The Chuch of Allan - The Plain Truth About God

A serialization of the book, The Plain Truth About God.

Chapter 11. “THE JESUS TAPES”

The Council of Nicea – What Christianity is really about!

As we have seen, there are many gods with similar stories to those that are found in the Christian Bible. By far the most significant event in the early history of European Christianity was the conversion of Emperor Constantine.

The Emperor was a follower of Mithra until he declared December 25th the official birthday of Jesus in 313 C.E and adapted the cult of Christianity as the state religion.

Constantine found he had several problems with his new faith.

First among these was that Jesus had proclaimed his faith as being staunchly anti-political. Jesus has insisted that his way was a non-worldly, individualistic and non-political way of life.

As a result the Christian texts were not only Anti-Roman (Judea was part of the Roman Empire during the life of Jesus), but since Jesus was also part-Rabbi and part Cynic he was also dismissive of human worldly authority.

If Christianity were going to work as a religion in a state ruled by a monarch who demanded worship and absolute authority, it would have to be changed.

The early Christians had tolerated the emperors and regarded them as a kind of necessary evil.

However, Constantine demanded their obedience both temporally and in terms of faith.

To this end, he merged the office of Emperor with the Christian faith and assumed authority over doctrinal matters.

Constantine’s belief that he was Divine presented a new and unsolvable problem for Christianity.

As long as the Emperor was a pagan, there was no question of the relationship between the church and the state.

The old rule was that the church and the state essentially each did their own thing.

However, the presence of Christian imperial authority led to severe conflicts and disruption.

(In fact, the question of the relationship between the church and a Christian government has yet to be resolved in the West.)

Constantine had other problems as well.

In his view, the Christian church was a powerful tool for unifying the Empire socially and politically.

If the church could become unified, that would provide a balance against the forces pulling the empire apart. The only problem was that there was no established or unifying doctrine.

In fact, there were as many forms of Christianity as there were communities of Christians. (Just like today)

The Vatican itself is built on the papacy of Mithra, who shared many qualities with Jesus and who existed as a Deity long before the character of Jesus was formalized.

(The Christian hierarchy is nearly identical to the Mithraic version it replaced.)

The church was also severely divided over some fundamental questions.

In particular, the speculations by the Eastern Churches on the nature of divinity were considered grossly heretical by the Latin churches.

This is what would finally call Constantine into action to unify the church. It was the schism between the Arians and the Athanasia’s.

Perhaps the most important task that Constantine undertook was the Council of Nicea.

That was convened to arbitrate a conflict between the Western Church and the Arians to decide the question of the relationship between imperial power and the church.

This council made major doctrinal statements that applied to the whole Christian world, and was the first to centralize doctrinal authority among Christians.

This was known as the Nicene Creed and began the long struggle, lasting to this day, between the anti-political views of Jesus of Nazareth and the views of human authority, which manifests itself as the “Christian Church.

Faced with the task of determining what was to go into the bible out of the thousands of manuscripts available by this time was a daunting task that was taken on with great trepidation.

By compiling a book of sacred writings that they could all agree on, Constantine thought this would give authority to the new church.

Composed of about 300 religious leaders, this council was given the task of separating the Divinely inspired writings from those of questionable origin.

The actual compilation of the Bible was an incredibly complicated project since it came three hundred years after the death of Jesus and involved churchmen of varying beliefs, in an atmosphere of dissension, jealousy, intolerance, and bigotry.

To add to the dissention, they were split into two groups that questioned the divinity of Jesus.

The purpose of the Council was to settle the dispute over the teachings of Arius - that Christ was not equal in divinity to God.

The council (in their wisdom) declared that Jesus WAS equal in divinity to God by a majority vote and declared Arianism a heresy.

Here is another example of human arrogance – they decided….Who was actually Divine? And who was not! What belonged in the bible- and was the actual word of God. And what was not!

A typical headline in the local newspaper would have looked like this!

Dateline - Middle East Times: “Jesus declared equal by majority vote!”
“Jesus relieved, would like to thank all his supporters!”

Sects and Cults;

While we can use the mainstream church as an example of religion that has gone wrong, let us be kind and just look at cults and sects for a minute!

At any given time there are between 500-600 cults and sects operating in North America.

Worldwide that number grows to the thousands, and their basic philosophy and code of conduct is as varied and diverse as their numbers.

It is at first, important to recognize the meaning of the words cult and sect.

We shall discuss cults presently but a sect is primarily an offshoot of an established religion or denomination. It holds most beliefs common with it’s religion of origin plus a number of novel concepts that differentiate and set it apart.

The most obvious North American example of a sect that evolved into a denomination is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the Mormons.

Their founder, Joseph Smith, had a revelation from God that the ministry of Jesus Christ continued after his crucifixion and is told in the book of Mormon.

The Mormon sect has since evolved into the Mormon Denomination due to the passage of time and increased number of members.

Within the next few decades, it is even expected to develop into the dominant faith group in the American North-West.

Even though the Mormons have been somewhat integrated into mainstream religious movements of North America, it has not been without a few impediments to their beliefs and practices.

The state of Utah had a lot of trouble achieving statehood due to the large Mormon population and their practice of polygamy.

In due course there was suddenly a new revelation from God that banned the practice of polygamy and so “lo and behold” Utah became a state and everybody was happy.
[Except a few male members who wanted to keep their multiple wives!]

(Of course, there was an answer to this dilemma. The males who were in favor of polygamy broke away from the church to form their own sects of the Mormon faith, and, although excommunicated, continue to this day in the United States and Canada.)

There is a belief amongst these Mormons that men must accumulate “plural wives” in order to achieve salvation! (As opposed to the Muslims who get their “virgins” after salvation!)

Sects can then be considered a process by which a new religious movement is generated.

Most die out quickly, a few linger, and one or two grow into an established denomination of a major religion.

Cults on the other hand, automatically have a negative connotation with most of society, and must be looked at in the context of how the word is used.

In the sociological use of the term, a cult is also thought of as a small religious group that is in a state of tension with the predominant religion.

Therefore, Hinduism could be considered a cult in North America while Christianity would be a cult in India.

A cult is also, in the general religious usage, termed a “small, recently created, religious organization which is often headed by a single charismatic leader and is looked upon as a spiritually innovative group.”

This means that early Christianity and Islam were definitely cults.

In fact, it took the early followers of Jesus nearly 200 years before they had progressed to the point of having an established hierarchy and doctrine that became known as the Holy Roman Church.

Tomorrow: Jihad Inc.

Allan W Janssen is the author of the book The Plain Truth About God (What the mainstream religions don't want you to know!) and is available at the web site www.God-101.com

Visit the blog "Perspective" at http://God-101.blogspot.com

The Chuch of Allan - The Plain Truth About God

A serialization of the book, The Plain Truth About God.

Chapter 11. “THE JESUS TAPES”

From all the evidence we have about the spread of early Christianity it might be fair to say that without Paul, the fledgling movement might not have ever got off the ground.

Above everything else, Paul was a masterful compromiser.

He knew when to hold them, and he knew when to fold them.

He knew when issues mattered and when something should be let go in favor of expansion of the Church.

Although this gave his writings a sense of indecisiveness, contradiction and opportunism, Paul’s ultimate goal was the expansion of the central teachings of Jesus of Nazareth throughout the Roman world.

As long as Paul felt the “spirit of the teachings” was being adhered to, he was willing to compromise on other things, or even tolerate one situation while he wouldn’t another.

So much for the infallible and literate word of God!

** “Never let a sense of morals prevents you from doing what is right!” - Asimov

About the same time that Jesus and Paul where spreading the message of what was to become known as Christianity, there was a whole host of different religions and beliefs that had been traveling around not only the Middle East, but also most of the known world for hundreds and even thousands of years.

This proliferation of ideas and beliefs took many forms and names but they all seemed to fit a general mold that was repeated time after time!

Religions and religious sects are a lot like a family business. Most come and go within three generations! This has been true throughout most of history, but never more so than at the time of Jesus in the Middle and Far East.

There seems to have been numerous contenders for the throne.

We do not know with certainty how much of the lore from these competing religions was borrowed from, and incorporated into Christianity, but there is a remarkable similarity between them and I will leave it up to you to draw any conclusions from them.

Gnosticism;

Gnosticism (Greek for knowledge) was popular throughout most of the Greek world at the time of Christ. Although we do not know much about the origins of this sect, the first recorded Gnostic was Simon Magus who lived at the time shortly before the first Jewish uprising against the Romans about 30-40 years after the death of Jesus.

Gnosticism was based on an old Canaanite religion that goes back to at least the seventh or eighth century B.C.E.

One of the remarkable features about Gnosticism is that it was like almost every other belief system prevalent in the area at that time. The Gnostic religion centered on the figure of Sophia (or Wisdom), who was believed to have been disgraced, but raised up again by God.

The worship of Sophia easily found itself at home with Zoroastrianism and its battle between good and evil, Judaism with its concept of a supreme God, Mithraism, with its story of the descent and resurrection of the sun-god, and above all else with Christianity and its story of the descent and resurrection of Christ.

At one time there were Zoroastrian Gnostics, Jewish Gnostics, Mithra Gnostics and of course Christian Gnostics.

Christian Gnosticism was a major competing religion for early Christianity.
One of its most popular manifestations was the assertion that the Divine spirit of Christ dwelled in the body of the man Jesus.

In this respect, then, the spirit of Christ did not die on the cross with Jesus.

There is now a belief that Jesus himself was a Gnostic.

Some of the other competing beliefs at the time of Jesus:

MITHRA, Sun God of Persia.

Official recognition of sun worship in the Roman Empire began when they instituted the cult of “Sol Invictus.” (The cult of Sol Invictus and that of Mithra are virtually the same.)

The story of Mithra precedes the Christian Jesus by over a thousand years.
It first appeared as an Aryan sun god in Sanskrit and Persian literature, circa 1400.
Mithra was introduced into the Roman Empire in the 4th century BCE.

The cult was, shortly before the Christian era began, the most popular and widely spread “Pagan” religion of the times.

Mithra has the following in common with the Christ character:
**Mithra was born of a virgin in a stable on the winter solstice, frequently December 25 in the Julian calendar.
**Attended by shepherds who brought gifts.
**Shown with a nimbus, or halo, around his head.
**Believed not to have died, but to have ascended to heaven, whence it was believed he would return at the end of time to raise the dead for a final judgment.
**Granted his followers immortal life following baptism.
**He had 12 companions or disciples.
**He performed miracles.
**He was killed for his views.
**After three days, he rose again. His resurrection is celebrated every year.
**Mithra was called, “The Good Shepherd.”
**He was “the Way, the Light, the Redeemer, the Savior, and The Messiah.”
**His sacred day was Sunday, “The Lord’s Day,” hundreds of years before the appearance of Christ.
**Mithra had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter, the time he was resurrected.
**His religion had a Eucharist or “Lord’s Supper.”
**Followed a leader called a ‘papa’ (pope), who ruled from the Vatican hill in Rome; celebrated sacramenta (a consecrated meal of bread and wine).
**Had a Myazda -corresponding exactly to the Catholic Missa {mass}.
**Used chanting, bells, candles, incense, and holy water in remembrance of the last supper of Mithra.

HORUS of Egypt

The legends of Horus go back thousands of years, and he shares the following in common with Jesus:
**Horus was born of a virgin on December 25th in a cave/manger.
**His birth was announced by a star in the east and attended by three wise men.
**He was a child teacher in the Temple and was baptized when he was 30 years old.
**Horus was also baptized by “Anup the Baptizer,” who becomes “John the Baptist.” –
**He had 12 disciples. **He walked on water.
**He performed miracles and raised one man from the dead.
**Horus was transfigured on the Mount.
**He was crucified, buried in a tomb and resurrected. **He was “Way, the Truth, the Light, the Messiah, God’s Son, the Son of Man.”
**He was the Good Shepherd, the Lamb of God, and the Word, etc.
**He was “The Fisher,” and was associated with the Lamb, Lion and Fish. **Horus was called “The KRST,” or “Anointed One,” long before the Christians duplicated the story.
**In the catacombs at Rome are pictures of the baby Horus being held by the virgin mother Isis - the original “Madonna and Child.”

KRISHNA of India

The similarities between the Christian Jesus and the Indian messiah are many.
**It should be noted that a common earlier English spelling of Krishna was “Christna,” which reveals its relation to ‘”Christ.” –
**Krishna was born of a Virgin -His father was a carpenter. –
**His birth was attended by angels, wise men and shepherds, and he was presented with gold, frankincense and myrrh. –
**He was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants.
**He was baptized in the River Ganges.
**He worked miracles and wonders.
**He raised the dead and healed lepers, the deaf and the blind.
**Krishna used parables to teach the people about charity and love.
**He was transfigured in front of his disciples.
**In some traditions he was crucified between two thieves.
**He rose from the dead and ascended to heaven.
**Krishna is called the “Shepherd, God” and “Lord of lords,” was considered “the Redeemer,” and “The Word.”
**He is the second person of the Trinity, and proclaimed himself the “Resurrection” and the “Way to the Father.”
**His disciples called him “Jezeus,” meaning “pure essence.”
**Krishna is to return to do battle with the “Prince of Evil,” who will desolate the earth.

Tomorrow; The Council of Nicea – What Christianity is really about!

Allan W Janssen is the author of the book The Plain Truth About God (What the mainstream religions don't want you to know!) and is available at the web site www.God-101.com

Visit the blog "Perspective" at http://God-101.blogspot.com

The Chuch of Allan - The Plain Truth About God

A serialization of the book, The Plain Truth About God.

Chapter 10. - Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up!

To quote James Breech once more: “Your concept of the kingdom of God, whether it belongs to the future mythological conceived, in either eschatological or apocalyptic terms, misses the reality of the kingdom.

The symbolism really refers to a power that is a basic factor in human experience!”

In the teachings attributed to Jesus, it is abundantly clear that he was an apocalyptic teacher who believed that the world would end within the lifetime of the people to which he was speaking.

The foundation of these teachings was that human beings could be saved by both believing his word and by modeling their lives on the higher moral law of God.
That higher moral law was the foundation of Jewish law.

To this end, he believed that Pharisaical teaching were an appropriate guide to following this higher moral law.

His criticism of the Pharisees was that they did not live by what they taught.

In line with this higher moral law, Jesus of Nazareth preached an ethics of selfless concern for the welfare of others, rejection of material wealth, and non-retribution, all of which were standard in Jewish ethics.

The religion that he taught was an intensely individual religion. Righteousness, which means the performance of right actions, was not a quality of actions but rather a quality of the interior state of the individual.

There is also abundant evidence in the Gospels that Jesus considered his teachings to be for Jews only.

This is a curious tradition to maintain in the face of the massive spread of Christianity into the Gentile world.

However, nowhere does Jesus of Nazareth construe his teachings or the religion he is espousing as anything other than for Jews and in one place explicitly says that his mission is only to the Jews.

Ultimately, the Jesus who emerges from the gospels is concerned with preparing the Jews for the last event in history.

The Christian religion was at first, obviously, a Jewish religion. It was a movement amongst the population in the immediate area of the land Jesus lived in.

Its message aimed directly at a Jewish audience by Jews.

However, with the advent of the Prophet Paul the message changed and was geared towards a Gentile population that was eager for the “word” as well.

Onto this template, Paul of Tarsus would add a new emphasis Jesus as a dead and risen God co-extensive with God.

This developed into two branches, which we could call a Jewish Christian and a Pauline (Gentile) Christian.

They not only lived side by side, but also competed for the same converts.

It was not until the Romans suppressed an uprising by the Jews in c A.D. 66-74 and again A.D. 132-135 that led to the destruction of Massada that the Pauline Christians gradually won out.

They became the defenders of the faith while the Jewish Christians were left by the wayside.

(Actually in the ashes of Massada!)

Allan W Janssen is the author of the book The Plain Truth About God (What the mainstream religions don't want you to know!) and is available at the web site www.God-101.com

Visit the blog "Perspective" at http://God-101.blogspot.com

The Chuch of Allan - The Plain Truth About God

A serialization of the book, The Plain Truth About God.

Chapter 10. - Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up!

With all the different views presented in the various Gospels and Sayings we have looked at so far it makes sense to try to find out how many in total actually came from Jesus.

We do not know exactly how the texts in the bible were chosen but we do know that whatever happened occurred principally in the middle of the second century up until 325 C.E. when the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea was convened by Emperor Constantine.

He established the Nicene Creed as the fundamental statement of Christian doctrine........................

In his book “The Silence of Jesus,” James Breech takes an in-depth and impartial view of the words that have been attributed to “Christ,” and compared these with the words that composed the core material said by the historical “Jesus.” (See previous chapter!)

According to Breech, all the thoughts attributed to Jesus, a collection of eight sayings and eleven parables, can definitely be followed back to (Q) and do not have the taint of something said by “Christ.”

Modern day scholars would agree that these sayings, at least, are authentic.

They are remarkably free of the language and concepts of the early Christian movement, and show a purity of thought and concept, that upon close examination, reveals a simplicity and universal message not constrained by time or culture.

To truly understand the sayings that were uttered by the historical Jesus, we must keep an open mind and not make assumptions, or at least keep them to a minimum.

To do otherwise would be to fall into the same trap that ensnared the early “Christians.”

They created a body of work that first collected, then glossed over and distorted the sayings of Jesus to provide a basis for their own teachings.

One of the most basic assumptions that Breech examines is the concept of Christian “love” that forms the basis of most of the teachings of Jesus.

Let me explain:

** The foundation of Christian ideology revolves around “Love” for one and another.

To understand this we need to define exactly how the term or meaning of “Love” is used when compared to (the small L) love!!

In the first instance, there is the true “Love,” which means it is rooted in the power of the kingdom of God.

This is the “Love” that the historical Jesus preached to his followers.

The second type of Christian “love” (small L) is defined solely as an ethical idea that was propagated by the spreading Christian faith in trying to define the words of Christ.

Nietzsche probably best defined this form of Christian ‘love’ as a masked feeling of pity or charity.

In other words, we feel sorry for others and from this superior moral ground, we lend a helping hand.

Nietzsche claims that Christian ‘pity’ (love) is a device used by those who are not themselves truly vital and alive to obtain a perverse elevation of their own position by undermining others.

In other words, “I can make myself feel better by thinking you or someone else is worse-off and deserving of love.”

We often confuse the feeling of Christian “love” for someone with:

1. Pity for them.

2. Humanitarianism-or a love of Mankind.

3. Altruism, or self denial, and:

4. Sentimentalism, or wanting to be with others.

** These concepts of “love” have been re-enforced over and over again through one story or another.

What Jesus actually said was something more basic and infinitely harder to achieve.

The historical Jesus did not urge us to love humankind or to feel pity for someone else. He did not tell us to deny ourselves for someone else’s sake, or flagellate ourselves, or even to enjoy another’s company!

What He did say was pure and simple and straight to the point, “Love one another!”

This sort of Love is not the altruistic love of humanity, nor the possessive love for our mate, but rather something that requires hard work, tenacity, and sacrifice.

It is easy to love your wife or husband, child or parent, but to Love your neighbor (or stranger) is a task that is never ending and always requires effort.

It is a Love that seems to have no immediate benefit and is therefore not practiced by many people.

However, in the end, this is what will make Humanity rise up to it is potential and approach what Jesus referred to as the “Kingdom of God.” (The Father)

This is not something that is to be expected in the near, or far, future. Rather, it was a state of being that is present at this time, and only has to be observed and followed in order to achieve a state of Grace.

One of the core sayings of Jesus was “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed, nor will they say ‘Lo, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ For behold, that kingdom of God is in the midst of you.”

Jesus tells us quite clearly that the “Kingdom of God” is not a coming kingdom, or a future kingdom, but rather something already in and amongst his disciples. It is not a place, but rather a state of mind!

Allan W Janssen is the author of the book The Plain Truth About God (What the mainstream religions don't want you to know!) and is available at the web site www.God-101.com

Visit the blog "Perspective" at http://God-101.blogspot.com

The Chuch of Allan - The Plain Truth About God

A serialization of the book, The Plain Truth About God.

Chapter 10. - Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up!

This leads us to another question: “Does the Gospel of Thomas really reflect the views of Jesus?” ……………..Maybe!

There was once a “Q” gospel and a Mark gospel. These were revised and combined into a Matthew gospel and a Luke gospel. Therefore, four interrelated texts testify to a single view of Jesus.

That in turn leads us to the further question of what is “Q” and what does it have to do with Thomas since none of this material existed in a written, coherent, or universal form for several decades after the death of Jesus.

At some point, scholars believe that a written text of only the sayings and teachings of Jesus was in circulation. This was probably in an effort to standardize the proliferating teachings attributed to Jesus in the oral tradition.

If you realize that Matthew and Luke are revised versions of Mark you will see that an extended set of sayings are in Matthew and Luke that do not occur in Mark.

Both Matthew and Luke, it is generally agreed to in scholarship, took those sayings from a mid-first century document that consisted of a list of Jesus’ sayings. That document, called “Quelle,” has come to be known as Q.

It does not exist any longer, but it can be recovered by analysis of Matthew and Luke. Simply put, Q was the written list of sayings that we find common and not too apocalyptic in Mark, Matthew, and Luke.

In other words, things that have a high probability of being said by the historical Jesus, instead of the apocalyptic sayings of “The Christ” that we find in the Gospel of John.

** At the end of the first century C.E. The “Alexandrian School of Thought,” of which Origin and Clement of Alexandria were part, taught that there were three possible approaches to be taken to the scriptures.

(That there were already discussions of this magnitude and significance tells us a lot of the early Christian movement.)

The first approach was the literal translation, the second was symbolic, or allegorical, and the third was spiritual.

1. The first/ literal was described as simplistic and solely for the un-educated.

2. The second/symbolic was the use of parables to convey a deeper meaning.

3. The third/spiritual transcended the mortal plane and bought us closer to God.

Unfortunately at that time, as now, the un-washed masses cried out for a ready-made, simplistic, popular faith. A faith that can best be described as closer to a romance novel than any serious attempt at theology, history and philosophy.

This is also the reason that the “Resurrection” was proclaimed as the basis for Christianity.

This version of the “Faith,” when combined with the Roman gift of organization and brute force, led to the “Christianity” that has been handed down to us.

It seems to be the consensus among New Testament scholars that “Jesus” preached a message that teaches a way of behaving and living that applied to a first century reality.

However, the words of “Christ” are another matter.

If the sayings and parables of “Christ” are examined closely with the purpose of separating those words that were actually uttered by “Jesus” from those that were later attributed to him, we see a vast difference in the context, meaning, and purpose between the two.

The sayings of “Christ” display a metaphorical and allegorical context that suggest someone slightly removed from the everyday world.

The biblical words of “Jesus,” however, were indeed a direct reflection of their place and time. (Just as today, we are all products of our own time and age)

The actual sayings of the historical “Jesus,” which upon close examination shows only a handful of thoughts and parables, are so simple and basic, with such underlying truth, that they can be applied to the human condition of any age.

The origin of Thomas is a question hotly debated by scholars. Many scholars say that it was written at about the same time, or even somewhat before, the gospels in the bible.

Their argument is that most of the sayings in Thomas show no signs of having any dependence on, or knowledge of the Biblical gospels and so Thomas’ sayings derive from oral tradition and not from written Biblical texts.

This does not seem to have been possible after the end of the first century. This is when the Biblical texts began to be authoritative.

Other scholars find bits of evidence that indicate Thomas was indeed dependent in part, on Biblical texts. They surmise that the author of Thomas must have edited out almost all indications of the particular styles and ideas of the Biblical authors.

(Those scholars date Thomas in the mid second century C.E. and are suspect.)

However, the choices for a compilation were made at this time, it could well have been that Thomas was unknown to those who made them.

Alternatively, there might have been elements of Thomas that were distasteful to them.

On the other hand, given a preference for narrative biographical gospels, Thomas might have been thought dry and irrelevant.

We know hardly anything about the process of Canonical gospel choice except that biblical canon is not open for debate, it is a closed entity.

A church that adds Thomas to its collection of scriptures would move outside the margins of orthodox Christianity and no well-known denomination has the slightest intention of adding Thomas to its scriptures.

If you take the set of sayings that are in common in Thomas and either “Q” or the gospels of Mark or Matthew or Luke (no sayings in Thomas are repeated in John) then you have a pared down set that could have come from Jesus himself.

These we will list at the end of the chapter.

The only thing that is known about Thomas for sure is that it will never be included in the Bible.

There is even more conjecture about the lost years of Jesus, between the time when he was in his late teens until he began his ministry at about the age of thirty.

During this time, it must be assumed that he followed the normal Hebrew custom of learning a trade and getting married.

Yes, married! It would have been highly unusual - even suspect, for him to be in that society and not be married!

Mary Magdalene, by the way, was his wife.

She was only drastically reduced in her role much later by the church hierarchy.

They could not stand the thought of a woman with that much influence on the “Son of God” so they reduced her to the status of a whore!

Allan W Janssen is the author of the book The Plain Truth About God (What the mainstream religions don't want you to know!) and is available at the web site www.God-101.com

Visit the blog "Perspective" at http://God-101.blogspot.com

Jesus Takes the Fifth!

In a news conference today Jesus responded to James Cameron's documentary this past weekend about his final resting place and the whole issue of Resurrection.

A nervous Mr. Christ said he was forced to "take the fifth" on that question, and was then seen going behind the podium to drink a fifth of scotch!!!

Allan W Janssen is the author of The Plain Truth About God-101 (what the church doesn't want you to know!) www.God-101.com

Guest Post: Tim McGirk!

Brace yourself. James Cameron, the man who brought you "The Titanic" is back with another blockbuster.

This time, the ship he's sinking is Christianity.

In a new documentary, Producer Cameron and his director, Simcha Jacobovici, make the startling claim that Jesus wasn't resurrected --the cornerstone of Christian faith-- and that his burial cave has been discovered near Jerusalem.

And get this, Jesus sired a son with Mary Magdalene.

(Gee, I wrote that in my book; "The plain truth about God-101" [what the church doesn't want you to know!] about six years ago!

And no, it's not a re-make of "The Da Vinci Code."

Let's go back 27 years, when Israeli construction workers were gouging out the foundations for a new building in the industrial park in the Talpiyot, a Jerusalem suburb. of Jerusalem.

The earth gave way, revealing a 2,000 year old cave with 10 stone caskets.

Archeologist's were summoned, and the stone caskets carted away for examination.

It took 20 years for experts to decipher the names on the ten tombs. They were: Jesua, son of Joseph, Mary, Mary, Mathew, Jofa and Judah, son of Jesua.

Israel's prominent archaeologist Professor Amos Kloner didn't associate the crypt with the New Testament Jesus. His father, after all, was a humble carpenter who couldn't afford a luxury crypt for his family. And all were common Jewish names.

There was also this little inconvenience that a few miles away, in the old city of Jerusalem, Christians for centuries had been worshipping the empty tomb of Christ at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.

Christ's resurrection, after all, is the main foundation of the faith, proof that a boy born to a carpenter's wife in a manger is the Son of God.

But film-makers Cameron and Jacobovici claim to have amassed evidence through DNA tests, archaeological evidence and Biblical studies, that the 10 coffins belong to Jesus and his family.

Ever the showman, (Why does this remind me of the impresario in another movie,"King Kong", whose hubris blinds him to the dangers of an angry and very large ape?) Cameron is holding a New York press conference on Monday at which he will reveal that three of the coffins are supposedly those of Jesus of Nazareth, his mother Mary, and Mary Magdalene.

News about the film, which will be shown soon on Discovery Channel, Britain's Channel 4, Canada's Vision, and Israel's Channel 8, has been a hot blog topic in the Middle East (check out a personal favorite: Israelity Bites)

In the Holy Land, Biblical Archeology is a dangerous profession. This 90-minute documentary is bound to outrage Christians and stir up a titanic debate between believers and skeptics. Stay tuned.
--Tim McGirk/Jerusalem

In spite of what McGirk said in his post, Bar-Ilan University Prof. Amos Kloner, the Jerusalem District archaeologist who officially oversaw the work at the tomb in 1980 and has published detailed findings on its contents, on Saturday night dismissed the claims. "It makes a great story for a TV film," he told The Jerusalem Post. "But it's impossible. It's nonsense."

Kloner, who said he was interviewed for the new film but has not seen it, said the names found on the ossuaries were common, and he added that "Jesus, son of Joseph" inscriptions had been found on several other ossuaries over the years.

The only thing for sure about this documentary is that it's going to get a lot of publicity. Of course, that was the whole point, wasn't it?

Your "show me" scribe;
Allan W Janssen

Allan W Janssen is the author of The Plain Truth About God-101 (what the church doesn't want you to know!) www.God-101.com

Jesus or Christ? or just Jesus Christ!!

Since this is Christmas day and we are supposed to be celebrating the birth of Jesus, let's see what history really has to say about the birth of "Christ." (Even though the historical Jesus was probably born on April 6, 6-A.D. Christmas is actually a Pagan Festival and celebrates the Winter Solstice, which means that it is more of a cultural phenomenon than a religious one.)

Remember, this is not Jesus, but rather the Christ of myth!

Note: As explained in the book The Plain Truth About God-101(what the church doesn't want you to know!)

Allan W Janssen is the author of The Plain Truth About God-101 (what the church doesn't want you to know!) at; www.God-101.com

Christianity is Idol worship!

Let's Get Things Back Into Perspective Here!

We have to keep in mind, and never loose site of the fact that the historical "Jesus" was culturally a product of the ancient Near East, and in an area under Roman sovereignty.

"Christ" was a product of the people and times that came after him; most notably Pauline thought, as well as a Greek influence.

The parables and stories of the historical Jesus were the product of a first century Jewish "rabbi-sage-cynic" from Galilee who had an enormous influence on a handful of people around him.

We will refer to the historical figure as "Jesus" from now on and the person of mythology as being the "Christ" of our modern religion.

"Christianity," in its simplest terms, is the result of previous centuries of Jewish and Greek myth and conjecture about the coming of a “Messiah,” and revolves around the resurrection.

The teachings of Jesus were altered to fit the legend, but definitely took a secondary role.

The gospels were composed many years after the death of not only Jesus, but even of most of the people that knew him directly. Not only were these Gospels displaced in time, but also displaced culturally since Greek speaking Christians composed them.

- And then even further meaning was lost in translation from the Aramaic.

There are now two main, and disparate, schools of thought about the origin of Christianity. The first, and mistaken belief is that Jesus himself, as well as his teachings, was the founder.

The other is that the Christ or "Anointed One" of the Resurrection, as well as Pauline thought, is the bases of this religion. This may seem to be a small distinction upon first inspection, but in the end a very crucial one.

If it is based on the teachings, and more importantly, the example of Jesus, then his words take on enormous significance.

If, on the other hand, the "resurrection" and "Pauline thought" is taken as the bases for Christianity, then it is based on the ideas and beliefs of the people who came after him!

Remember a very important fact! Jesus never personally claimed to be conducting his Ministry to "erase man's sins,” just as he never claimed to be divine himself. Jesus constantly referred to himself as the "son of God,” just as we all are!

The early Christian gospels are not historical biographies of Christ, and do not really give us insight into the life of Jesus. These gospels proclaim a message about Jesus, and express a significance that the early Christians found in Jesus.

They are written in a way that appeals to historical truth, but they are not history in any actual sense.

The gospels expressed what people experienced about Jesus in the context of the first century Near East.

This experience was taken as a "revelation" of the divine, and they tell us what the early Christians eventually came to believe about Jesus!

Until the recent deciphering of the Gospel of Thomas and the discovery of the "Q" sayings, this knowledge of Christ was the only bases we had to explore the historical Jesus.

As a result, it was very difficult to differentiate between the actual words of Jesus and the words attributed to him by his followers. (Christians) ............................Fortunately, this is changing.