CONSTANTINIAN CREDAL CHRISTOLOGY DEMYSTIFIED
In my last post I dealt with the heresy that you can’t amount to what Jesus did, which blatantly contradicts some of Jesus’s most frequent maxims. In this post I’m going to survey how we got our view of Jesus in a (for me) down-to-earth historical survey.
Most Christians now insist that Jesus was human and divine, a God-man, the God-man, the Son and Heir of God the Father–even though in the gospels and epistles there’s ample empowerment for the hearer to follow Jesus and become himself truly Another Jesus (summarized in my last blog post). Now in all of this both humanity and divinity are supposedly understood in a Hebreocentric (as opposed to Hellenized) sense.
But I can remember reading somewhere that most modern Jews (90% are technically Ashkenazim not Hebrews) have a prodigious index of schizophrenia. What if we asked ourselves why the Graeco-Roman world really took to this arch-Jewish figure whom they call Jesus and Christ? Well, for starters, Judaism is a unique holdover from Egyptian ways of life. That is why I’m going to call Egypt the X-factor of Europa.
The Pharaohate of Kemet fell in 30 BC(E) when a woman was Pharaoh, Cleopatra VII  Philopator . Graeco-Roman civilization has often revered its Egyptian roots and by association Temple Judaism, as we see in Freemasonry.  Alexander the Great wasn’t too great to seek his destined arch-divinity in spiritually fertile Egypt .
And thus, Egypt is the root of the Graeco-Roman world, remembered for its stable society, a father of nations, though the stronger sons tended to differ more widely than the weaker sons. But even the strong sons turn instinctively back to Egypt in times of empire and cultural decline.
The Jews uniquely, due to their frequent “exiles” (and/or perhaps causing them) kept clinging to Egyptian ways more tightly in many ways than most did, with the latter availing themselves of prosperity (and a more verdant natural environment) to forge their own identity.
The phenomenon of God-men or Übermenschen, therefore, was the Jews’ frequent visitor, a phenomenon which again we now stigmatize as schizophrenic, which is why (unlike say Korea) we don’t get too many Übermensch types rising to a level of popularity where they could threaten the power structure’s monopoly on the workman’s mind again.
And on those rare occasions when the “Jesus neurology” does crop up, our bureaucratic religious “fathers” can simply play their Christological exceptionalism card and tell the young rebel confidently that the Savior already came and what they’ve got going on must certainly be pride, demons or indeed schizophrenia–depending on the subculture and the times.
As a matter of fact, the Greek term barbarian seems to have begun as an antisemitic slur, with bar (“of”) being among the most frequently occurring words in the Hebrew tongue. The creed on which Christendom settled was that God is one (as in Judaism), but also three (as in Hinduism), but Jesus Christ is definitely just one, full stop.
This helped me understand how Europa could revere Jesus (and his early Jewish entourage) while fearing and hating all the rest of the Jews, and this is why Jews don’t need Jesus despite Europa’s insistence: the Jewish people are lousy with Jesus types–they get at least one messiah every century! Our kings went to great lengths to keep us apart from that people set apart, since of course the latter’s culture (with its Kabbalah center) could handily dilute and dispel those doctrines that underpin ultimately the authority of those other foreigners of the house of Caesar, the crowned heads of Europa. Of course today, in lieu of the Divine Right of Kings, as I’ve argued elsewhere, we have the Chosen People doctrine designed to silence the common objector.
But whatever else may change, the thief will never let the gentleman alone, and the occultist will never let the religionist sleep soundly either.
 Speaking of fatal 7ths, Ferdinand VII was King of Spain during the French purchase of “New Spain” [Mexico-ish] and the Mexican War of Independence.
 Meaning that she was devoted to her father.
 Note: Saint Peter’s Basilica features what are known as Solomonic columns.
 “Alexander advanced on Egypt in later 332 BC, where he was regarded as a liberator. He was pronounced son of the deity Amun at the Oracle of Siwa Oasis in the Libyan desert. Henceforth, Alexander often referred to Zeus-Ammon as his true father, and after his death, currency depicted him adorned with the horns of a ram as a symbol of his divinity” (Wikipedia citing Ring, Bosworth et al., and Dahmen).
A POLITICAL INTERPRETATION OF CHURCH THEOLOGY, 33 A.D. TO PRESENT
“Leaders don’t create followers. Leaders create other leaders” (Tom Peters, co-author of In Search of Excellence).
Atypically serious leader that he was, Jesus is notorious for compulsively stressing that his disciples were in the running to be as super-powerful and as violently hated as he the master was. Yet from Paul on, the prevailing community of “Christians”, a growing Greek majority, is one that adopts an earlier and more comfortable religious framework and adapts Jesus, fashioning unto themselves a more sapiential, White and far less prophetic rendering of that disturbing radical.
A striking example of this reheathenization process is when “Saint” Peter, known to have denied and grossly misapprehended Jesus, refuses to undergo an identical manner of death to his master, indeed choosing the opposite. Gospel observance has only deteriorated from there, following the sad example of the first disciples–particularly, I note, those whom the canonical Gospels seem to be at pains to heap praise upon.
All of this establishes a pattern and a spirit of contravention of Jesus’s oft-repeated command that no one should account himself as linked to him unless his clear goal be the privation of all society’s esteem and comforts–and in Peter’s defense it seems that he may have had this in mind.
As Jesus said, you must first stop calling your priest father and alter Christus: either you are one yourself or you are no disciple–ergo, no Christian! The only “apostolic succession” Jesus lends any credibility to is one of flagrant disregard for the established clerical order. Anarchist that he is, the prophet follows his heart which prizes the spirit of the law and the inner hierarchy, because the heartless flesh tends to value money, power and ceremony, which are so many illusions that fuel delusion.
But as I survey the history, it looks to me as if they got him back by parceling his life over a liturgical calendar, thus rendering it unrecognizable, unintelligible and especially uninspiring. And then they stress the role of Mary as if to say: “You just submit–pray, pay and obey–and leave the Jesus stuff to us.” (The dazzling style of Louis de Montfort comes to mind.)
Now after reading this, just you go ahead and do as you will, but don’t you dare ask me why the same people who live by such blatant hypocrisy as this are fondling your sons behind that sacristy door, though no more than every other pillar of society you so vainly trust. The conscious being that you are knows full well there is zero value to being so cozy in this profoundly sick Babylon culture, that you ought to stop “worshiping” Jesus and become like Jesus, that your only salvation is transformation–and if you’re transformed, you’ll damn-sure transform the world around you.
Those who take all statutes to be just, are as mindless as those who say all laws are criminal.
Both the conformist and the contrarian are bad actors because they are tethered to a random or sordid list of commands which naturally mixes justice (for credibility) with meddling (for profit), like how today’s coins are plated with shiny metals but are trash on the inside.
(What is more, most regimes are selective about which laws/statutes they enforce or criminalize – and on which peons [such as ethnic minorities].)
This produces the illusion of marijuana (before 1933 it was alcohol) as a “gateway drug” to other (Pinkerton/OSS/CIA) “controlled substances”: once you violate an arbitrary or race-baiting prohibition, the first temptation to which the institutionalized/infantilized mind falls prey is to assume that all rules are “made to be broken”. This inhuman mass mind game assures greedy industrialists a steady supply of simple-minded inmates to work literally for peanuts.
This obviously delusional and destructive mindset, that is the criminal mindset, was the cornerstone of the Judeo-Christian sect the Sabbateans or Frankists, forerunners to Rasputin and Crowley, coordinated destroyers of the last autonomous nations of the Western world. Now many who would not serve the national monarch have ended by slaving for the central banks.
But some rules you cannot break – rather they break you – because they’re written in stone and in the heart. The key to success, ultimately, is having your own inner system with its own hierarchy, and the key to developing an inner life is SILENCE.
ON HOW THE WALL DEFEATS THE WHOLE IDEA OF “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”
Allow me to address this “e-wall-ution” (er, no it’s not!) that we’ve been seeing lately.
What I think many brainwashed–er, “patriotic”–“Americans” don’t understand (can’t understand?) about Trump’s “wall talk” is that, as absurd as it is on so many obvious levels, it also promises to sap any vestigial meaning out of the expression “United States of America”, since what that appellation communicates is a long hoped-for confederation of sovereign nation-states comprehending the entire Western Hemisphere, though obviously few today consider it from that cool-headed a perspective, especially since the United States are effectively one State (since the deified Lincoln) and a bank-owned Corporation (since Wilson).
(Let’s take a moment to wonder, had Lincoln lived to retire, what regrets he too would have expressed as Wilson did?)
This of course bolsters the perception that Trump’s presidency is really the end of the US’s international credibility with any nation-state other than Israel, which as we all know is an apartheid police state with no fewer than sixty-five separate anti-Arab laws currently in force.
‘The great unmentionable evil at the center of our culture is monotheism’
I recently let the thought sink in that my father and I had not really bonded, that neither had he and his father, and that this had produced unilateral, dogmatic thinking. A cosmic miracle followed from this personal miracle. As I was reflecting the other day on the Gnostic arch-mythos, to my amazement I started inferring all these family values, such as the truth that in true love there is no need to impress or that a boy really does need his father to spare him abysmal confusion. At that moment it dawned on me that Western theology is woefully inauthentic, and I do mean all of it, and I do mean fundamentally. It is the terminology of bad fathering. GIGO! If it is true that Sophia–which is Divine Wisdom–has inhabited the most beautiful feminine forms through the ages in an effort to correct her mistake, then it is clear that the end-goal of every life, as different as they may be, is perfect centering peace, and this is the inseparable sister of self-affirmation.
‘The wise should surrender speech in mind, mind in the knowing self, the knowing self in the Spirit of the universe, and the Spirit of the universe in the Spirit of peace’
If, as Gore Vidal wrote, ‘the great unmentionable evil at the center of our culture is monotheism’ (or its creator dualism), then certainly the esoteric perspective on religion (and latent within it) is the answer to our issues, particularly our father issues, which is of course the father of our issues. Is it any wonder that Freud, like the Gnostic reformers of old, drew so heavily from classical mythology, demonology and personal eschatology? Contrary to what we’re told by our ‘leaders’ (who remember were abused if not tortured as children), mythology is psychology, and fairy tales are (as Einstein pointed out) the key ingredient in intelligence. Do not settle for the downer of outer-focused religionism, which is simply a corruption of spirituality, a treasure we can regain with the aid of the Mother of the Demiurge* to whom he must answer!
Note the resemblance of the vesica piscis (Latin for ‘fish bladder’) not only to the mandorla (Italian for ‘almond’, the classic sacred feminine form) but also to the Paleo-Christian ichthus (Greek for ‘fish’). Jesus, the son of her whose name means ‘Rebel’, chose fishermen first and foremost.
Every religion forbids to the layman that which gives the clergyman his power. You cannot likely achieve liberation or fulfillment without at some point seeing through this ruse.
Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, claimed that a man’s prime drive is to murder his father and marry his mother. Yoda, the patron saint of untrain.org, told Luke he had to confront Vader to become a Jedi. Paul wrote: “Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin” (Romans 6:6). Nietzsche wrote: “The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his eyes. ‘Whither is God?’ he cried; ‘I will tell you. We have killed him–you and I'”. This indubitably was in response to (imperial) Christianity (Protestant and Catholic equally perhaps)’s infantilizing impetus.
Like Freud, the Gnostics were immersed in myth, and certainly their aim is defeating the creator’s egoism and exalting Sophia, but it’s also discovering the feminine within, which is what the mature man is secure enough to do, sometimes represented by pink shirts.
* From The Golden Compass (note: demiurge means ‘common worker’ or simply ‘laborer’):