Introduction
Biblical
Symbolism
Old
Testament
New
Testament
The Dead
Sea Scrolls
Christian
Origins
Evidence from the Tomb
The Social
Order
The
Economic System
The
Democratic Principle
A World
Society
Tradition frequently leaves invisible mental scars. All too often misconceptions implanted in childhood persist throughout the lifetime of an individual, effectively thwarting the revelations of logic and science. Nowhere is this more true than with the exposure of young minds to erroneous biblical concepts. It is, in fact, little short of incredible that widespread ignorance of this body of literature should still persist in a supposedly modern age, in spite of obvious contradictions with both science and reason.
To those whose religious background would deny such principles as evolution and reincarnation, it is perhaps expedient to remove any vestige of doubt by going straight to the difficulty. For never, in all the annals of history, have so many souls been so misled by the written word of man.
The nature of the social order under which we live is of utmost personal concern. It may mean existence in a state of freedom, security and happiness on the one hand; or on the other, it may subject us to poverty, injustice and virtual enslavement. But it is not enough to involve ourselves solely with the economic system which regulates our immediate lives. It is imperative to understand that a man is still a man and a woman is still a woman regardless of where or under what regime he or she lives and that a transgression against any individual is of concern to all who are worthy of membership in the human race.
In the past, the penalty for failure to comprehend and overcome religious and economic difficulties has led to wars that could have been avoided through knowledge. A similar failure in this present age of atomic and chemical/bacteriological warfare could well lead to a catastrophic annihilation of civilization itself. We have reached the point where it is now most essential to achieve economic and social harmony among nations. It must, therefore, be perfectly clear that we can no longer afford to be indifferent to world affairs, and that there exists both a moral obligation and a dire necessity to acquire a realistic perspective with regard to such matters. A spirit of universal love and cooperation must prevail over petty nationalism and religious squabbling if there is to be any salvation for mankind.
That both Old and New Testament stories are not to be regarded as factual, from the point of historical accuracy, becomes quite evident once we examine the rather unique system of symbolism which pervades these ancient writings. For undoubtedly, the most obvious and most striking characteristic of the Scriptures is to be found in pronounced repetition of particular numbers and cryptographic words or phrases. In fact, when one contemplates the exceedingly lavish use of numerals, it will be noted that practically every such occurrence may be traced to one of a half dozen numbers, or at least to their multiples or to special combinations! Why should this be so? Therein lies a most important and largely obscured facet of biblical literature; for the writers of these documents were concerned with much more than actual history and mere physical events. To them, a chief aim was to convey an intended moral or principle, quite regardless of whether there was any correlation with reality or whether mythology and fiction had to be resorted to in order to stress the significance of a point.
This they chose to do by devising a system whereby certain names, persons, places, objects, ideas, phrases, happenings and especially numerals were introduced for the specific purpose of representing or symbolizing certain spiritual ideas or principles. For instance, in connection with the extensively used system of numerical symbolism, the basic numbers 1,3,4,7,10 and 12 were adopted and given a special meaning in relation to spiritual matters. A brief insight into these subsequently idolized and "sacred" numbers follows:
One: This number was used as a symbol of the recognition of a solitary Supreme Being — that there is but one God ruling the universe. An example would be, "could ye not watch with me one hour?" (Matthew 26:40).
Three: This figure was adopted to represent the intimate nature of spiritual matters, of success in attaining some measure of truth. Examples would be the rising of "Christ" on the third day, and the episode of Paul blinded for three days while on the road to Damascus.
Four: The symbol "four" was used to signify a search for truth. Examples would be the four thousand fed by Jesus, and the raising of Lazarus who was dead for four days.
Seven: This numeral was used to symbolize a sense of divine fulfillment and of spiritual perfection. Examples would be the seven "days" of creation, and the genealogy by Luke in which Jesus is depicted as the 77th personage.
Ten: The number "ten" was selected to depict the application of spiritual thought, of striving to put one’s virtues into practice. Examples would be the Ten Commandments, and Jacob’s statement (Genesis 20:22) that "I will surely give the tenth unto thee."
Twelve: The symbol "twelve" was adopted to symbolize true government, of the authority and universal extent of divine principle. Examples would be the twelve stones carried across the Jordan, the twelve apostles, etc.
While the above "basic" numerals are by far the most common and are used generally in the senses described, there are a few exceptions which deserve mention. For instance, the numeral "six" is often used as a symbol of mortal and imperfect thought. Another occasion would be the use of a particular numeral pertaining to the message imparted by one of the seven days of creation (e.g., the number "two" could refer to the message conveyed by the second day of creation; "five" to the fifth day, etc.). In addition, there are also times when the symbolic role of these "sacred" numerals is reversed and used in the opposite sense! Typical examples of this usage would be the three temptations of Jesus by the devil, Peter’s three denials, Judas receiving three times ten or thirty pieces of silver for betraying Jesus, etc.
Once it is recognized that the Scriptures were intended to imprint a spiritual lesson or point of view, rather than record mere physical and historical occurrences, they immediately take on a new and higher meaning — the picture at last begins to make sense.
Armed with insight into the aforementioned system of constructive symbolism, we are now in a position to make sense of otherwise enigmatic biblical stories. In the process, it will be seen that many characters and events have not the slightest basis in fact and were invented purely for the purpose of conveying a specific principle or idea which the writers wished to express.
The Seven "Days" of Creation:
Seizing upon a somewhat similar Babylonian creation myth, certain scriptural writers proceeded to develop it as an introduction to the Adam and Eve story which had been composed some time before. When we recall the symbolic meaning attached to the various numerals, it soon becomes apparent why their creation narrative happens to be extended over a period of seven days, since the figure "seven" is a symbol of fulfillment and completeness.
Although designed to give simple minds an explanation of how our physical universe came into being, in reality the seven "days" of creation may be resolved into a unique symbolic presentation of an instructive moral or principle. Depicting a sevenfold process of evolving spiritual thought, these stages may be stated as follows:
(1) The first recognition of conscience: i.e., the light of the first day;
(2) An understanding that conscience is capable of separating good from evil: i.e., the separation of the second day;
(3) The realization that conscience can lift us to a firm outlook upon life: i.e., the dry land of the third day;
(4) The knowledge that the revelations of conscience are the result of a divine System or Principle which rules the universe: i.e., the Sun, Moon, stars of the fourth day;
(5) A sense of exalted thought and abundance of life as arising from the revelations of conscience: i.e., the fifth day where the fowl of the air are used as a symbol of exalted thought, and the fish of the sea symbolize abundance;
(6) The recognition that man is to have dominion, and that his soul is of an immortal nature capable of identification with God: i.e., the sixth day in which man is created in the image of God;
(7) The realization of his destiny must bring to man a sense of security, peace and rest, since the attributes of immortality and communion with God are all that could be desired: i.e., the completeness, fulfillment and state of total rest epitomized by the seventh day.
An understanding of the true meaning imparted by each of these seven "days" (or stages of spiritual thought) is of importance to a proper interpretation of the Scriptures. Indeed, recognition of these seven messages constitutes a valuable key which resolves a host of otherwise obscure biblical stories.
The Adam and Eve Story:
Immediately following the seven days of creation comes a narrative portraying man in quite the opposite sense imparted by the sixth day of creation, and in which a most unethical reason for our imperfect environment would seem to be given. What is the real purpose behind this seemingly contradictory passage? That the Adam and Eve story cannot possibly receive a literal interpretation is now so obvious as to be beyond question, both from the aspect of historical accuracy and from an ethical point of view. To accept a literal translation of this narrative is to deny free will altogether; it is to cast blasphemy upon the just nature of the spiritual cosmos!
To conclude that our imperfect environment is the result of the sin of one man is more than fantastic; it is positively unthinkable! On the basis of a literal interpretation we are not the children of a Just and Loving Creator, but the unfortunate victims of a God of spite! To insinuate that we should be made to suffer for the sins of a man whom we have never encountered is just about the most shocking belief imaginable. For if we are responsible for the sins of those who lived before us, then there can certainly be no such thing as free will — life itself becomes a complete farce! What, then, is the true value of this narrative?
As is typical of so many of the early biblical stories, none of the characters portrayed in this allegory ever existed in real life, but are fictitious symbols introduced for the purpose of conveying a moral or lesson. In direct contrast to the conclusion, which must be derived from a literal interpretation, the real meaning of this episode was to signify that man’s sense of conscience was, in effect, of a distinctly higher nature than that of all other forms of earthly life. In reality, the Adam and Eve story was written for the express purpose of illustrating the principle of conscience and free will — not to deny such, as a literal interpretation must imply!
First of all, is it not of the greatest significance to note that the tree from which Adam and his wife ate, and through which action our imperfect environment is supposed to have originated, happens to be so aptly termed "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?" Indeed, is not the symbolism used to illustrate the recognition of conscience perfectly clear when we read, "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil?" And furthermore, what were the immediate consequences of eating from this magical tree? "Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked....Then the Lord God said, Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil." (Genesis 3:7,22).
Thus the reason why Adam — a fictitious symbol representing mortal man — is caused to suffer as a result of his actions is seen to be quite natural enough, since a greater knowledge of God’s Will must necessarily entail exposure to abuse and persecution from his fellow beings who are less spiritually evolved and who do worship material rather than spiritual values. This point, incidentally, is promptly portrayed in the fictitious saga of Cain and Abel — where the lowly physical sense slays one of higher principles — as well as in several other narratives throughout the Scriptures.
Noah and His Ark:
By way of another example, let us take the episode of Noah and his ark. Who in all honesty can accept this story as an actual historical event? On the basis of a literal interpretation it is clearly fantastic; the story breaks down completely from every conceivable angle. It is not only plainly ridiculous from an historical perspective, but a deliberate deluge of such destructive proportions is wholly inconsistent and unacceptable from an ethical point of view. Invariably, all attempts to interpret this allegory in a literal fashion encounter so many insurmountable difficulties that one would expect this passage to serve as an incentive to bring theologians back to reality — back to the realization that the authors of the Scriptures were concerned primarily with illustrating principles by means of symbolism!
The overall message to be drawn from this spiritually significant allegory of Noah and his ark may be defined essentially as follows: Whenever we find ourselves engulfed by the floods of materialism and despair, we may find safety and solace by casting our eyes in the direction of God; in response to our efforts He will lift us above the ravaging effects of mortal actions and experiences.
Although of a generally higher nature than many documents of the Old Testament, and while dealing with the life and teachings of a most dynamic personage, it remains that the New Testament is primarily a continuation of earlier symbolic and spiritually significant writings! To not a few earnest seekers of truth, it is bound to come as somewhat of a shock to learn that traditional interpretations are in need of considerable revision; but such is certainly the case. Indeed, even the basic titles of "Satan" and "Christ" demand an explanation that is far different from what has been offered by orthodox theology.
The Enigma of Satan:
Throughout the ages the identity of Satan has proven to be a source of great embarrassment to many theologians. For while they have been inclined to look upon the devil as a sort of supernatural being and opponent of God, they have been quite unable to explain a rather fundamental mystery concerning his very existence. In fact, such theology is guilty of holding two highly conflicting points of view; for if God is really omnipotent, then why does He simply not destroy Satan? Obviously, any doctrine which would consider Satan to be a spiritual entity of a supernatural nature is quite ridiculous; and the very existence of such a belief may once more be traced to a distorted biblical interpretation.
Actually, the devil is nothing more than a particular symbol which was introduced into the Scriptures for the purpose of illustrating a lack of Truth! The entire problem of evil is but a false sense of reality. Indeed, is the symbolism portraying lack of the Truth not perfectly clear when we recall Jesus’ reference to the devil? "He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies." (John 8:44).
What we might like to consider so conveniently as being the works of the devil should really be attributed to the results of our own selfish desires — our own state of imperfection! Whether or not it is realized, all sin originates from an unbalanced love of oneself; for selfishness is at the root of all evil!
The Jesus/Christ Paradox:
At the root of Christian theology is a problem involving an apparent "duality" when speaking about Jesus and "Christ." In short, who (or what) is a "Christ?" What is the true status of Jesus, that historical personage whom so many hold in such high esteem?
On the basis of orthodox views, we are to believe that Jesus was a one and only "Son of God" — that no other comparable entities ever existed. This notion can only be described as highly naive, for even if we were to accept the traditional idea that Jesus constituted our world’s one and only "Savior," it sadly fails to consider all the countless numbers of other worlds similar to our own which have existed in the past, exist now and which are bound to exist in the future! Surely we cannot be so vain as to deny these other worlds the light of a "Christ" such as ours — or do we have so much as the slightest idea as to the true nature of the spiritual cosmos? Clearly, this popular concept of a "Savior" is not a very realistic one and breaks down completely under the slightest reasoning.
Upon examination of the Bible itself, we encounter a most confusing and contradictory state of affairs. On the one hand, we have the statement "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30), with the rather curious doctrine of a so-called Holy Trinity based upon the belief that Jesus was indeed equal to God; while on the other hand we have numerous passages which impress upon us the understanding that God is greater than Jesus: "the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28); "not my will, but thine, be done" (Luke 22:42); "I do nothing on my own authority but speak thus as the Father taught me" (John 8:28); "if you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love" (John 15:10); "I can do nothing on my own authority, as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me" (John 5:30); "And Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.’" (Luke 18:19).
The solution to this contradiction (which, incidentally, orthodox theology has yet to explain) is simple in essence. Recalling that the Scriptures deal primarily with principles, and that historical events are of secondary importance, it should not come as a surprise to learn that Jesus was described initially — and symbolically — in terms of a "dual" personality. That is to say, when referring to actual human status of Jesus it must certainly be acknowledged that "the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28), since we are dealing with an entity characteristic of mankind — a "son of man." In contrast to this imperfect state of mind we have the "Christ" or "Son of God" state, which is really a title or goal in that it symbolizes the attainment of a state of Perfection which is none other than God Himself: "I and the Father are one." (John 10:30). Thus it will be seen that, throughout the course of his ministry, Jesus was striving to demonstrate and live the hypothetical goal or ultimate "Christ" state of Perfection. This principle of attempting to reach such a priceless goal we may term the "Christ-idea" — for essentially, "Christ" is a spiritual idea or ambition of which it may well be said that "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me." (John 14:6).
It will, therefore, be concluded that Jesus himself was a very human being, and all attempts to picture him as anything else will be seen to be rooted in sheer fantasy.
The issue of Christian origins is not a subject that our churches generally care to discuss. They prefer to let their flocks live a rather sheltered life, oblivious to important new evidence and to the impact of scholarly research over the past hundred years or so. In particular, they have endeavored to pretend that discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, during the middle of the 20th century, has posed little or no threat to traditional Christian beliefs. This could hardly be further from the truth.
At the extreme northwest corner of the Dead Sea, is to be found the ruins of what was once a combination religious housing settlement and fortress known as Khirbet Qumran. Dating back to the first half of the 2nd century BC, it was badly damaged and abandoned during the reign of Herod the Great, from 37 to 4 BC. Eventually rebuilt, it stood until finally destroyed for good by the Romans in 68 AD. Identified by historians as being occupied by a Jewish sect known as the Essenes, it was from just such a group that a vital key would be found to link the Dead Sea Scrolls to Christian origins.
The Essenes evidently populated many local communities, including nearby Jerusalem which was home to a large following. Over the years their once ascetic, reclusive and pacifist membership became deeply infiltrated with a number of religious Zealots — men "zealous for the Law" of strict Judaism and antagonistic toward their Roman invaders, whom they regarded as an enemy to be expelled by whatever means were necessary. Although called Essenes by several ancient historians, inhabitants of the Qumran community often referred to themselves as "followers of the Way," and ran their own social order upon the basis of a communistic economy — in which all wealth and possessions were shared and held in common. It was truly a distinctive philosophy which separated this group from the mainstream of Jewish society.
First surfacing in 1947, with findings continuing over the course of the early 1950s, a large number of ancient documents or scrolls were discovered in caves hidden on the faces of steep cliffs close to the Qumran ruins. In order to deal effectively with such an enormous corpus of material, it was clear that the talents of many experts would be required to decipher and publish the 800 or so separate documents which had been found by the end of 1952. Accordingly, a team was assembled and actively engaged in this monumental task by the summer of 1953. Inexplicably, it excluded all Jewish scholars, being comprised chiefly of Roman Catholic priests under the leadership of Father Roland de Vaux — a highly opinionated and bigoted Dominican priest. Needless to say, from the team’s very inception temptation to withhold evidence or publish a biased interpretation — in favor of dogma inherent in traditional Christian beliefs — was bound to be quite irresistible!
Of the published sectarian Dead Sea Scrolls, which is the only type of literature capable of imparting insight into Christian origins, there are two scrolls which are perhaps outstanding in this regard.
Damascus Document:
Portions of eight copies of the "Damascus Document" were found in Cave 4 at Qumran; while parts of a ninth were discovered in Cave 5. An incomplete tenth copy was uncovered in Cave 6, indicating that it was a popular work. Known to scholars for more than half a century, when it first surfaced in an old Cairo synagogue, this document was given its name by reason of a reference to a place in the wilderness called "Damascus," where an unspecified "Teacher of Righteousness" is described as leader of a Jewish sect that remained "true to the Law."
What is so highly significant about the name of this place is that it is able to clear up a mystery with regard to Acts 9, of the New Testament, where Paul is reported to have been blinded for three days while on the road to "Damascus." Previously, it had been quite wrongly assumed that Damascus in Syria was the city in question. But this had always posed a problem, since an arrest warrant issued in Jerusalem would have been useless in such a foreign country! There is now no doubt but what Qumran was originally called "Damascus" by its inhabitants. (As we shall presently see, this information has all the aspects of a "Rosetta stone" — one capable of revealing the truth about crucial events concerning the apostle Paul and Christian origins.)
Habakkuk Commentary:
This scroll was one of the first to be found in Cave 1 at Qumran. In conjunction with a number of other documents describing the same trio of mysterious characters, the "Habakkuk Commentary" poses a very real threat to traditional Christian beliefs. There is repetitive mention of a conflict involving a "Teacher of Righteousness," a "Liar" and a "Wicked Priest." Who are they? What role do they play in the scheme of events just prior to the Jewish uprising of 66 AD? Due in no small measure to the research of Professor Robert Eisenman (Chairman of the Department of Religious Studies at California State University at Long Beach), it is now possible to finally resolve such questions.
Although initially there was a strong temptation for orthodox theology to visualize Jesus as being the "Teacher of Righteousness," this idea is beset by a serious flaw. In short, there is not the slightest hint — in all the Dead Sea Scrolls — that their leader was ever considered to be divine by his followers! If those in immediate contact with Jesus did not look upon him as the "Son of God," then how could Christians today be expected to uphold such a belief? As a result, this notion had to be abandoned and the problem was left unresolved by Christian theologians.
The key to identifying the three aforementioned participants mentioned in the conflict is to be found in the "Liar," who is described as being a traitor from within — one who had been taken in by the Qumran community, accepted as an accredited member after an initiation period, who subsequently defects. Recalling that Paul of Tarsus was greatly changed after his experience while on the road to "Damascus" (Qumran), it is most logical to picture him as the "Liar." He does, in fact, meet all of the requirements, and he was in the right place at the right time. But, one might ask, in what sense did he defect? Quite simply, he was the first to preach that Jesus was anything more than a human being — that he was, indeed, an incarnation of God!
The identities of the other two persons, the "Wicked Priest" and the "Teacher of Righteousness," promptly fall into place. The high priest Ananas was the Temple priest at this time and is reported to have been an adversary of James — an early pre-Christian leader — and therefore a "Wicked Priest." By association, it seems most likely that James is the unnamed "Teacher of Righteousness."
Armed with the identities of the quarreling trio mentioned in such documents as the "Habakkuk Commentary," we are now in a position to proffer a truly revolutionary picture of Christian origins.
Canonical New Testament literature is not a very reliable guide when it comes to dealing with actual fact, since it is heavily biased in favor of imparting a religious message. Thus, in order to place the issue of Christian origins into true perspective, it is desirable to begin with what is known as historical fact, and then to extrapolate a probable scenario from the new evidence which is implicit in the Dead Sea Scrolls. To this end we shall commence with the lives of Jesus, James and Paul — the three principals who were involved initially in what later evolved into our present-day Christianity.
The Personage of Jesus:
Most likely born between 6 and 4 BC, somewhere in the general vicinity of Jerusalem, Jesus appears to have been well-versed in all aspects of biblical scripture. Highly antagonistic toward both the Sadducees and Pharisees, we are left with only the neighboring Qumran community as a possible source for his later education. Indeed, with the evidence strongly weighted in this direction, it can hardly be doubted that Jesus must have spent considerable time studying and conversing with members of this particular Jewish sect. Eventually, convinced that he had learned all that they could teach him, he then departed and began to preach on his own.
It is likely much more than a coincidence that at least some (if not most) of Jesus’ original followers were recruited from among the Qumran membership. In particular, it is now little short of obvious that John the Baptist must have been intimately entwined with the Qumran sect. By reason of his close association with John the Baptist, it must be concluded that Jesus was of the same school, so to speak.
Unfortunately, the infusion of Zealot elements into the Qumran sect was to prove the undoing of Jesus. That he was indifferent or even sympathetic to their cause is attested to by the mention that "Simon who was called the Zealot" (Luke 6:15) was actually one of Jesus’ chosen apostles! Also testifying to the rebellious company that he kept was the incident in the garden of Gethsemane, where Jesus’ disciples are described as being an armed band. (Peter is reported to have cut off the right ear of the servant of the high priest.) Another occasion in which violence was displayed is the episode of Jesus overturning the tables of the money-changers in the Temple (Matthew 21:12). Moreover, statements like "Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth, I have not come to bring peace, but a sword" (Matthew 10:34) can only make one think of the militant Zealots. Yet a further indication of his involvement with this "zealous for the Law" sect is the fact that the Romans saw fit to crucify him — a punishment employed exclusively against political and rebellious offenders. Either Jesus was framed, or he was himself a member of this extremist group!
It is, therefore, to be concluded that there are two sides to the personage of Jesus. On the one hand, he would seem to have been an exceptionally wise and enlightened philosopher for his era. By way of contrast, he might well have become unwisely involved with a group displaying a little too much "zeal for the Law." (This association is clearly attested to in Acts 5:35-39, where Jesus’ disciples are compared to earlier bands of militant Zealots.)
The Personage of James:
Mentioned in the Bible as a brother of Jesus (Acts 1:19), the character of James has been quietly pushed into the background by church theologians. (Although it is just conceivable that the term "brother" is a metaphor for a fellow member of the Qumran community, it still remains a fact that he was closely associated with Jesus.) Indeed, much of the early literature relating to James is rather mysteriously excluded from the New Testament canon. Why? This is even more surprising when it is considered that James is described as head of the early church in Jerusalem — instead of Peter, who is supposed to be the "rock" upon whom Jesus would build his church (Matthew 16:18). The answer is one which completely undermines the very fabric of orthodox Christian beliefs: James was a staunch proponent and upholder of the "Law of Moses," and as such would have nothing to do with the wild idea of considering Jesus to have been an incarnation of God!
This interpretation explains the pronounced rift between Paul and James, since the former was actively preaching a story about Jesus’ resurrection and divine nature. Unable to tolerate such an obvious fabrication, and as the "Teacher of Righteousness" head of the Qumran/Jerusalem sect, James is forced to object and to publicly admonish Paul. In turn, Paul’s repeated assertions gets him into serious trouble with James’ zealous "followers of the Way," and he is only saved from death at their hands by Roman soldiers (Acts 21:32).
James’ second adversary was the Temple high priest Ananas (depicted as the "Wicked Priest" in several documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls). Considered by James to be a puppet of Roman authorities, Ananas was reviled by Qumran "followers of the Way." Despised in turn by the "Wicked Priest," James was looked upon as an unwelcome rival of the Temple establishment. Moreover, by reason of his Zealot connections, James was a threat to Temple security and a feared Roman reprisal. It was an atmosphere in which something bad was bound to happen.
When violence finally broke out the first major casualty would be James, who was severely beaten, eventually perishing (around 62 AD) at the hands of Ananas’ hostile supporters. Incensed by this attack against their leader, the Zealot faction within the Qumran community subsequently managed to exact a measure of vengeance by assassinating the "Wicked Priest." Not long thereafter, all of Jerusalem exploded into violence, culminating in a general uprising and the Jewish armed revolt of 66 AD.
The Personage of Paul:
Born in the city of Tarsus (now in Turkey), Paul was of Jewish heritage with Roman citizenship. Well-educated, he was fluent in several languages. Never having met Jesus, he enters the biblical scene as an official entrusted with the task of persecuting opponents of Temple theology.. At this time little more than another radical Jewish sect, infiltrated with Zealots, there was no thought of the Qumran group ever becoming the nucleus of a new and dominating religion. Merely a simple expedition to "Damascus" (Qumran) in order to arrest certain ringleaders of the "followers of the Way" — men who were suspected of being militant Zealots — this seemingly insignificant trip would serve to drastically change the course of history.
According to the text in Acts, chapter 9, Paul is in charge of a band of soldiers en route to Qumran when a "light from heaven" supposedly knocks him to the ground. Whether it be pangs of conscience for previous misdeeds, or plain sunstroke, he is reportedly stricken blind for three days. When insight into the truth (the symbolic meaning of the numeral "three") is imparted to him by a member of the Qumran community, he is completely changed. Allegedly spending three years at Qumran (Galatians 1:17-18), Paul is converted and accepted into their society as a legitimate member. He then departs to join James in Jerusalem, ostensibly most anxious to redeem himself by now preaching the sect’s "zeal for the Law."
Evidently encountering a measure of distrust from some of James’ associates (quite understandable in view of past experience), it is not long before Paul is farmed out to more remote locations — clear out of the country, in fact. This turns out to be a big mistake. Thrust into contact with pagan religions boasting of a variety of impressive deities — including semi-gods with magical powers — it is only a matter of time until Paul succumbs to a strong temptation to embellish his account of Jesus in order to be more competitive. In due course, he finds himself making exaggerated claims and preaching a miraculous resurrection from the dead. The people just love his stories and he soon begins to make large numbers of converts. The ground is fertile and the promise of a heavenly life is exactly what the masses want to hear.
However, word of Paul’s deification of Jesus eventually reaches James in Jerusalem. Paul is subsequently recalled and rebuked for his actions. A compromise of sorts is reached, to the effect that some aspects of the "Law of Moses" will be relaxed for non-Jews to join the church in the form of second-rate members. In return, Paul agrees to tone down his preaching and stick to Qumran doctrine. He then embarks upon what must be described as a rather extended and incredibly successful mission — the only problem is that his many converts believe in a Jesus/God deity!
Again recalled to Jerusalem by James some years later (about 58 AD), Paul foolishly thinks that he can still come to an equitable agreement with a church leadership that has by now little in common with Pauline philosophy. Confronted with the evidence, Paul is soon branded a traitor and a "Liar" by the Qumran community, in spite of the monetary contribution which he brings to the church from his recent converts. Ambushed by a mob of pious Qumran extremists, much less tolerant than James, Paul is barely saved from sure death by the intervention of Roman soldiers. Following a somewhat lengthy series of questionings, by various authorities, he is shipped off to Rome to face some kind of trial, where he fades out of the picture.
But the die is cast. In short order the post-Jesus church is superseded by a new and radical Christ/Jesus religion — one which very quickly spreads to surrounding nations, and which bears little resemblance to the philosophy expounded by its alleged founder!
It must now be abundantly clear, to all who would seek truth in an unbiased manner, that present-day Christianity is built upon a framework of deception and lies. Its major premises are seen to have absolutely no basis in fact and can only serve to disgust those who would exercise the power of human logic. The great irony of it all is that the theological structure of this most peculiar Christ/Jesus religion was never intended by Jesus, who was simply trying to uphold the "Law of Moses."
Following in Paul’s footsteps, the new religion was soon further embellished by a succession of deceived and overzealous theologians, scribes and editors. Thus it was that Old Testament ideas of a "Messiah," who would lead the Jewish race to world supremacy, was replaced by a New Testament theology embracing the wildest of claims. First, there was the notion that a mere human being was God! Then, incredible as it might seem, it was claimed that through faith and blood redemption man could be "saved" and pass to a "heaven" — completely bypassing the vital principle of free will and contrary to a cosmic requirement that destiny must be in the hands of the individual!
There is, incidentally, one important aspect of this blood redemption dogma which is to be mentioned, although our churches would prefer that a certain historical fact not be discussed. Originating in ancient Persia, the cult of Mithraism was a religion which embraced the principle of a Redeemer or Mediator between God and mankind. Firmly established in Rome at least a century before the crucifixion, it flourished until the 4th century AD, when it finally succumbed to the new and highly competitive religion called Christianity. However, this surrender was far from unconditional, since several features of the older religion were clearly absorbed into the basic structure of its successor — including the very practice of observing Christmas upon the actual birthday of Mithras himself! Other supposed Christian practices derived from Mithraism include switching the Jewish Sabbath to Sunday, which had long been the holy day of Mithraics. This religion also contributed such ideas as baptism and confirmation, and fostered notions of a mystical salvation from a eucharistic Last Supper.
To date, organized religions have relied upon blind faith and lack of knowledge in order to retain their flocks. Hopefully, with fresh insight into Christian origins, it will not be long before nebulous faith gives way to the revelations of modern scholarship — where the truth is capable of opening new horizons.
Evidence from the Tomb
Subsequent to revelations from the Dead Sea Scrolls, a rather startling
discovery was made in 1980. However, it was not until some decades later that
the full significance of this find became evident and made readily available to
the general public in the form of a TV broadcast (mysteriously limited in
exposure), and in a most informative book. (See: The Jesus Family Tomb, 2007, by
Simcha Jacobovici and Charles Pellegrino, ISBN: 978-0-06-119202-9.)
Incredible as it may seem, when a tomb outside the old city walls of Jerusalem
(in a hill region called Talpiot) was accidentally uncovered in 1980 by a
bulldozer excavating a foundation for a housing development, the inscriptions on
some ten bone ossuaries found within were given only a callous glance. (An
ossuary is a small stone coffin in which were placed the bones of one after the
deceased had been laid to rest for about a year and the flesh had decayed to
dust. By way of dating the find, it is to be noted that this unique Jewish
practice of a “second burial” was just a temporal passing phase over the span of
a few generations— namely, from about the time of the birth of Jesus to the
destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans and a major dispersal of its inhabitants
in 70 A.D.) Not only did one of the inscriptions read “Jesus, son of Joseph,”
but other ossuaries contained such biblical names as two “Marys,” a “Joseph,” a
“Matthew,” and one reading “Judah, son of Jesus!” Moreover, yet another was even
inscribed “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus!” Who, in the light of such
archeological evidence, could not conclude that this tomb was most certainly a
Jesus family tomb?
One would surely have expected authorities to look upon this site as the
greatest biblical find ever. Instead, it was allowed to pass with little fanfare
and dismissed by many so-called “experts” as just a coincidence that the crypt
contained so many names associated with Jesus. Clearly, none are so blind as
those who will not see— for fear of totally undermining their cherished
theological dogma!
As if to add an aura of mystery and intrigue to the discovery, one of the ten
ossuaries found in this Talpiot crypt vanished before they could be transferred
to a Jerusalem museum. Somehow, the ossuary bearing the inscription “James, son
of Joseph, brother of Jesus” was literally stolen shortly after it was
cataloged, but before it could be studied in depth. When it finally surfaced,
some two decades later in the antiquities market, it was actually claimed to be a
forgery by a number of supposed experts desperate to preserve the status quo.
Only later was it to be proven legitimate through analysis of its patina. (A
patina is the thin layer of dust and chemical residue that has accumulated over
much time— a spectroscopic analysis of which could be almost as exact as a
fingerprint.) In essence, the James patina was a perfect match for the other
nine ossuaries found in the Talpiot tomb, and was indeed the missing one stolen
years earlier.
What is especially troubling to Christian dogma is the inscription of “Judah,
son of Jesus.” According to traditional belief, Jesus is not supposed to be
married, much less having fostered any children. A further anomaly, which was
thought to argue against a Jesus family tomb, was the inclusion of a second
“Mary,” subsequently identified as Mary Magdalene, most beloved female companion
of Jesus. But since only family members would be buried in a family tomb, it
surely follows that this Mary must have been the wife of Jesus and the mother of
his son, Judah. Needless to say, such revelations completely negate all ideas of
Jesus being some sort of mystical god-like deity that is quite above the human
race!
What are the odds of this tomb not being the actual burial site of Jesus and his
immediate relatives? Estimates range from one chance in tens of thousands to one
in several million, depending upon the criteria used and the method of
statistical analysis. Most assuredly, there can be little doubt but what this
find is the archeological discovery of all time with respect to biblical
history. But it is unlikely to be a subject which our churches will care to
discuss, as it must lead to serious admission of error, loss of prestige, and be
highly detrimental to income. Hopefully, in time, the masses will come to
recognize the truth of the Jesus/Christ divinity myth.
The primary purpose of our existence is to evolve spiritually, through the process of overcoming an inherently selfish nature. Any interference with this sacred obligation must be considered to be a violation of fundamental human rights! Reduced to simple terms, the State must be charged with the fostering of this noble end.
Regrettably, there are many ways in which governments have acted to the detriment of a soul in genuine pursuit of conscience. By far the most common invasion of privacy lies in the despicable practice of forcing an individual into military service. In the guise of upholding freedom, one is required to relinquish freedom of both mind and body. Moreover, at a command, he is expected to openly defy conscience by committing a transgression against his fellow man! Without a doubt, this can only be viewed as a flagrant example of enslavement. Not only is it criminal by its very nature, but submission provides the ammunition and the temptation for any unscrupulous leader to wage warfare. It is a fact that if all who are drafted refused to enlist no major war would be possible! If nations were really sincere in their professed desire for peace, they would see the wisdom of outlawing compulsory military service. Under the auspices of a reformed United Nations, a worldwide ban on this outrageous custom could do much to prevent future large-scale wars and the devastating holocaust which must surely follow.
Linked closely to this deserving respect for conscience is freedom of speech and freedom from religious dogma. Under no circumstance is the State justified in interfering with free expression of ideas! Indeed, if the prevailing social order is incapable of withstanding criticism, it is a sure sign that such a government is in dire need of removal.
There are two fundamentally opposed economic ideologies upon which a social order may be based — specifically, capitalism and communism. In both, the principle of democracy is of overwhelming importance to the proper functioning of the system.
Although certain aspects of capitalism go back in history to the first ideas of private ownership, it was only with the Industrial Revolution of comparatively recent times that this system really began to assume its present structure. Evolving, upon occasion, by the slow process of trial and error, many capitalist principles are merely a passing phase in man’s quest for economic harmony. As a result, there may be witnessed considerable variation in the extent to which certain features have been retained or modified by different nations. In many instances ideas have been incorporated which might best be described as attributes of an opposing system. Examples of this would be attempts to inject a measure of stability and security through government sponsored pension plans and insurance against the specter of unemployment. A few of the more progressive capitalist societies have also adopted schemes of health insurance. Thus it will be seen that the harshness of a purely capitalist economy has, to some degree, been improved by social reforms in which the interests of the public are not completely overlooked. In effect, one nation may be observed to embrace a number of socialist principles although retaining an economy which is essentially capitalistic in nature; while another government may exhibit little change from the primitive notion of equating authority with personal wealth.
The motivating principle of capitalism is material wealth, the acquisition of which is held to be of prime importance. All actions, policies and production of goods by industry are prompted by the idea of personal profit — quite irrespective of whether they are justified ethically! Instead of a spirit of cooperation there will exist a situation in which one is forced to compete against his neighbor. As a result of the lack of planning which prevails, men are frequently compelled to seize whatever means of employment the system chances to provide — whether such employment be an asset to the community, a senseless waste of time and energy or even a liability to society itself. Furthermore, it strongly encourages an unfair distribution of wealth, with all the resulting evils and injustices which invariably arise when certain individuals are permitted to acquire wealth and power at the direct expense of others who must go without!
In spite of all the negative publicity given to communism over the years, there are few inhabitants of capitalist nations who can be said to possess a realistic insight into many aspects of this system. But such ignorance is perhaps to be expected in countries where control of information is largely in the hands of factions quite strongly opposed to the principle of public ownership. As a matter of fact, it is questionable whether present condemnation and hatred of communism has been fostered as much by those genuine in their sympathy for injustices under such regimes, as it has by others who have much to lose should it ever be decided that industry and wealth rightfully belong to all, and not to a privileged few.
But admitting that reports about communist nations are often "edited" in a highly biased manner by capitalist news media, the fact still remains that as a social order discontent has generally been the rule and not the exception. The idea in itself of all individuals sharing the resources of a nation constitutes a very noble philosophy, and one that can hardly be criticized on grounds of either ethics or economics. However, valid criticism arises, not as a result of public ownership, but rather because there is frequently a distinct lack of such! While it may be true that industry and commerce have been taken out of private hands and placed in control of the State, it is also a fact that in many instances the State has not been the people, but a clique of authorities terminating in a virtual dictatorship. For this very reason, it is not even certain that a true state of communism has ever existed in the world, as this principle actually implies public ownership and control by the people themselves. (A more accurate description might, therefore, embrace such terms as "quasi-communism" or "totalitarian communism.")
It is here, in the inability of citizens to formulate their own policies, where the real objection lies. Whenever a body of people permit themselves to be dominated by a clique who will not allow any criticism of their actions, it is more or less inevitable that concern for personal feelings and even human lives will be placed in jeopardy. Instead of regarding man as a sacred spiritual entity placed here on this planet for the express purpose of evolving spiritually, such a totalitarian regime will tend to look upon one as important and an asset only to the extent that his views coincide with the aspirations of the State — the will of a virtual dictatorship — and insofar as his labor may be utilized by said State. A person will be brought up to accept authority and compelled to accept values as emphasized by "leaders" who may have little sense of values.
And yet, as oppressive and dictatorial as may have been certain quasi-communist regimes, one slight but vitally important change would make all the difference in the world. If only it were recognized that the State exists for the benefit of the people (and not the people for the State) most of the many inadequacies now so evident in so-called communist societies would soon vanish. In short, establishment of a genuine democracy is very likely a dire necessity before objections to current alleged communist governments can be overcome.
While the principle of democracy must be regarded as crucial to the functioning of a just society, it cannot be said that a genuine democracy is likely or even possible under a capitalist economy! It may be true that the privilege to vote and to elect representatives constitutes a definite measure of democracy, but this is hardly a guarantee of an acceptable social order, nor evidence of the existence of a real democracy. On the contrary, while this principle is still in its infancy, the results so far can only be described as less than encouraging.
The privilege of casting one’s vote is a personal right to be cherished, posing a moral responsibility to the individual. Since the vote of an unintelligent and indifferent citizen carries just as much weight as that of one who is more enlightened, it is imperative to refrain from voting blindly. It is surely more prudent to limit the right to vote to those capable of passing a stiff test designed to weed out the incompetent and the uninformed. Ability to discern principles is of the utmost importance in any election. Most assuredly, there is little merit in basing intelligence solely upon some arbitrary age. The privilege of voting is a right that should be earned!
The reason why capitalism is so unfavorable to the existence of a sound democracy is due, in large measure, to the serious inequality of wealth which it fosters. Inasmuch as an individual’s perspective owes much to the influence of environment, it is to be expected that such media as newspapers, books, magazines, radio and television will constitute a most important source of persuasion. But whose views do these influential organs reflect? Almost without exception they express the personal views and aspirations of their owners — in essence, the views of wealthy people! If it should suit their purpose they are able to tactfully withhold or even color news items that would tend to cast an unfavorable light upon their ambitions. On the other hand, they are able to magnify, often out of all proportion, certain trivial occurrences that happen to coincide with their policies. In short, by controlling the main avenues of information it is frequently possible to restrain those passions it desires to suppress, and to incite those passions that are likely to prove advantageous. (Ironically, before the advent of mass media, and the necessity of purchasing much flattering publicity, the democratic process stood a better chance of working.)
As regrettable as this one-sided control of information may be, the trouble extends to the actual choice of political representatives. Here money plays a predominant role. It so happens that one lacking financially has little hope of success without receiving favorable publicity and monetary assistance from some exterior source. As a result, it is not in the least surprising that most of our politicians owe allegiance to business interests, whose selfish motives have led them to provide such contributions. But nobody is likely to give something for nothing! It is, in fact, no accident that genuine democracy is little more than an illusion and that, on the whole, our governments have failed to properly reflect the wishes of its citizens. It may well be considered a disaster of our times that so many freedom-loving nations hold periodic elections in which the public has little or no opportunity to elect a truly acceptable government — simply because there is not a sufficient number of worthy candidates from which to choose!
Nevertheless, in spite of the many obvious economic, social and political defects of capitalism, the public itself is not without a definite measure of responsibility. As long as a nation has the freedom to vote, regardless of any unfair influence imposed by wealth, it is within its power to overcome these obstacles and to create a society of its own choosing. Social improvements can be obtained under such circumstances, but only at the cost of much effort and through the acquisition of an enriched perspective on the part of the masses. If we truly desire a better social order we must not be afraid to work and sacrifice to achieve this noble end.
Almost since its inception, it has been apparent that the United Nations, as currently formulated, is far too weak and ineffectual to guarantee world peace. In many respects a carbon copy of its failed predecessor, the League of Nations, this body has proven to be no more successful in settling international disputes and in achieving world disarmament. A multitude of wars and atrocities have been allowed to ravage the globe without interference, in open defiance of its very presence. The momentous question now confronting us is whether there is any way it may be revitalized and given the power to deal with aggression and injustice.
By far the most pressing issue today involves the abolition of nuclear weaponry and germ/chemical warfare — twin evils which threaten the annihilation of Earth society. It is a highly alarming state of affairs to realize that a multitude of minor nations will soon possess one or more of these fearful capabilities. What makes the situation even more ominous is that history has repeatedly demonstrated man’s willingness to resort to acts of sheer terrorism. It requires no great taxing of the imagination to envisage the wholesale carnage once some mentally unbalanced leader begins pushing buttons. (One need only wonder what Adolf Hitler would have done had he possessed today’s weaponry.) A World Government and World Army, comprised of carefully screened volunteers from many nations, and pledged to fight aggression and injustice wherever it is seen to exist, is necessary for world prosperity.
Contrary to popular opinion, the natural resources of our planet rightfully belong to everyone — not to those whom some arbitrary national boundary would seem to bestow a privilege. If ever we are to rise above the mentality of ignorant tribesmen, it is essential to realize that no nation has a legitimate and exclusive claim to that which has been supplied by nature. The selfishness of a few to the detriment of many is an attitude that can no longer be condoned by a civilized humanity. It is just as much an outrage for a group of oil-rich sheiks to resort to acts of extortion, as it is for other nations to refuse food to a starving populace. Similarly, the timber, fisheries and mineral resources of the world are a heritage given to all.
The task of economic reform is one that invariably raises the issue of public ownership. To what extent is it desirable to replace private enterprise with a system of democratic State ownership or control? In spite of the numerous injustices which capitalism has spawned, it must not be thought that the system is entirely without merit. On the contrary, inequalities arose chiefly because there has been no effective limitation upon the wealth and power accumulated by a small minority of citizens; and as long as a more just distribution of wealth can be assured there are many features that are beneficial at our current stage of social evolution. The right of one to own a home, farm or business establishment of reasonable size should be recognized by the State. Nevertheless, it is also clear that a considerable amount of public ownership is essential if present objections are to be overcome and resources utilized for the benefit of all. In particular, there must be a limitation placed upon personal wealth, as it is this great inequality that leads to so many undesirable consequences. But what specific business enterprises should be owned by the public, and what actual restrictions should be placed upon private wealth and business corporations?
Limitation of wealth may be achieved by placing a ceiling upon the total assets that may be held by an individual. The exact figure of this proposed limitation is something which must naturally be based upon circumstances and the wealth of a nation. However, a tentative value of perhaps thirty times the yearly income of the average worker is not entirely out of line with the need to encourage private initiative on the one hand, and the necessity to achieve a more acceptable distribution of wealth on the other. Future injustice could be negated through imposition of higher succession duties, and by an income tax so designed as to confiscate entirely all income above a certain sum — possibly, an amount equal to no more than ten times the average annual wage.
By far the most important business demanding public ownership is that of finance — a medium which totally regulates the very economy of a nation! It is incredible that anything so vital should be entrusted to private ownership. Future generations will surely be amazed by policies which we presently condone. Not only does private control of finance often result in a poor channeling of funds to worthy projects, but the practice of paying interest for the use of money constitutes an unnecessary hardship for many, and serves to lower the standard of living for all but the wealthy. The idea of charging interest for borrowed money has little justification, either ethically or from the point of view of economic stability. Morally speaking, any money obtained by way of interest cannot be considered earned, as no genuine contribution to society will have been made. On economic grounds there is certainly no conflict with the requirement that the money supply must always balance available consumer’s goods, since all loans must be repaid. The concept of demanding interest in return for the use of money constitutes one of the main principles upon which the capitalist system is based. In effect, it is actually little more than a device to place an unnecessary burden upon the shoulders of the public. The only ones who really stand to gain are those who possess wealth!
A planned economy, devoid of any unfair distribution of wealth, wasteful duplication, unemployment, and senseless military expenditures, would at last permit genuine peace and a great increase in world living standards. But nothing of real value comes easy. If the imperfect environment of our era is ever to be transformed into a more just and harmonious society of the future, it is bound to come only as a result of much effort on our behalf.
It is essential that we rise above the tribal level and think in terms of acquiring a Cosmic Perspective. Only then will it be possible to realize the glorious destiny which awaits mankind.
H.W.G.A.