Not wishing to ‘throw the baby out with the bathwater’, this author readily recognizes, admits and appreciates the fact that the Holy Gospels does contain a ‘germ’ of truth, -despite its hyperbole, contradictions, incongruence and, of course, its omissions. How might we distinguish fact from fiction or, more importantly, ‘read’ what is not written? ‘There is a way O’ soul… -you may find the ‘truth’ of God within (your own God-given heart and mind).
Although this unique and compelling account is inspired and derived from that which is otherwise missing or omitted from both the Holy Gospels and Antiquities of the Jews and Wars of the Jews, this work is not about “Jesus Christ” of Saul or Paul’s epiphany (the likes of whom ‘literarily appeared’ sometime later and, which shall be discussed in due course).
Inexorably intertwined, it is strangely curious that only in the Holy Gospels is the “notorious [Jesus] Barabbas” mentioned and, that only in the non-ecclesiastical ‘historical’ works of Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews -Bk 18:3) is “Jesus Christ” mentioned. Indeed, if it were not for the Holy Gospel’s incongruent account concerning the former, -we would not know that he even existed at all (despite his “notoriety”). And, although Josephus’ reference concerning the latter (regarded by most ‘biblical scholars’ as an ‘interpolation’, -written by an unknown ‘copyist’ some years later), -nevertheless, it was proffered by Eusebius in 325 A. D. as evidence or proof to dispel the ‘Antinomian’ versus ‘Trinitarian’ controversy over the physical and spiritual nature of the Holy Gospel’s protagonist. (This) one wonders why it took more than two centuries for this ‘evidence’ to come to light in 325 A. D.
The Holy Gospels makes it ‘appear’ that Pontius Pilate had two Jesus’ to deal with on that same day. Does this explain the disparity of ten years between Matthew’s ‘Testimony’ wherein “Jesus Christ… was born in the days of Herod the king” (prior to 4 B. C.) versus Luke’s account: “Jesus Christ… was born in the days of the census” (6 A. D.)? Also, was “Jesus Christ a Nazarene” (Mt. 2:23) or “…a Galilean” (Lk. 23:5-7)? (Actually, there never was a town called “Nazareth”, -until the ‘Church’ created one sometime in the fourth century. The correct term is “Nazarite” -a well-known ancient ascetic Jewish sect, -not one who hails from a town named “Nazareth”. However, I digress.) Herein there is only one “Jesus” [Barabbas] (the actual ‘Son of God’), -it matters not one jot ‘when’ He was born, likewise ‘where’ He was born, -only that He was born at all (thank God). He was born -like all men, for the sole purpose of providing the way and means to ‘salvation’ in the evolution of man at that time. Otherwise, we might (mis) construe the apparent observation that our growth or potential has come to an end and that there is no “God”.
But, you may ask, where was God or the ‘Son of God’ in the above scenario?
Actually, that is a ‘strange’ but an important question to ever be asked, -not only as it concerns ‘those days’ but for anytime. Where is God or the ‘Son of God’ now? Where has God or the ‘Son of God’ ever been?
Did He appear to humanity, in the flesh, as ‘Christians’ believe, only one time (between before 4 B. C. -according to Matthew or, 6 A. D. -according to Luke, and died for our sins in 33 A. D. -if ‘he’ appeared at all? And, that ‘He’ will come into the world again… sometime in the unknown future?
Let me remind you, as stated earlier, this literary work is not about “Jesus Christ” (of Saul or Paul’s epiphany and all the ‘Christian literature’ that came into being after the Jewish messiah was crucified and/or after 40-45 A. D.).
Strange as it might seem, the fact is, that, the ‘Son of God’, “Jesus” by name, was not “crucified”, -so says the Holy Gospels (see Mt. 27:21; Mk. 15:15; Lk. 23:18; Jn.18:40).
Until now, we know next to nothing about Him. Instead, we have the Holy Gospels, -variously written between 40-45 A. D. and shortly after 70 A. D. Further, the Holy Gospels were written retroactively, -that is to say that, they were begun after Saul or Paul’s ‘immaculately conceived’ epiphany or apparition of the deceased ‘descendant of David’, -was resurrected, converted into Greek philosophical principals, reconstituted and renamed “[Jesus] Christ” -glossing-over and omitting the ‘insurrection’ all together and, concluded with ‘his’ supposed birth.
Briefly, ‘the elders of the (twelve) tribes of Jews or Hebrews beseeched Samuel to ‘anoint’ a king to rule over them, so that they would become a nation like other nations’. This was a great innovation to their otherwise ancient customs of the Jews and that Samuel tried his best to dissuade the ‘elders’ from implementing. They insisted and Samuel relented.
Now, we may ‘understand’ Samuel’s fear and trepidation over implementing such an innovation of moving ‘religion’ into the world of politics.
I strongly suspect that these summary conclusions, such as they are, have already been addressed and posited for studious consideration by other (unknown) authors, in their own voice and in their own day, however, such ‘first-hand or studied opinions’ were surely banned and burnt (being considered as ‘sacrilegious’, ‘blasphemy’ and ‘heresy’) by the emerging ‘Church’. I simply cannot accept the fact that I am the only man on this planet to hold these ‘alternative’ views, -as they may relate to Jesus [Barabbas] and His holy Word of God and the cunning machinations of Saul.
There has not been one day that ‘evil’ has not existed within the heart of man, likewise also that ‘good’ has reigned; I, for one (of an untold number) thank God (especially ‘His’ ‘Son’, for mine.
And, for ‘Atheists’:
It is perfectly clear that our ancient ‘past’ is amiss, -made evident by either our skewed assumptions, acquiescence and personal neglect, -deeming ‘history’ as being ‘irrelevant’ and ‘unimportant’ or, has been avoided, obfuscated and/or ‘incomplete’ by secular historians and/or, commandeered and willfully hidden from us by the ‘Church’. It is not without its significance that ‘historians’ failed (and continues to fail) to even mention “[Jesus] Barabbas” and, that the Holy Gospels fails to elucidate upon the true import and impact of the ‘insurrection’ has upon its own creation, -thus, misleading us into false conclusions in the process. Anathema attempts to fill that void, -made evident by both ‘secular historians’ and the ‘Church’, -with logic, reason and love. Further, in that the ‘Church’ failed to provide answers to questions that they themselves cause to be raised or even allow to make available to the serious student certain ‘historical’ records (that get in the way of the Holy Gospels intended agenda (giving us the ‘good news’, -instead of the simple truth).
It seems impossible to “remember” what is not known by the rest of us, -who are in ‘the dark’ so to speak. Nevertheless, the footprints of history leave indelible ‘clues’ to the critical and discerning eye, Historicity, chronology, logic, make clear even what is not ‘written’ (not to mention the yearning of a sincere loving heart). In our own ‘perpetual infancy’, we grow older in spite of ourselves. Anathema is not for the childish or illiterate, revealing that which the Holy Gospels willfully obfuscated and, secular history has avoided lo these many centuries, -the likes of which is crucial to our present day understanding (and/or the lack thereof), concerning the science of ‘spirituality’ and/or ‘politics’, -especially, ‘salvation’ and the means to attain fulfillment.
It is without question that the otherwise enigmatic ‘insurrection’ that gave rise to the destruction of the Jewish nation and, because of that, paved the way for the creation of ‘Christianity’ and, because of the intellectual grip that the ‘Church’ has exercised heretofore, -we are ‘where’ we ‘are’ today,-no further along than our ancestors. At long last, now is our time to face both the unpleasant ‘facts’ concerning the otherwise ‘unknown history’ and the truth concerning the actual identities and roles of our protagonists and, because of learning the ‘truth’ concerning them, we might not be in our present state of mind and affairs.
It is understandable that the holy ‘Church’ fathers wrote as they did, -sheltering us from ‘unpleasantries’, -omitting or avoiding crucially important ‘historical’ details and re-writing Jewish history in the process. But, ‘religion’ aside, it is not at all ‘appropriate’ or ‘acceptable’ that not one secular ‘historian’ has ever examined or pursued these obviously omitted matters, -the likes of which leaves the rest of us in the dark and the ‘Church’ in the role as the sole ‘arbiter’ and ‘authority’ on matters both ecclesiastical and secular. This literary work therefore, addresses and fills that ‘historical void’ with the light of reason, persistent retentiveness and love and, posits to the modern-day reader that otherwise unwritten view the Holy Gospels fails to include in its attempt to ‘instill faith’ by postulating upon ‘other’ matters in its stead. More importantly, the Holy Gospels notwithstanding, Anathema unabashedly reveals the necessarily mysterious source of the Holy Word of God (as It was contained within John the Baptist, as It was given to Him and, was given to Jesus [Barabbas] and, likewise was passed onto Banus, etc. etc. ad infinitum), -as since before the beginning of creation and, continues to enliven us even to this very day. How might we “remember the past” if we are made ignorant of it? Better that this day, be our first.
Purely for edification purposes only, it should be known herein that “Jesus” and “Christ” are not ‘one and the same man’ but rather two separate and distinct beings (if a ‘ghost’- “holy” of course, might be considered as a ‘being’). Moreover, “Jesus was not “Christ”, -there was only one “Jesus” and, He was a real ‘flesh and blood’ man, a ‘holy’ man to be sure, -and, in deed and in fact, was truly the ‘Son of God’. He was born (naturally), lived at Qumran by the Salt Sea (as it was known at that time), taught the timeless way of ‘salvation’ (as it was given to Him by John the Baptists) and, died -as all men do. “Christ”, on the other hand and among other things, was not of the flesh. ‘He’ ‘appeared’ as a ‘vision’ (of the crucified and ‘resurrected’ ‘messiah’ to Saul) later (at the earliest, approximately ten years after the Jewish ‘messiah’ was crucified), if ‘he’ appeared at all. “Christ” allegedly ‘appeared’ as an immaculately conceived epiphany of Saul or Paul and his proselytizing. He was, for all intents and purposes, the risen or ‘resurrected’ ‘messiah’ or holy ghost, -transliterated into the Greek word: “Kristos” and later Latinized into “Christ”. The ‘holiness’ of the only one Jesus [Barabbas] and His teachings was inappropriately attributed or switched (in the Holy Gospels) to that of the latter-day so-called risen “Christ” or Holy Ghost, -while, the actual insurrectionary actions of the Jewish ‘messiah’, whose true identity or name was Judas, was falsely attributed to that of “Barabbas” [Jesus]. Essentially, “Christ” is a literary invention, designed and instituted by Saul or Paul and his cohorts to obfuscate the actual (Jewish) history of both Jesus [Barabbas] and Judas [the Galilean], -the legitimate ‘descendant of David’ and Jewish ‘messiah’. The ‘messiah’ at that time, long since marginalized and rejected by the majority of the Jews, came in the unsuccessful attempt to reassert the theocracy of his forefather by overthrowing the secular governance of Herod and, replace that government with himself as its head. The historical alteration of the actual facts were successfully accomplished (obviously), by the latter-day ‘Church’, for the purposes of concealing the ‘messiah’s’ true identity, role, and purpose, as well as omitting Saul or Paul’s involvement in securing the ‘messiah’s arrest and crucifixion. It wasn’t until ten years later that Saul or Paul and his cohorts realized the ‘religious’ vacuum that the ‘insurrection’ created, thereby paving the way for his own (Paul’s) ‘religious’ beliefs to take effect and flourish ,-contrary to that of the Jewish ‘messiah’.
“Christ” and the Holy Gospels (supposedly, “good news”) unwittingly ‘put the cart before the horse’, so to speak, -not letting a ‘good story’ get in the way of the historical facts. Ostensibly, “Christ”, was cunningly utilized as a ‘transliteration’ of the otherwise properly applicable Hebrew word ‘messiah’ and, because of its catholic (universal) meaning and usefulness, it effectively re-directs our attention away from the actual ‘historical’ facts as they truly occurred before and during the infamous crucifixion of the Jewish ‘messiah’ toward what was ‘written’ ten to forty years later.
After the natural ‘death’ of the physical body of Jesus occurred, He passed His ‘authority and consent to grant initiation to sincere seekers of the God-head’ onto His disciple named Banus. (Banus did likewise before His natural ‘death’.) Jesus received His ‘authority’ from John the Baptist before His unnatural ‘death’ of beheading. Like a lighted candle (the body) lights another ‘candle’, the ‘Light’ remains the Same, -only the ‘candle’ is changed (or its usefulness is spent). There has never been a single instant whereby He (and/or His ‘Light’) has not existed in the world, -indeed, the world and all of creation cannot exist without this mysterious enlivening principle.
As ‘salvation’ was paramount to those men and women in their own day, it is no less important for us (or to some of us) in our own time. (Others, hedonists and the like, couldn’t care less.) As ‘they’ were grievously misled (or so it ‘appears’), likewise, it ‘appears’, so have we. Fortunately, as it was then and is now, salvation has ever been available to the sincerely seeking humble heart. Today, as it was then, we may know the whole truth, -save only that portion of which may be received and whereby one’s own obstinacy prevents completion.
*1. “Jesus”, originally written in the original Greek Holy Gospel according to Matthew (27:16-17), -but omitted from the Latin translation of the same text, to wit: “Whom shall I release unto you? Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ?”
*2. “Barabbas” is not a proper name per se’, rather, it is an Aramaic appellation, the meaning of which is: Bar = Son + Abba = Father (i.e. the Creator of us all or God). Despite his alleged “notoriety” (noted elsewhere) as “a robber, murderer and insurrectionist”, -wherein there is no evidence or proof offered to this ‘allegation’. Nevertheless, he is curiously not mentioned or has been ‘omitted’ (supposedly) by Josephus Flavus -eminent Pharisee General and prolific historian of that period, -circa 100 A. D.
*3. “Judas” [the Galilean]. See Acts 5:37 and Antiquities of the Jews Bk. 17:6.2; 9.4-5; 18:1.1 & 6; 2:1-3; 3:1-3; 20:5.2; Wars of the Jews Bk. 2:8.1 Author of the unnamed fourth philosophical sect among the Jews. Regarded herein as one of many a crucified ‘descendant of David’ and otherwise known as ‘the Jewish messiah’. Like “Jesus” above, there was only one Judas in question and in focus herein. Nevertheless, one might review “the death or end of Judas” –see Mt. 27:3 for more willful obfuscation over the improbability of two “Judas’”.
*4. Saul of Tarsus, of the tribe of Benjamin and namesake of the original ‘anointed’ (messiah) king of the Jews -who was eventually rejected by God and was replaced by David in his stead. Saul possessed an inherently revengeful propensity towards the tribe of Judah from whom arose David and his descendants that claimed the theocratic throne over the Jews, -that was supposedly given to them by God to rule over the Jews forever. He became the ‘Apostle Paul’ after his epiphany of the crucified ‘descendant of David who claimed to be the messiah’ and preached the Holy Gospels (good news) of the historically altered combination of “Jesus [Barabbas]” together with that of “Judas the Galilean”, -resurrected, converted into Greek philosophical principals and renamed “Jesus Christ” thereafter. (No Jew, during the time of the ‘crucifixion of the messiah’, ever knew or even heard of Jesus “Christ”.)