JC Myth (9.7): Gnostic New Testament: “Closing of the Breach”

JC Myth Picture for Blog

Chapter Nine: Gnostic New Testament: “Closing of the Breach”

One aspect of the natural-to-spiritual imagery presented in the New Testament is that the earth was becoming the sky, the human a god, the female a male. The breach was going to be closed.

In The Gospel of Thomas Jesus states that he plans to make women male so they can enter his kingdom.

(114) Simon Peter said to him, “Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life.” Jesus said, “I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven.[1]

Of course, this didn’t make it into the canon, but it is nevertheless evident that, within early Christian thoughts, male and female would be reunited as one being, the new, androgynous last Adam, or Christ. Christ then would be “all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28, Eph. 1:23). As Clement of Alexandria wrote, the “‘Sun of Righteousness,’ who drives His chariot over all, pervades equally all humanity.”[2]

Jesus (of the house of Jacob) fixed the rift between his parents, thus closing the breach, ending their separation, and bringing reconciliation. They got back together for their offspring. Jesus’ mother, who had been so lewd the Philistines were ashamed of her, committed fornication with the Egyptians and the Assyrians, and fornicated from the land of Canaan to Chaldea—pouring her prostitution on “everyone who passed by” (Ezek. 16:15-29)—finally came home. The new Jerusalem, the “mother of us all” (Gal. 4:26), descended and Yahweh’s tabernacle was with men (Rev. 21:2-4). Heaven came down and joined the earth. The old heaven and old earth were gone, and in their place was only one entity, with no more sea (adversary, foreign lover) to separate the divine couple (Rev. 21:1). Again, Lamentations 2:13 states that the breach between Yahweh and his “virgin daughter” Israel was “great like the sea: who can heal thee?” Jesus was the only one who could build a bridge across the sea, and crush the serpent, dragon, devil, or Satan. He was the knight in shining armor who killed the monster in the waters surrounding the castle, rebuilt the bridge across the moat, and brought everybody home safe and sound. “In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea” (Isa. 27:1). At this point, of course, the old Israel had become Egypt, or the sea that was no more (Jn. 8:44, Gal. 4:24-28, Rev. 11:8).

Remember, the brother of the mother in ancient times was the male figure in a child’s life. In Amos 6:10 the uncle of a dead man was to go into a burned house and get the man’s bones. In the New Testament we read about “Paul’s sister’s son” and “Marcus, sister’s son to Barnabas,” presumably because these nephews were close to their uncles (Acts 23:16, Col. 4:10). If an indigent widow (widow indeed) has children or nephews, Christianity demands that both provide for her (1 Tim. 5:4). In ancient times the “only recognized bonds of blood relationship depended on motherhood . . . The bonds were maternal because no paternal relationships were perceived or even guessed.”[3]

An interesting concept appears with regard to the god Adonis as well as Osiris—an idea we have mentioned, which is that the gods enjoy incestuous relationships. We saw it with Ishtar and Tammuz; and the mother of Adonis was the reincarnated Aphrodite or Venus, and was the consort of Adonis and therefore both his mother and his lover.[4] Isis mothered Horus through Osiris and became both the mother and lover of Horus. Isis was also the sister of Osiris,[5] hence his sister and his lover. Also, Horus and Osiris may be identical gods, making Isis the wife of God and the mother of God.[6] Brahma, Abraham, and Zeus married their sisters. And who can forget: “I am come into my garden, my sister, my spouse” (Sng of Sngs 5:1)? We might also remember that Yahweh called Israel both his daughter and his wife (Jer. 3:8, Lam. 2:13). As we know, the Virgin Mary was both the wife of God (Yahweh) and the mother of God (Jesus). This is carried over into the relationship the New Testament bears out between Christ and his church. He is the older brother and the bridegroom, as well as the father (Is. 9:6); and the church (or new Jerusalem) is both the mother of all, which would include the Christ since he is the Christian’s brother, and the bride of Christ (Jn. 3:29, Gal. 4:26, Rev. 21). Barbara Walker noted that the “female who is both Bride of God and Mother of God, like Mary, dates all the way back to Paleolithic cultures before biological fatherhood was understood.”[7] Another interesting tidbit is that Mary Magdalene was, in some stories, the midwife at the birth of Jesus, the one who anointed him with oil (making him the Christ), and, in some Gnostic literature, the lover of Jesus.[8] In fact, Jacobovici wrote regarding Mary:

“In our Lost Gospel, she is depicted as a Galilean Phoenician priestess that abandons idolatry after meeting and falling in love with Jesus. They marry, but she’s not simply ‘Mrs. Jesus.’ She is a partner in redemption referred to as the ‘Daughter of God’ and ‘The Bride of God.’ Our Lost Gospel states that Jesus and Mary had two children and it witnesses to the idea that, for their earliest followers, Jesus and his wife Mary were co-deities embroiled in the politics of their times.”[9]

Origen thought Mary Magdalene was immortal, calling her “titles later bestowed on the Virgin Mary, such as Ecclesia (the Church), Jerusalem and ‘Mother of Us All.'”[10] Thus, just as we have a fanciful story of a fake male savior, so we have a fake tale of a female savior. One stuck while the other didn’t.

Again, today we know that females have male DNA in their brains that may have come not only from their fathers but from older brothers who left it in the womb of their mothers. This makes older brothers a part of their younger siblings.[11] So, physically and biologically, a sister and brother are connected in much the same way as a father and child. The point is that once a child is born, no force on Earth can destroy the bond between the child’s family members. Children bind parents, they bind siblings, and they bind in-laws. The entire family (or human race) is connected, particularly in this son of the most powerful god who is now brother, father, and husband to humanity and a bridge between humans and gods. And, according to Romans 8:38-39, nothing can “separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Once the couple (Yahweh and Mary, Asherah, or Israel; heaven and earth; male and female; spirit and body or matter) made that baby (who was a part of them both), it was a done deal—signed, sealed, and delivered; no power could separate them. Men finally found a way, through the divine mother, for their male god to make a baby god and become a creator and sustainer of life. The purpose of marriage is intimacy and consequent offspring. Companions can be had without marriage, but sex and babies are why we marry. (Yahweh was married to sister wives Judah and Israel, and Jesus married his ecclesia.) Immortality was thus gained in the closing of the breach, as sex produces life while separation produces death. And, with the return of the goddess (Matronit, Sophia, Holy Spirit, Asherah, Shekinah, Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene the whore-turned-bride, Ecclesia, New Jerusalem, Israel, Matter, or Mother Earth), and the birth of the baby who closed the breach, Yahweh was no longer sexually frustrated, his wrath was assuaged, and our home became happy again. Allegro wrote: “When the penis slides into the vagina . . . ‘harmony’ has been achieved.”[12] The Bible begins with a separation and ends with a reunion; thus death turned to life. That’s the whole story.

Allegro continued:

“It has seemed strange to scholars that Pluto, the god of the underworld, should elsewhere be reckoned as a god of fertility. It is true that much of our western classical and Semitic tradition has led us to think of Hades as a place of dull lifelessness, or even of retributive torture of the damned. More original, as we have seen, is the conception of the earth’s bowels as the seat of creation where all life is conceived and after death recreated. In the subterranean oven, the god’s seminal fluid is processed into living matter, and the Word made flesh.”[13]

Thus, as Job said, we return to our mother’s womb, possibly to be reborn (Jn. 9:2-3).

Tina Rae Collins

My goal is to share my book The Judaeo-Christian Myth one article at a time. If you find these articles interesting or you don’t think I’ll reach my goal (always a possibility, I suppose), and/or you just can’t wait, you can purchase the book by clicking on the picture above or the title in this paragraph. Thanks for reading!

[1] Robinson, The Gospel of Thomas[2] Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Heathen, “Chapter 11. How Great are the Benefits Conferred on Men Through the Advent of Christ,” tr. William Wilson, ed. Kevin Knight, newadvent.org, 2009, web. 26 Feb. 2015. [3] Walker, Man Made God, 63. [4] Walker, Man Made God, 163. [5] Bennett, 146. See also: “Osiris,” wikipedia.org, 18 Jan. 2015, web, 30 Jan. 2015. [6] “Osiris & Horus,” ambrosiasociety.org., 2009, web, 7 Nov. 2014. [7] Walker, Man Made God, 177. [8] Walker, Man Made God, 170. See also: Clement A. Miles, Christmas Customs and Traditions (New York: Dover, 1976), 107. [9] Jacobovici, “Jesus’ Marriage to Mary the Magdalene Is Fact, Not Fiction.” [10] Walker, Man Made God, 171. See also: Marjorie Malvern, Venus in Sackcloth (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1975), 60. [11] This is called microchimerism, and the cells from a fetus reside in a woman’s cells and organs for the rest of her life, and are therefore transferred to later children. So a man’s nieces and nephews could be a part of him. Robert Martone, “Scientists Discover Children’s Cells Living in Mothers’ Brains: the connection between mother and child is ever deeper than thought,” scientificamerican.com, 12 Dec. 2012, web, 16 Nov. 2014. [12] Allegro, 104. [13] Allegro, 153.

 

JC Myth (9.6): Gnostic New Testament: “The Allegory”

JC Myth Picture for Blog

Chapter Nine: Gnostic New Testament: “The Allegory”

As written in my book We Are Emmanuel (and according to Eusebius), Philo of Alexandria (c. 20 BCE–c. 50 CE), a “Hellenistic Jewish philosopher,”[1] wrote that the early Christians (known as Therapeuts, who, as we learned earlier, worshiped Serapis Christ) “explain the philosophy of their fathers in an allegorical manner, regarding the written words as symbols of hidden truth which is communicated in obscure figures. They have also writings of ancient men, who were the founders of their sect, and who left many monuments of the allegorical method.” Eusebius said these writings were probably the “Gospels and the writings of the apostles, and probably some expositions of the ancient prophets, such as are contained in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and in many others of Paul’s Epistles.”[2] Eusebius continued to quote Philo:

They expound the Sacred Scriptures figuratively by means of allegories. For the whole law seems to these men to resemble a living organism, of which the spoken words constitute the body, while the hidden sense stored up within the words constitutes the soul. . . But that Philo, when he wrote these things, had in view the first heralds of the Gospel and the customs handed down from the beginning by the apostles, is clear to every one.”[3]

Origen, who fought Gnosticism, nevertheless agreed: “The learned may penetrate into the significance of all oriental mysteries, but the vulgar can only see the exterior symbol. It is allowed by all who have any knowledge of the scriptures that everything is conveyed enigmatically.”[4] Dameron believed Jesus was schooled in Gnosticism, stating that “his code of ethics is purely Buddhistic; his mode of action and walk of life Essenian.”[5] Dameron wrote further that Gnosticism was the “purest form of primitive Christianity . . . who derived their doctrine from the oriental philosophy.”[6]

Dr. Craig Lyons wrote that “contrary to what Rome would have us believe about a ‘literal’ Christ,” the earliest believers considered Christ to be an allegory, believing in a “salvation of a dying and rising god; not literally but only allegorically.”[7] Lyons continued: “A person attains salvation by learning . . . of their spiritual essence: that they are a divine spark of light or spirit of God . . . In allegorical terms their soul was asleep and they were unaware of their true spiritual essence.”[8] This fits well with Paul’s view of the death of Adam and resurrection of the Christ (1 Cor. 15), as well as with the following: “Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light” (Eph. 5:14). The early Christians were said to be members of Christ’s body: “of his flesh, and of his bones” (Eph. 5:30). That sounds literal, but we know it wasn’t intended to be so; therefore, it should come as no surprise that the biblical story (at least through the lens of Christianity) may be metaphorical in all aspects. The kingdom of God is said to be within the Christian (Lk. 17:21); also, as Paul declared, Christ was a “spiritual” Rock (1 Cor. 10:4). And, no, Christians don’t literally eat and drink him. However, if they did, it would be no more repulsive than a god’s demanding literal human blood to appease his anger and nearly insatiable need for vengeance. That (as well as dumb animal blood sacrifices) sounds more like what a devil might require. (“Pound me the witch drums.”[9])

Tina Rae Collins

My goal is to share my book The Judaeo-Christian Myth one article at a time. If you find these articles interesting or you don’t think I’ll reach my goal (always a possibility, I suppose), and/or you just can’t wait, you can purchase the book by clicking on the picture above or the title in this paragraph. Thanks for reading!

[1] “Philo,” wikipedia.org, 15 Jan. 2015, web, 20 Jan. 2015. [2] Eusebius, “Philo’s Account of the Ascetics of Egypt.” See also my book We Are Emmanuel, 115. [3] Eusebius, “Philo’s Account of the Ascetics of Egypt.” [4] Origen, Contra Celsus, as found in Alfred Boyd Kuhn, PhD, Who Is This King of Glory?: A Critical Study of the Christos-Messiah Tradition (San Diego: The Book Tree, 2007), 70. [5] Dameron, 51. [6] Dameron, 50. [7] Craig M. Lyons, MsD, DD, MDiv, “Gnosticism: What Did Gnostics Believe?” Bet Emet Ministries, firstnewtestament.com, n.d., web, 4 June 2014. [8] Lyons, “Gnosticism: What Did Gnostics Believe?” [9] Marilyn Manson, “Cupid Carries a Gun,” opening theme song for TV show Salem, genius.com, 2015, web, 11 June 2015. On Salem, the devil needs a human sacrifice in order to manifest himself, and the mother (Mary Sibley) of the boy to be sacrificed is told she is honored like the Virgin Mary, and that any betrayal she feels is like the betrayal the “other Mary” must have felt since “The angel of the annunciation failed to mention that she would end up weeping at the foot of the cross beneath her slaughtered son.” Salem, TV series, created by Brannon Braga and Adam Simon, 2014-present, Season 2, Episode 9, “Wages of Sin,” 31 May 2015.

 

JC Myth (9.5): Gnostic New Testament: “The Book of Hebrews”

JC Myth Picture for Blog

Chapter Nine: Gnostic New Testament: “The Book of Hebrews”

According to the Law of Moses, Jesus couldn’t have offered his life or his blood for the sins of people on the earth because he was not of the priestly tribe of Levi (Heb. 7:14). But the book of Hebrews gives another reason. There were still priests on the earth offering sacrifices in the “worldly sanctuary,” and the way into the most holy place couldn’t be manifested as long as they were performing their duties (Heb. 8:4; 9:1, 8). No matter how good Jesus was or how much he bled out, he couldn’t offer a sacrifice on the earth. Any offering he made would have been rejected. His death on a literal cross couldn’t have atoned for sins, and he didn’t carry blood in a bucket to heaven. If Jesus didn’t literally carry his blood to heaven, that means his blood was not real but symbolic. If his blood was symbolic, his death should have been symbolic too. Even the text says that Jesus “through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God” (Heb. 9:14).

Hebrews 9 (GEN): 22 And almost all things are by the Law purged with blood, and without shedding of blood is no remission. 23 It was then necessary, that the similitudes of heavenly things should be purified with such things: but the heavenly things themselves are purified with better sacrifices than are these. 24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places that are made with hands, which are similitudes of the true Sanctuary: but is entered into very heaven, to appear now in the sight of God for us,

While the Law might have allowed the shedding of blood for purification, that wasn’t the way it was to be in the kingdom of Christ. He would offer a heavenly sacrifice; he was in fact in heaven at that time offering his sacrifice. And, again, it wasn’t literal blood.

Christian teaching itself expresses that the blood sacrifice took place in heaven, not on Earth. Hebrews 10:12 says that Jesus “offered one sacrifice for sins.” Where did he make this sacrifice? According to the New Testament, priests were on the earth years after Jesus died on the cross; but Jesus was in heaven, where, at the time of the writing of the book of Hebrews, the new covenant had not been ratified and iniquities had not been forgiven (Heb. 8:4-13). However, Jesus was a “priest forever,” and he offered his sacrifice in heaven, being slain from the foundation of the world (Heb. 7:21, 27; Rev. 13:8). Jesus couldn’t be crucified on Golgotha in a specific time period if he was crucified from the foundation of the world. The author of Hebrews expressed that Jesus was not a priest on the earth because had he been here he could not have been priest (Heb. 8:4). Regarding this passage Jim Walker wrote: “Furthermore, the epistle to the Hebrews (8:4), makes it explicitly clear that the epistle writer did not believe in a historical Jesus: ‘If He [Jesus] had been on earth, He would not be a priest.'”[1] Again, the Bible says that Christ “through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God” (Heb. 9:14). He did not, however (pardon my repetition), carry his literal blood into a literal place called heaven to sprinkle it on a literal altar. His sacrifice was therefore considered even by the writers of the New Testament to be spiritual (heavenly), not literal (Heb. 9:23).

Tina Rae Collins

My goal is to share my book The Judaeo-Christian Myth one article at a time. If you find these articles interesting or you don’t think I’ll reach my goal (always a possibility, I suppose), and/or you just can’t wait, you can purchase the book by clicking on the picture above or the title in this paragraph. Thanks for reading!

[1] Jim Walker, “Did a historical Jesus exist?”

 

JC Myth (9.4): Gnostic New Testament: “Heinous Human Sacrifice”

JC Myth Picture for Blog

Chapter Nine: Gnostic New Testament: “Heinous Human Sacrifice”

No good father-god would literally kill his son; such heinous behavior is unthinkable. If true it would reduce Christianity to a cult of human sacrifice. As Alvin Kuhn wrote:

“If the Christ was in most real truth crucified in space, the physical timber on Golgotha’s ghastly height, hewn and sawed and nailed, might be accepted with enlightenment as pure symbol of cosmic process. But as it stands in common thought among Christian people it is a gruesome sign of the most abject stultification of the godlike principle of intelligence known to history.”[1]

It is, of course, true that ancient people were savagely sacrificing people to the gods long before Christianity came into existence. The following depicts this monstrous ritual:

“The human sacrifice ritual around the Mediterranean, birthplace of Christianity, was virtually identical in important aspects to the Passion portrayed in the gospel story. This ritual often required a sacred king, whose death, it was believed, would propitiate a god and ensure good fortune and fecundity. During a national crisis, it was deemed necessary for the king to sacrifice his own son or sons, ‘to die for the whole people,’ for the same reason.”[2]

In the ancient Semitic sacred-king sacrifice, which was the same as the Passion of Christ but which preceded Christianity by centuries and millennia, the proxy of the god was first anointed as king and high priest. Next, he was clothed in a purple cloak and crown, and led through the streets with a scepter in his hand. The crowd adored him, and then he was stripped and scourged. Finally, in the third hour [see Mark 15:25], he was killed, collected and sprinkled upon the congregation in order to ensure their future fertility and fecundity. At that point, the faithful crowd ritually cried, ‘his blood be upon us and our children!’ (Mt. 27:25) After the sacrificial victim’s death, the women mourned, wailed and tore their hair at their loss, and his body was eventually removed at sunset, buried in a sepulcher and covered with a stone. Adonis and Tammuz are two of the preChristian Near Eastern gods in whose names were practiced such sadistic rites, echoed in the New Testament.”[3]

Yahweh even insisted on human sacrifice in the Old Testament, as seen here:

Leviticus 27 (BBE): 28  But nothing which a man has given completely to the Lord, out of all his property, of man or beast, or of the land which is his heritage, may be given away or got back in exchange for money; anything completely given is most holy to the Lord. 29  Any man given completely to the Lord may not be got back: he is certainly to be put to death.

Later, we read that Yahweh commanded human sacrifice in order to destroy his people.

Ezekiel 20 (BBE): 25  Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live; 26  And I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am the LORD.

Even the idea of eating flesh and drinking blood, the eucharist (communion, Lord’s supper), didn’t originate with Christianity, as has been shown. Again, the ancients thought that if they drank the blood or ate the flesh of brave or strong men, they themselves would take on these men’s characteristics. Hence, if we eat Christ’s body and drink his blood, we become Christ—we are a part of him (Jn. 6:56). According to The Gospel of Thomas, even Jesus spoke of this. He said: “Blessed is the lion which becomes man when consumed by man; and cursed is the man whom the lion consumes, and the lion becomes man.”[4]  A. Wallis Budge (1857-1934), an English Egyptologist and prolific author of books pertaining to the ancient Near East,[5] explained this as follows:

“The notion that, by eating the flesh, or particularly by drinking the blood, of another living being, a man absorbs his nature or life into his own, is one which appears among primitive peoples in many forms. It lies at the root of the widespread practice of drinking the fresh blood of enemies—a practice which was familiar to certain tribes of the Arabs before Muhammad . . . The flesh and blood of brave men also are, among semisavage or savage tribes, eaten and drunk to inspire courage.”[6]

Budge wrote the words above regarding “a passage from the pyramid of the Egyptian ruler Unas, in which Unas is depicted as ‘eating’ all the gods, thereby taking on their magical powers and eternal life.”[7] Allegro wrote that those who ate Bacchus “took on his power and character as the Christians ‘carried in their bodies the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus might be manifested in their bodies’ (II Cor 4:10).”[8]

Every Sunday Christians metaphorically vampirize and cannibalize on Jesus’ “blood” and “flesh” in an attempt to become like him or, really, to be him as it is the only way to have Christ dwelling inside one and experience his immortality and, hence, receive his “magical powers” (Jn. 6:53-58, 14:12; 1 Cor. 11:23-34). According to Genesis 3:22 and as Allegro noted, Yahweh stated that Adam had become like one of “us” (the Elohim) and Yahweh was concerned that Adam would eat of the tree of life and live forever. Therefore, according to verses 23-24, Yahweh drove the man out of the garden and made it so that he/they could never return. Within the doctrines of Christianity, the tree of life is available and people live forever by feasting on this metaphorical “tree” (Jesus). Hence, Christians eat Christ in order to obtain his characteristics.

However, while human sacrifice did occur, when a god was sacrificed it was in the heavens. And Jesus could not have literally fulfilled the Judaeo-Christian demands for a human scapegoat sacrifice (if indeed Yahweh wanted such a heinous offering) since he was not qualified as a priest to offer a sacrifice to Yahweh on the earth. For various reasons (and based on the biblical texts), he could not have been an earthly savior, and his crucifixion on the earth for the sins of the world can’t be valid.[9]

Tina Rae Collins

My goal is to share my book The Judaeo-Christian Myth one article at a time. If you find these articles interesting or you don’t think I’ll reach my goal (always a possibility, I suppose), and/or you just can’t wait, you can purchase the book by clicking on the picture above or the title in this paragraph. Thanks for reading!

[1] Alvin Boyd Kuhn, Who is this King of Glory? (New Jersey: Academy Press, 1944), 214. See also: Acharya S, Suns of God, 268. [2] Frazer, The Golden Bough, 341. See also: Acharya S, Suns of God, 276-277. [3] Edouard Dujardin, Ancient History of the God Jesus (London: Watts, 1938), 55-56. See also: Acharya S, Suns of God, 276-277. [4] James M. Robinson, ed., The Gospel of Thomas, tr. Thomas O. Lamdin, The Gnostic Society Library (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1990) <http://gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html&gt;. [5] “E. A. Wallis Budge,” wikipedia.org, 2014, web, 12 Nov. 2014. [6] E. A. Wallis Budge, The Egyptian Book of the Dead (Dover, NY, 1967), lxxi. See also Acharya S, Suns of God, 275. [7] Acharya S, Suns of God, 275. [8] Allegro, 86. [9] For a while I will be quoting from my book We Are Emmanuel: How Man Became God.

 

JC Myth (9.3): Gnostic New Testament: “Place of the Skull”

JC Myth Picture for Blog

Chapter Nine: Gnostic New Testament: “Place of the Skull”

Jesus was crucified at Golgotha, or “the place of the skull” (Mt. 27:33-37). Christ’s purpose was to purify the “conscience” (in the skull). Adam and Eve were naked before their fall and naked afterwards (nothing changed except in their minds). The believers in Christ were to “repent” or “have a change of mind” (Acts 3:19). They were to “kill the beast” or overcome the “natural man,” thus becoming a spiritual, or resurrected man.

The scheme of redemption is metaphorical. A man standing upright with his arms out is a cross. Tertullian, when declaring that others (besides Christians) worshiped a cross, wrote: “If you position a man with his arms outstretched, you shall have created the image of a cross.”[1] Within the skull of that upright man is a natural man, Adam. That Adam (Jesus) had to be crucified or destroyed so that the new Adam, the anointed man, the Christ, could rise. (This is why anyone in the new Christ would be greater than John [Mt. 11:11, Jn. 3:30].) That was the crucifixion of the son of man (not the son of God), an “invisible, spiritual, cosmic event of  the mind.”[2] Of course, upon this crucifixion and resurrection the person became a child/son of God and a “new man” (Eph. 2:15, 4:24; Col. 3:10).

Again, resurrection in the New Testament is spiritual. That’s why a person crucified the “Son of God” afresh when he turned back to his old ways (Heb. 6:6). When a person is enlightened, all darkness is gone and his eye is single (Lk. 11:34). He rises from his grave and is alive. His spirit is renewed and he experiences a new, resurrected life. This is the resurrection that Paul described in 1 Corinthians 15. Again, Yahweh’s “Son” was his fruit, his seed, his word that was planted in the heart of man. Proverbs 15:4 says that a “wholesome tongue is a tree of life: but perverseness therein is a breach in the spirit.” A breach is a fracture, a brokenness. When Israel lived perversely like the nations about her, she partook of the forbidden fruit, which broke her connection to her only true source of wisdom. Lamentations 2:13 states: “O daughter of Jerusalem? what shall I equal to thee, that I may comfort thee, O virgin daughter of Zion? for thy breach is great like the sea: who can heal thee?” The “house of Jacob” (Israel, the virgin daughter herself) would eventually be the “repairer of the breach” (Is. 58:12). Isaiah 30:26 says that the “light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days, in the day that the LORD bindeth up the breach of his people, and healeth the stroke of their wound.” Again, the bride (moon) would shine like the husband (sun). She would reflect his glory on the earth with her crown of children on her head. Adam was the old Israel, and Christ was the new Israel.

Those who walk in the light of Yahweh eat from the tree of life (Christ). Christians must, then, crucify the natural man, the man who is selfish, prideful, and ego-ridden. That’s the only way, if one wishes to follow the teachings of the New Testament, to reach a resurrected state. Joshua Tilghman wrote:

You, too, must learn to defeat the ego just as Jesus defeated Satan. You are also meant to carry your cross and be crucified (your ego) at Golgotha, the place of the skull! It’s all in your head. You must conquer the mind, meaning the ego, and then become the Christ that Paul labors to form in you![3]

The number of man (Adam), according to Revelation 13:18, is 666. That is also the number of the beast. The Koine Greek number for the name “Jesus,” as has been stated, is 888.[4] When the natural, earthly Adam (man) died, the beast died with him, and the Christ arose. That is the teaching of 1 Corinthians 15. Romans 1:3-4 states that Jesus was “made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” Resurrection made him the son of God with power. According to the flesh, he was of the seed of David. He was Israel. He was the natural man. He was the Christ only in the resurrection. According to the Bible, Adam was made in the image of God and Jesus was the image of God (Gen. 1:26, Col. 1:13-15), but both were men. Making a man in the belly of a woman is no different from making a man from dirt. Both were humans if they existed at all (they were human characters in the biblical story).

It might be good to take the time here to look at several translations of Paul’s view of how Jesus became the son of God.

Bible in Basic English: Romans 1:3  About his Son who, in the flesh, came from the family of David, 4  But was marked out as Son of God in power by the Holy Spirit through the coming to life again of the dead; Jesus Christ our Lord,

World English Bible: Romans 1:3  concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, 4  who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,

Young’s Literal Translation: Romans 1::3  concerning His Son, (who is come of the seed of David according to the flesh, 4  who is marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of sanctification, by the rising again from the dead,) Jesus Christ our Lord;

Geneva Bible: Romans 1:3  Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord (which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, 4  And declared mightily to be the Son of God, touching the Spirit of sanctification by the resurrection from the dead),

Douay-Rheims: Romans 1:3  Concerning his Son, who was made to him of the seed of David, according to the flesh, 4  Who was predestinated the Son of God in power, according to the spirit of sanctification, by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead;

King James Version Romans 1:3  Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; 4  And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

American Standard Version: Romans 1:3  concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, 4  who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead; even Jesus Christ our Lord,

Since Paul wrote before the Gospels were written, it seems logical to conclude that the author of Romans saw Jesus as a mere man who, through his work on the earth, was simply declared to be the son of God. However, as time went on a couple of writers (Matthew and Luke) decided to make the story even bigger and better by declaring Jesus to have been conceived miraculously (while John thought he was a god from all eternity). I suppose that would be like a speck from the Father (really, shouldn’t all of us be that if the god who is in all and through all really exists [Eph. 4:6]?).

Dr. Tony Nugent, ordained Presbyterian minister, former professor in the Department of Theology and Religious Studies at Seattle University, and, as mentioned previously, a scholar of world religions, wrote:

“Jewish Christians, the first Christians, didn’t believe in the virgin birth. They believed that Joseph was the biological father of Jesus. Part of their Christology was ‘adoptionism’–they thought Jesus was adopted as the unique son of God at some time later in life. There were disagreements about when – Mark suggests the baptism, Paul suggests the resurrection. . . Eventually we get the gospel of John which pushes the sonship of Jesus back to the beginning of time. . . But Matthew and Luke think that the sonship of Jesus began at birth.”[5]

Obviously the writers disagreed with one another. While Nugent stated that Paul’s belief was that a literal Jesus became the son of God upon his resurrection (and, in the story, perhaps he did), Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 15 presents a Christ’s coming into being at the final resurrection of the dead, not the resurrection of a man named Jesus (1 Cor. 15:43-47). This is important—it’s the spiritual significance of the mythical story. In the story, when Jesus was crucified he said, “It is finished” (Jn. 19:30). But it was not finished—not until Israel was “crucified,” not until Israel was reduced to ashes (with not one stone left on another [Mt. 24:2]), not until Israel rose from the dead. Adam was Jesus was Israel (1 Cor. 15:42-58). Again, the soul that sinned (Adam) is the soul that died (Israel) and the soul that was resurrected” (Christ) (Ezek. 18:4, 20).

Paul stated that Christ appeared to Peter and then to “the twelve, afterwards he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once . . .  afterwards he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. And last of all — as to the untimely birth — he appeared also to me” (1 Cor. 15: 5-8). Although Paul never saw the risen Christ, he made no distinction in the way he “saw” Christ and the way the others he mentioned saw Christ. Paul’s intent was to express support for a Christ in heaven. Hebrews 8:4 states that if Christ “were [or “had been,” BBE] on earth” he couldn’t be priest; and Paul made sure people accepted his claim of Christ’s being in heaven, from where he did have authority as priest and could offer sacrifices. Jesus said that anywhere two or three people gather in his name, he is right there with them (Mt. 18:20). Do people actually see him? No. Did Paul see him? No, he saw a blinding light; and later he had a vision (Acts 9:3, 7; 18:9; 22:6). So what might we assume about how others “saw” Jesus after his resurrection (if indeed he was historic and walked on the earth before his supposed resurrection)? (Paul considered his seeing a light to be like everybody else’s seeing Jesus, yet he strangely never mentioned that Stephen claimed to see Jesus in the heavens [Acts 7:56].)

Raphael Lataster, author and lecturer at the University of Sydney, wrote:

“The first problem we encounter when trying to discover more about the Historical Jesus is the lack of early sources. The earliest sources only reference the clearly fictional Christ of Faith. These early sources, compiled decades after the alleged events, all stem from Christian authors eager to promote Christianity – which gives us reason to question them. The authors of the Gospels fail to name themselves, describe their qualifications, or show any criticism with their foundational sources – which they also fail to identify. Filled with mythical and non-historical information, and heavily edited over time, the Gospels certainly should not convince critics to trust even the more mundane claims made therein.

Paul’s Epistles, written earlier than the Gospels, give us no reason to dogmatically declare Jesus must have existed. Avoiding Jesus’ earthly events and teachings, even when the latter could have bolstered his own claims, Paul only describes his “Heavenly Jesus.” Even when discussing what appear to be the resurrection and the last supper, his only stated sources are his direct revelations from the Lord, and his indirect revelations from the Old Testament. In fact, Paul actually rules out human sources (see Galatians 1:11-12).

“Also important are the sources we don’t have. There are no existing eyewitness or contemporary accounts of Jesus. All we have are later descriptions of Jesus’ life events by non-eyewitnesses, most of whom are obviously biased. Little can be gleaned from the few non-Biblical and non-Christian sources, with only Roman scholar Josephus and historian Tacitus having any reasonable claim to be writing about Jesus within 100 years of his life. And even those sparse accounts are shrouded in controversy, with disagreements over what parts have obviously been changed by Christian scribes (the manuscripts were preserved by Christians), the fact that both these authors were born after Jesus died (they would thus have probably received this information from Christians), and the oddity that centuries go by before Christian apologists start referencing them.

“Agnosticism over the matter is already seemingly appropriate, and support for this position comes from independent historian Richard Carrier’s recent defense of another theory — namely, that the belief in Jesus started as the belief in a purely celestial being (who was killed by demons [like Inanna] in an upper realm), who became historicized over time. To summarize Carrier’s 800-page tome, this theory and the traditional theory – that Jesus was a historical figure who became mythicized over time – both align well with the Gospels, which are later mixtures of obvious myth and what at least sounds historical.

“The Pauline Epistles, however, overwhelmingly support the ‘celestial Jesus’ theory, particularly with the passage indicating that demons killed Jesus, and would not have done so if they knew who he was (see: 1 Corinthians 2:6-10). Humans – the murderers according to the Gospels – of course would still have killed Jesus, knowing full well that his death results in their salvation, and the defeat of the evil spirits.”[6]

We read in Ascension of Isaiah:

“The Lord will indeed descend into the world in the last days (he) who is to be called Christ after he has descended and become like you in form, and they will think that he is flesh and a man. And the god of that world will stretch out his hand against the Son, and they will lay their hands upon him and hang him upon a tree, not knowing who he is. And thus his descent, as you will see, will be concealed even from the heavens so that it will not be known who he is. And when he has plundered the angel of death, he will rise on the third day.”[7]

“And all the angels of the firmament, and Satan, saw him and worshiped. And there was much sorrow there as they said, ‘How did our Lord descend upon us, and we did not notice the glory which was upon him, which we (now) see was upon him from the sixth heaven?’ And he ascended into the second heaven, and he was not transformed, but all the angels who (were) on the right and on the left, and the throne in the middle, worshiped him, and praised him, and said, ‘How did our Lord, remain hidden from us as he descended, and we did not notice?'”[8]

This fits well with the biblical declaration that it was the princes of this world who killed Jesus, not knowing who he was (1 Cor. 2:8).

Tilghman wrote:

“Jesus’ life as it is related to the sun’s travels through the zodiac is a depiction of the soul’s birth and death on the physical plane as it relates to attaining Christ consciousness. It is the plan of salvation for every human being should they choose to undertake the journey of crucifying their ego.

“We must also remember that the Gospel stories depict Jesus’ ministry as taking place in one year. The sun travels through the 12 houses of the Zodiac in one year. Coincidence? I think not. Remember, even Enoch, another Christ figure and type, was taken by God at 365 years old. 365 days represents the completion of the solar year.

“With all the Zodiacal signs complete we can see a rebirth of the physical man into a spiritual man. This is the goal for anyone undertaking the advanced spiritual journey.”[9]

While stories depicting a dying and rising god appear in the New Testament, that doesn’t necessarily mean the authors of the accounts believed them to be true, except perhaps in a metaphorical sense. Paul’s writings reveal this truth. And the idea, when taken allegorically, is not a bad concept: Heaven and earth are one. We can agree on that.

Tina Rae Collins

My goal is to share my book The Judaeo-Christian Myth one article at a time. If you find these articles interesting or you don’t think I’ll reach my goal (always a possibility, I suppose), and/or you just can’t wait, you can purchase the book by clicking on the picture above or the title in this paragraph. Thanks for reading!

[1] Tertullian, Ad Nationes, I, XII. [2] Bill Donahue, “What is the Crucifixion?” hiddenmeanings.com, n.d., web, 26 June 2014. [3]Joshua Tilghman, “Jesus, the Zodiac, and Higher Consciousness,” The Spirit of the Scripture.com: Uncovering the Hidden Meanings of the Bible! spiritofthescripture.com, 8 Sept. 2012, web, 27 June 2014. [4] John Henry, ThD, “Jesus = 888,” reason.landmarkbiblebaptist.net, n.d., web, 10 June 2014. [5] Tony Nugent, PhD, “Jewish angels and Roman gods: The ancient mythological origins of Christmas,” interview with Valerie Tarico, salon.com, 12 Dec. 2014, web, 26 Dec. 2014. [6] Raphael Lataster, “Did historical Jesus really exist? The evidence just doesn’t add up,” washingtonpost.com, 13 Dec. 2014, web, 19 Dec. 2014. [7] James H. Charlesworth, ed. “Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah,” The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Vol. 2 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers Marketing, LLC, 1983), 170. [8] Charlesworth, “Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah.” [9] Joshua Tilghman, “The Conclusion of Jesus, the Sun, and the Zodiac,” The Spirit of the Scripture.com: Uncovering the Hidden Meanings of the Bible! spiritofthescripture.com, 12 Sept. 2012, web, 27 June 2014.

 

 

JC Myth (9.2): Gnostic New Testament: “Paul’s Gnostic Resurrection”

JC Myth Picture for Blog

Chapter Nine: Gnostic New Testament: “Paul’s Gnostic Resurrection”

As an example to explain the differences between these two warring factions (Gnosticism or “priestly perversion”), psychics believed their dead bodies would be reconstituted in a literal and physical resurrection, while the Gnostic pneumatics recognized the resurrection as the “process of receiving gnosis,”[1] or, as Irenaeus proclaimed, the Gnostics “maintain that ‘the resurrection from the dead’ is knowing the truth that they proclaim.”[2] The Gospel of Truth, a Gnostic gospel written between 140 and 180 CE,[3] states:

“As one’s ignorance disappears when he gains knowledge, and as darkness disappears when light appears, so also incompleteness is eliminated by completeness. Certainly, from that moment on, form is no longer manifest, but will be dissolved in fusion with unity. For now their works lie scattered. In time unity will make the spaces complete. By means of unity each one will understand itself. By means of knowledge it will purify itself of diversity with a view towards unity, devouring matter within itself like fire and darkness by light, death by life. . . It is thus that each one has acted, as if he were asleep, during the time when he was ignorant and thus he comes to understand, as if he were awakening. And happy is the man who comes to himself and awakens. Indeed, blessed is he who has opened the eyes of the blind.”[4]

Paul (in the New Testament) may not have always presented a cohesive view, but his description of the resurrection of the dead in 1 Corinthians 15 clarifies that the resurrection was indeed a spiritual awakening, confirming that the Christ was not an earthly man but was only a spiritual being. Here is the text from Young’s Literal Translation.

1 Corinthians 15:42  So also is the rising again of the dead: it is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption; 43  it is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44  it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body; there is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body; 45  so also it hath been written, “The first man Adam became a living creature,” the last Adam is for a life-giving spirit, 46  but that which is spiritual is not first, but that which was natural, afterwards that which is spiritual. 47  The first man is out of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord out of heaven; 48  as is the earthy, such are also the earthy; and as is the heavenly, such are also the heavenly; 49  and, according as we did bear the image of the earthy, we shall bear also the image of the heavenly. 50  And this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood the reign of God is not able to inherit, nor doth the corruption inherit the incorruption;

Verse 47, above, says: “The first man is out of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord out of heaven.” It is difficult to understand how someone can read that the second man is the Lord out of heaven and then teach that the second man is a reconstituted, re-created biological body of John Doe or Suzy Homemaker. The natural man was Adam but not the physical body of some man named Adam. Jesus, if he lived at all on the earth, would have been a descendant of Adam/Israel and carried Adam’s biological DNA, so he was also the natural Adam and was born under the death curse. Jesus, like Adam, was earthy if being earthy means having a physical body! Thus, there could be no distinction between Adam and Christ! (Remember, the soul that sins is the soul that dies [Ezek. 18:4, 20], and it was Adam who was dying in 1 Corinthians 15. Yet, Jesus is the one who was put to death; that’s because he was the sinner, Adam.)

Two bodies are mentioned here: the body of flesh (Adam’s body, the Israelites, the earthly kingdom, the carnal man, the earth, the human) and the body of Christ (the spiritual kingdom, the spiritual aspect of man, the sky or heaven, the god). There was a natural body of Yahweh’s people that was morphing into a spiritual body of Yahweh’s people. Max R. King wrote that “out of the decay of Judaism arose the spiritual body of Christianity that became fully developed or resurrected by the end-time. Hence, this is the primary meaning of Paul’s statement, ‘It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body and there is a spiritual body.'”[5] King also noted: “The natural body, receiving its death blow at the cross and beginning then to wax old and decay (Heb. 8:13), became a nursery or seed-body for the germination, growth, and development of the spiritual body by means of the gospel.”[6]

The truth is, the body that was killed and buried was the old covenant body of Israel, God’s firstborn son, Adam. Once again, God was saying to ‘Egypt’: ‘Let my people go’ (Ex. 5:1). He warned further: ‘and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn’ (Ex. 4:23). The firstborn, the natural man (Egypt/Israel [Rev. 11:8]), was finally being slain.

Ezekiel 37:12 states: “I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.” Peter Enns wrote regarding this passage:

If moving from the land into exile is to move from life to death, returning to the land is (all together now) to be brought back to life, to be raised from the dead (as Ezekiel’s prophecy lays out for us).

“And that is where we find ‘resurrection’ in the Old Testament: returning to the land, where God and his temple are, where there is peace and security, the land promised to Abraham (Genesis 12), the land ‘flowing with milk and honey.’

“Physical resurrection of individuals isn’t the hot topic of conversation in the Old Testament. Revival of a nation is.”[7]

The natural Adam was being transformed into, or conformed to, the spiritual Adam. Carnal Adam was finally going to bite the dust—return to dust as Yahweh told him he would do. But in his dying, a new body was to emerge. That was the body of Christ. There is a natural body and a spiritual body, and the natural was disappearing while the spiritual was rising. Adam, the natural man, became Christ, the spiritual man of Yahweh. The natural, earthy body became the spiritual, heavenly body. Mack confirmed that “The Corinthians had understood the Christ myth, not in terms of a bodily resurrection ‘from the dead,’ but in terms of translation, metamorphosis, or exaltation into a purely spiritual mode of existence.”[8] As Valerie Tarico wrote:

“The earliest Christian texts, the letters of Paul, suggest that the eternal body is ‘pneuma’ or spirit, but later New Testament writers inclined toward physical resurrection of both Jesus and believers, though with renewed, perfected bodies. This view was affirmed by Church fathers and is now the predominant Christian belief.”[9]

The resurrected Christ was not human. 1 Corinthians 2:7 says, “we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery.” And Paul said he would “travail in birth” until Christ was “formed” in his fellow Christians, and we read that the “mystery” was “Christ in you” (Gal. 4:19, Col. 1:27). The book of Revelation speaks of a woman’s travailing in birth. She is “clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars . . . pained to be delivered” (Rev.12:1-2). This is the mother. She is being reunited here with her spouse and has her crown of glory (her children) upon her head. Author Peter Gandy said that Paul existed “before the literal story” and that Paul spoke of “the Christ within.”[10] Referencing Galatians 1:16, Timothy Freke agreed, saying that “there is no literal Jesus at this time” and Paul spoke of the Son’s being “revealed in me” rather than “to me.”[11] Pagels added that Jesus was not spoken of as “the” son of God until the year 160 CE, and that the book of John seems to have been written for the purpose of declaring this claim of divinity.[12]

Speaking of the divinity of the man Jesus, in what way could he have been the son of a god? Does Yahweh have a penis and sperm to place in an egg to produce a baby? Surely not. Now he could have taken Mary’s egg and turned it into a baby, to be sure, but how does that differ from picking up a handful of dirt and turning it into Adam? And if someone wants to claim that it was the spirit of Jesus, not his body, that was the son of Yahweh (or the Holy Spirit), whence did Adam’s spirit come? It was breathed into him by the god of the Old Testament (Gen. 2:7)! And Adam was indeed, according to the Bible, the son of God (Lk. 3:38)! The unique divinity of Jesus was a later addition to the story contained in the New Testament, as it was needed for the growth of Christianity. Besides, as I (and the Bible) have said, Jesus was Adam (1 Cor. 15:45). He was a transformed Adam (or man).

Viklund noted regarding the god Adonis: “they say that for a long time certain rites of initiation are conducted: first, that they weep for [Adonis], since he has died; second, that they rejoice for him because he has risen from the dead.”[13] Adonis was called a bridegroom as “his resurrection involved a sacred marriage with the Goddess, a tradition also found in early Christianity, before Church fathers eliminated it.”[14] I don’t think this idea was completely obliterated, as we find ample proof in the New Testament that Jesus, like Adonis who came hundreds of years before him, married the glorious goddess who came down from the sky (Rev. 21:2, 9). Thus the god was reunited with his goddess.

Tina Rae Collins

My goal is to share my book The Judaeo-Christian Myth one article at a time. If you find these articles interesting or you don’t think I’ll reach my goal (always a possibility, I suppose), and/or you just can’t wait, you can purchase the book by clicking on the picture above or the title in this paragraph. Thanks for reading!

[1] Hisey Pagels, 29. [2] Hisey Pagels, 29. [3] “Gospel of Truth,” wikipedia.org, 5 Oct. 2014, web, 11 Jan. 2015. [4] “The Gospel of Truth,” tr. Robert M. Grant, The Gnostic Society Library, gnosis.org, n.d., web, 11 Jan. 2014 <http://gnosis.org/naghamm/got.html&gt;; from Robert M. Grant, Gnosticism (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1961), as quoted in Willis Barnstone, The Other Bible (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984). [5] Max R. King, The Spirit of Prophecy (Colorado Springs: Bimillennial Press, 2002), 199-200. [6] King, Ibid. [7] Peter Enns, “Brief Bible thought: is there resurrection from the dead in the Old Testament?” 9 Feb. 2015, web, 26 Feb. 2015. [8] Mack, 133. [9] Valerie Tarico, “10 reasons Christian heaven would actually be hell,” rawstory.com, 31 Jan. 2015, web, 31 Jan. 2015. [10] “Osiris & Christianity – The Christian Adoption of Egyptian Iconography, Symbolism, and Myth.” [11] “Osiris & Christianity – The Christian Adoption of Egyptian Iconography, Symbolism, and Myth.” [12] “Osiris & Christianity – The Christian Adoption of Egyptian Iconography, Symbolism, and Myth.” [13] Viklund; Origen, Comments on Ezekiel, 8:12; quoted by Richard Carrier. [14] Walker, Man Made God, 136-137. See also: Walker, The Woman’s Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets, 465.

 

JC Myth (9.1): Gnostic New Testament: “The Apostle Paul”

JC Myth Picture for Blog

Chapter Nine: Gnostic New Testament: “The Apostle Paul”

Paul’s writings, at least in some instances, present a Gnostic view of the crucified savior. He claimed to have received his gospel not from eyewitnesses of a literal man named Jesus but from a “revelation of Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1:11-12). Paul was, according to Graham, “the Moses of the New Testament.” Thus even Paul is a reiteration or type. Moses took up the salvation of the Jews when Joseph’s time ended, and Paul became the main leader in Christianity. Graham wrote:

“Just as Moses was reared an Egyptian but became the leader of the Jews, so Paul was reared a Jew but became the leader of the Gentiles. Just as Moses became the lawgiver of the Jews, so Paul became the lawgiver of the Christians. As God spoke to Moses from a burning bush, so Christ spoke to Paul from a blinding light. As Moses was told to go to Sinai to receive power and do great works, so Paul was told to go to Damascus for like reasons. Moses built a tabernacle, Paul a church. Moses preached biologic rightness, Paul, moral righteousness. . . The cue to this parallel is given in Acts, which gives Paul’s history. Chapter 7 recounts the whole story of Moses that we may see the connection.”[1]

According to Princeton professor Elaine Pagels, Paul taught Gnosticism and “became known in the second century as the ‘apostle of the heretics.'”[2] Some early authors (including Clement and Peter) declared Paul himself to be a heretic.[3] Piero Scaruffi wrote:

“For a long time gnostics have been viewed as opposed to ‘Pauline Christianity,’ Christianity as it is today. But now we know that the gnostics actually revered Paul and considered [him] one of theirs. We also know that only seven of the 13 letters attributed to Paul are authentic and one can suspect that the other six were written to prove something that was not proven in the original seven. (Some of the letters appear for the first time with Irenaeus, in 190.)”[4] [5]

Scaruffi noted that if these six fake Epistles are removed, “the originals are strikingly similar to gnostic literature and not a single attack against the gnostics remains.”[6] Dameron claimed that Paul was “well versed in the mysterious doctrines of the Gnostics,”[7] and Irenaeus “by the late second century” became the “challenger of ‘the gnostic Paul'”[8] while Tertullian called Paul “the heretics’ apostle.”[9] Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and Origen fought strongly against Gnosticism.[10] (Irenaeus, like Paul, seems to have swayed back and forth enough that people see him as both a Gnostic and an antiGnostic. Perhaps his goal, also like Paul’s, was to be “all things to all men” [1 Cor. 9:19-23].) Pagels wrote that Irenaeus, and Tertullian (despite calling Paul a heretic), affirmed that Paul denounced Gnosticism, and people have accepted their word for it.[11] However, the Valentinian sect of the Gnostics claimed that “Paul’s own secret wisdom tradition” was Gnostic.[12] Although Irenaeus and Tertullian argued that no “secret” teachings of Paul existed and that the claim was an “insult to Paul,”[13] these “non-existent” teachings were later found at Nag Hammadi.[14] And Pagels wrote:

“When we compare the heresiological accounts with the newly available evidence, we can trace how two antithetical traditions of Pauline exegesis have emerged from the late first century to the second. Each claims to be authentic, Christian, and Pauline: but one reads Paul antignostically, the other gnostically. Correspondingly, we discover two conflicting images of Paul: on the one hand, the antignostic Paul familiar from church tradition, and, on the other, the gnostic Paul, teacher of wisdom to gnostic initiates!”[15]

Pagels said the Valentinians claimed that most Christians mistakenly read the scriptures in a literal fashion while they “through their initiation into gnosis, learn to read [Paul’s] letters (as they read all the scriptures) on the symbolic level, as they say Paul intended. Only this pneumatic reading reveals ‘the truth’ instead of its mere outward ‘image.'”[16] Pagels sees the literal view of the New Testament as worshiping the creature instead of the creator (Rom. 1:21-32). This makes sense in that, according to Numbers 23:19, God is not a “son of man” while Jesus stated many times that he was a son of man (Mt. 8:20, 9:6, 10:23, et al.). Therefore, if one worships a son of man, he isn’t worshiping God but a creature of God.

Dameron wrote: “According to the Chaldean doctrine found in the Kabala, the Jehovah of the Jews was one of the emanations of the divine essence, and was androgynous, being male and female, like all angels, double-sexed.”[17] Although it was Yahweh’s will for all people to be one, the early Christians were separated as Adam and Eve had been (Christ restored this union, Gal. 3:28). An “unnatural” separation (Rom. 1:26-27) had occurred between the “pneumatics” (who viewed the Bible metaphorically) and the “psychics” (who viewed it literally). The “elect” understood that when Paul spoke of this “unnatural” behavior he was referring to the disunity of the believers and the separation that Christ came to destroy.[18] We know Christ’s purpose was to get his parents back together, to restore heaven and earth, to join the physical world to the spiritual one. The story itself (of a miraculous birth and resurrection) was just a way of explaining that, but it was turned into “history.”

Graham noted that the “Gnostic and pagan doctrine was the source of Pauline Christianity. In it lies the true esoteric basis, a universal principle available to all.”[19] Graham continued:

“Christianity began not in Rome nor yet in Jerusalem, but in Antioch in Syria—and it was operative before the time of Christ. It took three hundred years to blend its two components, and now we live by a synthetic faith whose name and purpose derive from the Greeks and whose theology and psychology derive from the Hebrews. Its morality derives from neither exclusively but from humanity in general, and this is the one good apple in the whole rotten barrel.

Paul preached neither Jesus nor Christ but Christhood, that deified consciousness developed within the individual rather than from a Christ without. This was the method of the schools of the Mysteries, their long, arduous and dedicated work of initiation resulted in a spirituality that can never be achieved vicariously. Rightly understood, this is the heart of all religions but the literalists destroyed it. . .

“It has been said that Paul was the real founder of Christianity, but not the Christianity that came down to us. His was Gnostic Christianity, the other but a priestly perversion of this. Paul, however, was a combination of both: priestly zeal, and knowledge he could not absorb because of his racial heritage. He too was a victim of Jewry, and therefore burdened with its false theology and conviction of sin. Thus he was a man torn between two philosophies. While he spoke as a Gnostic, there is much that is deep and profound in his words, but alas, he could not escape his heritage.”[20]

Earl Doherty summed up Paul’s philosophy as follows: “We are led to conclude that, in Paul’s past, there was no historical Jesus. Rather, the activities of the Son about which God’s gospel in scripture told, as interpreted by Paul, had taken place in the spiritual realm and were accessible only through revelation.”[21] Philosopher Adam Randolph wrote that a literal reading of the Scriptures is “for those who cannot, or cannot yet, understand the metaphorical, secret teachings. The metaphorical is reserved for those who are elect”[22] (1 Cor. 2:6-7).

The Gnostics recognized that their scriptures were being stolen and distorted, and they spoke out against both crimes. Massey noted:

“The Gnostics complained, and truly maintained, that their mysteries had been made mundane in the Christian Gospels; that celestial persons and celestial scenes, which could only belong to the pleroma—could only be explained by the secret wisdom or gnosis—had been transferred to earth and translated into a human history; that their Christ, who could not be made flesh, had been converted into an historical character; that their Anthropos was turned into the Son of Man—according to Matthew—Monogenes into the Only-begotten, according to John, their Hemorrhoidal Sophia into the woman who suffered from the issue of blood, the mother of the seven inferior powers into Mary Magdalene possessed by her seven devils, and the twelve Æons into the twelve Apostles. Thus, the Gnostics enable us to double the proof which can be derived directly and independently from Egypt. They claim that the miracle of the man who was born blind, and whose sight was restored by Jesus, was their mystery of the Æon, who was produced by the Only-begotten as the sightless creature of a soulless Creator. Irenæus, in reporting this, makes great fun of the Word that was born blind! He did not know that this Gnostic mystery was a survival of the Egyptian myth of the two Horuses, one of whom was the blind Horus, who exclaims in his blindness—’I come to search for mine eyes,’ and has his sight restored at the coming of the Second Horus—the light of the world. Nor did he dream that the two-fold Horus would explain why the blind man in our Gospels should be single in one version and two-fold in another account of the same miracle. The Gnostic Horus came to seek and to save the poor lost mother, Sophia, who had wandered out of the pleroma, and the Gnostics identified this myth with the statement assigned to Jesus when he said he had only come after that lost sheep which was gone astray [the mother, Israel, Yahweh’s estranged wife]. For, as Irenæus says, they explain the wandering sheep to mean their mother. This shows how the character of the Christ was limited to the mould of the Mythos and the likeness of Horus. But the lost sheep of the House of Israel has not yet found Jesus.”[23]

Tina Rae Collins

My goal is to share my book The Judaeo-Christian Myth one article at a time. If you find these articles interesting or you don’t think I’ll reach my goal (always a possibility, I suppose), and/or you just can’t wait, you can purchase the book by clicking on the picture above or the title in this paragraph. Thanks for reading!

[1] Graham, 410. [2] Elaine Hiesey Pagels, The Gnostic Paul: Gnostic Exegesis of the Pauline Letters (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), 157. [3] Scaruffi, “Jesus and Christianity.” [4] Scaruffi, “Jesus and Christianity.” [5] Dr. Richard Carrier stated that 95 percent of scholars agree that only seven of Paul’s letters are authentic, while the others are forgeries. Richard Carrier, PhD, “Richard Carrier: Acts as Historical Fiction,” youtube.com, 13 Mar. 2014, web, 9 Jan. 2015 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5MUUP4l6l4&gt;. [6] Scaruffi, “Jesus and Christianity.” [7] Dameron, 88. [8] Hiesey Pagels, 162. [9] Tertullian, Against the Valentinians, I.4. See also: Michael Kaler, Paul and Pseudepigraphy, ed.  Stanley E. Porter and Gregory P. Fewster (Leiden, Netherlands/Boston: Brill, 2013), 337. [10] Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Paul; Gnostic Exegesis of the Pauline Letters (New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, 1992), 2-4. See also: Hisey Pagels, 157. [11] Hiesey Pagels, 162. [12] Hiesey Pagels, 4. [13] Hiesey Pagels, 4. [14] Pagels, 2-4. See also: “The Prayer of the Apostle Paul,” tr. Dieter Mueller, The Nag Hamadi Library, bibliotecapleyades.net, n.d., web 18 June 2015. [15] Hiesey Pagels, 5. [16] Hiesey Pagels, 6. [17] Dameron, 32. [18] Hisey Pagels, 17. [19] Graham, 411-412. [20] Graham, 412-413. [21] Jim Walker, “Did a historical Jesus exist?” See also: Doherty, “The Jesus Puzzle,” 83. [22] Adam Randolph, “The Resurrection of Paul,” unpublished paper, 2014, viewed 30 Aug. 2014. [23] Massey, Gerald Massey’s Lectures, No. 21. See also: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis (New York: Cosimo, Inc., 2007), Vol. 2, 428; and David Rankin, Tertullian and the Church (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 79.