 120 x 3600 or 432,000 years, and that they had been on the planet we know as Earth for 440,000 years. According to the King List 120 sars had passed from the time the Anunnaki arrived on Earth to the time of the Flood that covered Sumeria (it did not cover the earth). However when the Lofty Ones [space travellers] came to Earth their lifespans began to sync with Earth’s faster orbit and they faced rapid aging compared to that on Nibiru. The Sumerians never called the Anunnaki, ‘gods.’ They were called din.gir, a two-syllable word. ‘Din‘ meant ‘righteous, pure, bright’ while ‘gir‘ was a term used to describe a sharp-edged object. As an epithet for the Anunnaki ‘dingir’ meant ‘righteous ones of the bright pointed objects:’ which many have interpreted as being swords or spears–and with them came the beginning of foundries of weapons and the Bronze Age heralded by gods who came like birds in groups of three.

Birth of Athena from head of Zeus

The Greek triad was composed of Zeus, Athena and Apollo.   Greek religion was different from many others in that it had no great founder, no sacred books and no priestly caste system. Rather than just belief, Greek religious worship was a matter of cheerful practice incorporated into daily life, and their gods were very “earthly” with the same carnal lusts, desire for wine and other alcoholic drinks, committed adultery freely, and more (see: http://www.suite101.com/content/understanding-the-worlds-religions-a62138).

Three Goddesses

One of the largest pagan temples built by the Romans was constructed at Ballbek (situated in present day Lebanon) to their Trinity of Jupiter, Mercury and Venus.  Jupiter did have a son (Vulcan) by his wife Juno, and the son was acclaimed by the ancient Romans to be “the Son of God” and recognized as “sitting on

Vulcan son of Jupiter crossing the heavens in a winged chariot

the right hand of his Father who is in the heavens … giving guidance through the ministrations of his Holy Wife”–Vulcan was a part of the early Roman Trinity that would take on various shapes through the passing of time until this ancient theology influenced the emperors of the decaying empire to insist on the incorporation of a Trinity into Christian theology.  What is unique is that the image of Vulcan was portrayed commonly as a god riding in a winged chariot across the heavens, in the same way that Old Testament prophets

Prophet Elijah's Chariot of Fire (Icon courtesy of http://www.eikonografos.com used with permission)

are said to have traveled or seen wheels in the heavens in their eagerness to see their god YHWH (cp. the prophet Elijah (Hebrew: אליהו), also Elias (NT Greek Hλίας), in 2 Kings 2:11;  in many Slavic nations Elijah is sometimes referred to as Gromovik (literally “Thunderer” which is the Slavic god of storms, snows, and rains).

There is no evidence the Apostles of Jesus ever heard of a Trinity. The Bible does not teach the doctrine of the Trinity. 

The disciples viewed Jesus as the ‘one mediator between God and men,’ (1 Timothy 2:5) not as God himself. A mediator by definition is someone separate from those who need mediation.

While Christians since the sixth century liked to proclaim that Egypt was one of the original Christian bastions, that was not true, as the old religion of the past remained strong until the sixth century and only caved into the worship of “the Messenger” (Jesus) because of imperial force.  Augustine of Hippo was neither Egyptian nor respected in Egypt but seen as a mad man who lusted openly and wrote about his sexual conquests in his Confessions.

2 Comments

Filed under Augustine of Hippo, Homosexuality

United Nations Votes Against Human Rights

Homophobic bigotry has its historical roots in a misreading and mangled translation of ancient Babylonian myths that were plagiarized and incorporated into various Abrahamic (The people and languages Abrahamic religions arose from were in fact of one people—Jews, Christians and Arabs [many who were converted to Islam, usually at the point of a sword] who all claim to be descended from Shem) are among the Semites] writings in the Middle East–starting with the myth of Abraham (who was nothing less than the Apiru (it is found in Akkadian cuneiform texts that show a uniqueness near ancient Sanskrit. The corresponding name in the consonant-only Egyptian script appears to be PR.W, conventionally pronounced Apiru) transmogrification of the Hindu god Brahama (move the

Akkadian script: Peoples of the Battle of Kadesh

final “a” to the front of the name) who was carried along with a petty agricultural god (YHWH) into Canaan where the northern barbarians, who later were known as Israelites who created the mythology for a desert deity encased in a large black stone and known as Allah, rewrote history. (The earliest recorded instance of the term is dated to the reign of king Irkabtum of the north Mesopotamian, known in the bible as Amorite of the central kingdom of Yamkhad (c. 1740 BC), who had a year named “Year when king Irkabtum made peace with Semuma and the Habiru.” This has been taken to show that the Habiru led by Semuma already wielded such influence in the neighborhood of Alalakh that the local sovereign felt obliged to conclude a treaty with them.  There was nothing peaceful about the Apiru—on the contrary they were known as a filthy and evil foreign people who could not be trusted. It was for that reason the character of Lot was developed—a man so distrusted he had to sit in the outer gate to the brilliant and enlightened city of Sodom.)

Lot's cave where he impregnated his daughters (Gen. 19:36) outside Zoar

The original texts of ancient Apiru mythology details how a “Lot” (actually a word for a separating group of people from the original nomadic followers of Brahama who had made war plans to sack and destroy the City of Sodom, which in its day was known as “the Golden City of the Gods”) was rejected because of the Apiru demand for war when the Cities of the Plain were in armed conflict. Lot had to sit in the gate to judge “his” own people (Gen. 19:1)–and only was allowed a house within the walls to protect him and his extended family. When messengers (malak [in Arabic ملاك, Hebrew מַלְאָךְ, Aramaic מלא]: the original meaning of the ancient script in the Akkadian language), and Lot addresses them as “My Lords” conferring upon them military distinction (nowhere do we find the word for “angels” in the original scripts) came, they were rushed in without going through proper channels of the registration of foreigners. When (according to Genesis 19), the city council learned of Lot’s deception, “all the people, young and old together”, including women (Gen. 19:4), gathered before the house of Lot to demand to know (register) the messengers.  Lot refused and offered them his daughters (a common action) “to do with as you wish” (Gen. 19:8, including gang rape, molest, or kill) which exposes the corruption of this “patriarch”–who is patterned after “Abraham” who sold his wife Sarah into sexual slavery three times (by which he enriched himself with cattle, sheep, men and maid servants, etc; cf. Gen. 12-13f) before stealing her back from the various kings to he pimped his wife.

The absurd claim that evangelical and fundamental Christians and Muslims make is that the City of Sodom (and her sister cities: Gomorrah and Zoar) were destroyed because of homosexuality can quickly be dispatched although no rabid homophobe will ever give up this favored whipping post.  Ezekiel 16:49 states, clearly, that “the sin of Sodom” was “pride, fullness of bread, the inability to put forth the hand to help the needy” and so forth–sex is not even matched.

The Leviticus code declaring that “a man who lies down with a man” (Leviticus 20:13/16; cf. Lev. 18:22) is frequently brought up, but it exists only in bad medieval to medieval to modern translations neglects the original response “as if he were a woman” (meaning that it was a betrayal of self-acceptance, or a pretense in order to issue “an effusion”). This injustice continued against Canaanites who accepted homosexuality as a religious act “dog-priests” and the effusion was a sacred act symbolic of nurturing new life in a field (שּׂכּבּ)—the act was customary at times of planting and harvest.

There is no record of any “marriage” in the Torah (the only qualification for joining a man and a woman was that the wife [a word that meant helper or house slave] “is a virgin; and the Hebrew word (one) references cohabitation without ceremony or registration. The word for marriage as a ceremony does not appear until the European Middle Ages, when Jews refined it into the words erasing and insulin, the actual ceremony for the marriage. “Husband” is a Babylonian word (Baal [בעל] which is actually from the Akkadian Bēlu who was the Lord of an Assembly or a chief over gods or warriors) that actually translates as “master”. “Sanctification” of the union (Kiddushin, קידושין) actually comes much later in time.

 If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed” (Deuteronomy 22:13-21). Interestingly, the contemporary concept of marriage appears no where in the later Jewish Bible, or in the initial Attic Greek Christian bible. Jesus goes to a “marriage feast” (John 2:2) only changes water into wine late during the “feast” (there is no record of a uniting ceremony). The text states that the host was upset as the best wine was saved “until last” (John 2:10f)—a notation that marriage was a public registration of commitment between two people (it states nowhere in the account that there was a bride nor a groom) and the purpose of the marriage was to “eat and drink until full” (drunk). If marriage was “religious” and “sacred” it is strange that the man who swore he would “fulfill the law” of Moses never married.

Not only did Jesus never marry—he never had a girlfriend; however he did let at least one man (John the Beloved) sleep on his chest (John 13:23, Luke 22:8)—and the only person he ever claimed to love was Lazarus (whom he “raised from the dead”—but who then disappears from all biblical account to make way for the advent of John the Beloved). Instead Jesus spent his entire public life around men, living with twelve, and having (Luke 10:1) 70 male disciples. In the day that Jesus allegedly lived, that would be considered the actions and traits of a gay man, as the only “married” man was Peter—and he lived with Jesus, abandoning his wife until she was on her death bed—similar to the way Newt Gingrich treated his wife (although Newt did bring his mistress to his wife’s death bed).

Evangelicals and fundamentals ignore the fact that Jesus preferred men over women, and find solace in the megaphone hatred of the mangled words of Saul of Tarsus (St Paul) whose writing latter has him stating that “effeminate men” (homosexuals) would not be allowed into heaven—but the original definition was lost: given to vanity, and it applies to men and women. But accuracy in translation has never been a strong part in religion, with all religions, especially Roman Catholicism and evangelical Protestants rewriting scripture to meet their own biases.

This crystallizes in the later “Koran” that appears more than a century after the death of “Muhammad” who was an illiterate camel driver–and who received Gabriel’s message while being deluded (to put it mildly) in the desert. He, knowing he could not read or write, Muhammad selected Remembrancers to listen to and memorize his tale of the Koran. They, in turn, remembered it and passed it to succeeding generations before it was written down—which gives cause to pause—as that was even the way the Torah and Bible came into being—with nothing being original. Out of this absence of academic accuracy come homophobic hatred, character and corporal attacks and religious sanctioned murders—now sanctioned by a once reputable, and respected institution that claimed to speak for all people: the draconic United Nations (See: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?t=81139&p=3941839 and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thor-halvorssen/united-nations-its-okay-t_b_787024.html.

The proposal that was ratified to allow the execution of people for being gay or lesbian, or bisexual or transgender was sponsored by evangelical fundamental Christian groups and Muslims and Mormons. The fact of being a homosexual, regardless if the person practiced homosexuality, was not considered for this marginalized community was reclassified as being nonhuman and dangerous to the well-being of order. Religion quickly became the master of the United Nations, and all pretenses of the UN

Uganda Christians Marching

sponsoring and supporting human rights were erased by a vote after the Roman Catholic church, leaders of the Mormon cult, and representatives of Muslim nations (along with several from Latin American nations) demanded that “homosexuality be stamped out” (see: http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/6520779/latest-un-shocker-its-ok-to-kill-gays.thtml). Uganda and other African nations promised an immediate push to execute gays and lesbians where ever they are found (http://www.towleroad.com/2009/12/uganda-kill-gays-bill-likely-to-pass.html) a move heralded by USA evangelical Christians, such as Scott

Scott Lively, Christian Missionary

Lively,  who claim that is the will of their god will not be outdone by the god of Islam and demands his share of human blood in sacrifice for the sin of homosexuality (see: http://www.towleroad.com/2010/01/the-nyt-looks-at-t-he-three-americans-who-participated-in-stephen-langas-uganda-conference-on-homosexuality-last-march-and.html and on Scott Lively see: http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/24/22914, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html, and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9UGXSZDB7w).  

Iran hangs gay boys

Educated, intelligent, reasonable, responsible people will hold the United Nations in total contempt for its despicable action, its contemptuous and cavalier denial of human rights, and its posturing as an agency supporting and defending human rights. The United Nations must be stopped before other human rights erode into oblivion. Now is the time to withhold all money from the UN and all of its organizations that pretend to speak for the down-trodden, the

Iraq tortures and kills gays

marginalized, for the UN has taken up the mantle, the torch, and the arson of Adolf Hitler and has turned the institution into one so vile and nefarious it does not deserve any respect.  Daily the bodies of gay men and lesbians pile up in Muslim nations while the faithful declare that Allah is Most Merciful and that Islam is a religion of love, compassion, and understanding. It is the idiocy of Islam that strangles sanity and charity, and it is buttressed by the intolerance of evangelical extremists and fanatical fundamentalists in the USA who march in step with Fred Phelps and his Kansas based Westboro Baptist Church that not only condones but even funds the executions of those found “unworthy” of charity or the right to life and basic human rights.  In this regard, the United Nations has turned its back, collectively, on humanity and has sanctioned the most inhumane acts against all of humanity that finds itself to displease a few religious who claim their deity or deities do not recognize any person’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Westboro Baptist Church poster

Leave a comment

Filed under Church history, Homosexuality, Jesus Christ, Nazis