AW! Epistles
From Patrick R Wilkins
Abstract
Saturday, April 21, 2001
Did the Roman Christians deify Jesus in order to compete with the mystery religions, or is there a genuine connection that can be made between Jesus and the Cult of Osiris for example?
While I am sceptical about the motives of the gentile bishops, I think it less likely that any deliberate copying went on than that converts accustomed to the mysteries brought into early Christianity their own habits and mind-sets that the opportunistic bishops were ready to accommodate to get a congregation. It is not unusual, Christians have always done it and still do. The same is likely to be true of any sect growing in an alien field. It is inevitable that it will be influenced by its neighbours, so perhaps the Essenes were influenced by Egyptian myth.
Is there any historical validity to the idea that Jesus lived in Egypt, or at least was there for an initiation training?
Some of the Gnostic books, I believe, claim it, and doubtless senior Essenes would have visited Egypt. That might be what Matthew was hinting at in the flight to Egypt, or perhaps he was explaining that Jesus WAS Egyptian! There was a rebel called the Egyptian, mentioned in Acts, who might have been Jesus himself. Paul was mistaken for him. It is all circumstantial, though intriguing.
Regarding the passage in John that refers to Jesus’ age (not yet 50), does this mean that he was really this age, or that he really was about 30 - 35 and the Jews were looking for someone else?
It is of course sarcasm because of the reference to Abraham, but I take it to be evidence that Jesus was the Nasi because 50 was the maximum age allowed for a Nasi of the Essenes. So they are saying something like, This man claims to know Abraham but he cannot be older than 50 because he is the Essene leader and we all know they are kicked upstairs at 50.
Can the Persian monotheism, and Persian-Essene commitment to Jehovah (YHWH) be traced back to the ancient Sumerian religion and worship of YHWH, and what would the implications be if the Sumerians really were the oldest civilization known (which may have included the patriarch Enoch)?
You’ll have to tell me more about this. I have not heard that the Sumerians DID worship Yehouah. Please advise me because it sounds important.
Is there a connection between Daniel and Zoroaster?
Well, the author of Daniel pretended to be writing in chancellery Persian Aramaic to make it seem to be as old as Ezra, but other than that Judaism was an imposed form of Mazdaism, I cannot see any.
Was John the Baptist more than 6 months older than Jesus?
I suggest he was. At least ten years older and perhaps more still. He seems to have preceded Jesus as the Nasi and presumably was made titular head only, when Jesus succeeded him. Whether he baptised Jesus as his successor because he was at the retirement age of 50, or whether a successor is baptised anyway to ensure a succession, we do not know, but when the baptist was jailed, Jesus had to take over, whatever age John was. I suggest John himself succeeded the Zacharias of Luke’s gospel.
If Jesus is not God, can his story still fit the Ebionite belief that he will return in the clouds of heaven?
Sure. They believed that the leader of the hosts of heaven was the archangel Michael. Jesus took Michael’s role because Michael was seen as the heavenly double (fravashi) of Jesus (the Messiah) on earth. Essenes or Ebionites expected Michael but Michael was the heavenly Jesus, so it is easy to see why Christians came to believe that it was Jesus returning and forgot about Michael.
I am aware of the connections between Paul and the Herodian family, and also have read the claim that he might have been lying about being a Pharisee. Is there room for him to authentically be a Pharisee while still maintaining some Sadducean-Herodian connections?
It will depend on what ’some’ means. Doubtless it was possible for a Sadducee to become a Pharisee, but it would not have been possible for him to have continued behaving as one. So, I do not think the Pharisees would have accepted one of their own acting as a temple guard, as Paul evidently did in seeking out the dissenting Nazarenes. The Ebionites did not think Paul was even a Jew. It seems to me that he was probably a proselyte whose parents were Godfearers in Tarsus, if that is where he was brought up. Modern Rabbinic critics cannot see the depth of knowledge in Paul that a disciple of Gamaliel would have had, though no one denies that he had adopted Jewish ways of thinking. In my online commentaries on Acts, I take Maccoby’s view that Paul was a Roman agent provocateur. That is why he was friendly with high ranking officals and was so commanding when on his way back to Rome. He was the senior ranking person on the ship, though supposedly a prisoner. This hypothesis explains a lot in Acts. A mysterious Saul turns up as some sort of mediator in the Jewish War, according to Josephus. Was this the same man? Hope this helps, but most of it is onsite!
Could you please re-explain the two Judah tribes (one northern and one southern). I read your work twice and an unsure about what you are saying. Are there two separate lineages?
Not a tribe but an Aramaean country called Yahudi with its capital at Samal. It is important because Assyrian references might be to this Yahud and not the one in the south, which might therefore not have started until Yahudim from Yahudi were moved south by the Assyrians in about 720 BC.
I was not aware that Michael the Prince of Israel was the representation of the Messiah in heaven. Regarding the second coming of the Messiah in the clouds, will this be Michael or Jesus, or both? Will this be a natural event?
This was the Essene belief. They expected Michael to come with the heavenly hosts to defeat evil in the world. The Messiah was to lead off the battle on earth. My contention is that when the followers of Jesus thought Jesus had arisen as the first fruits of the dead—the first person to be resurrected uncorrupted—they thought heaven was beginning to join with earth and the heavenly hosts would come to finish the job. So, the original expectation was that Michael would lead the hosts, but this was transferred to Jesus "returning" because Jesus became Michael in heaven.
In response to your answer as to whether or not Jesus was Egyptian or at least had an Egyptian connection, you stated that the Messiah-figure that Paul was confused with could have been Jesus himself. What evidence exists that Jesus did not ascend into heaven and thus spent a full life here on earth after his crucifixion and resurrection?
The Roman Tribune thought Paul was the Egyptian. I am not suggesting that Paul was Jesus but simply that the Roman soldier had reason to think Paul was associated with bandits led by the Egyptian because the bandits led by the Egyptian were Nazarenes—something Paul admitted—and the Egyptian was Jesus, whence the reason for inventing fanciful tales to explain his nickname. Ascending into heaven expresses the early belief that Jesus would lead the angelic hosts of heaven, so he had to go there first. He did not return, so there is no need to believe he went.
What other information is in your book The Mystery of Barabbas that is not on the Internet? I’m almost sold on it. I’m curious though to know which groups believe this and am hoping to obtain more solid facts on this.
It is ALL on the internet and more. My Christianity Revealed pages, say far more than The Hidden Jesus does, so if your concern is not to spend money, there is no need to buy it. It is often more convenient to have a book rather than having to log on, it is easier to annotate and can be read or annotated in planes, buses and trains, not to mention unmentionable places! It also helps us to buy a crust.
When dealing with the Barabbas-Jesus connection, how does this relate to the other two similar names, Barnabbas and Barsabbas. Both, from what I understand, are connected to Jesus’ brothers. Joseph, the third brother of Jesus, is called Barnabbas in the Book of Acts, and later this same title is applied to Judas. What is the significance?
Well, it is dealt with in Christianity Revealed. They are accidental or more likely deliberate mistakes to obfuscate the fact that Barabbas was a title (just as Catholic priests are called Father) of senior Essenes.
Is there any connection between Joseph, Jesus’ step-father, and Judas the Galilean or Theudas (two rebels in Acts) mentioned by Gamelil?
I take Jospeh to be a sop to the Samaritans by the first Christians, Jesus having been a waif taken in by the Essenes, as they did. Jesus was a Galilean not because he came from Galilee necessarily but because he was a "son" (follower) of Judas the Galilean, founder of the Zealot gang called "the Galileans"—militant Essenes. Theudas might have been the same or the leader of some other sectarian group. There were many at the time.
FYI: As far as the ancient Sumerian worship of YHWH, I really have very little information.
I would be glad to have the references if you can find them.
I’m now working on church history, particularly the Eastern churches as this is the least amount of information I have.
The Nestorian Church must be extremely interesting. The eastern orthodox churches of Greece and Russia must be well documented but the earlier heresies have been neglected, I feel. They might show up the direction taken by the churches of the west as being wrong, and might even show that many modern Christians are heretics by the criteris used originally. If so, are they Christian anyway?
One true God
Every sect calls their own god "The One True God." It is certain proof that they are all mistaken.
Anyway, I do believe in God.
There is nothing wroing with that as long as it is not a supernatural entity interfering in the lives of humans.
Jesus is the Messiah, or at least will be re-established in the future by God.
Why is God so lacking in urgency, if he wants to save souls? There will be no people left if he leaves it another 2000 years.
They warn against reinterpreting the Bible, but are unwilling to listen to even basic conclusions such as BarAbbas for the name of Jesus. (Even when I document it for them!) All that to say, I am very excited about what ’scholastic Christianity’ has to offer, but find myself somewhat discouraged as very few people wish to follow the same journey.
Traditional German Protestantism is the most scholastic and analytical. You sound as though you are in a Fundamantalist crowd. Fundamentalists are idolaters who venerate the bible not God. Even the Pharisees, to judge by their successors, the Rabbis, refused to accept that the Torah was perfect because perfection only exists in heaven and, needless to say, we are not! Either way, Patriarchal religions have had their day or humanity has. Veneration of the Goddess Nature is the only way we can save the world, our children and our race.
What is the significance of the separation of the 69th and 70th ’weeks’ in the Book of Daniel? From what you can see, Is this an indication of the ’church’ age?
Whatever significance there might have been in it is probably lost now. It all plays on the magic number seven, it being seven years short of the 7 times seventy and being twice a time, two times and half a time, assumed to be three and a half years. This will have been meaningful to the descendents of the Persian priests who started Judaism, but it is probably now lost.
In your last e-mail, you spoke of the deity of nature and the lack of an actual substance of/for God. Could you elaborate on the theology behind this? Do you personally believe in the gods that Christians call angels?
Before God was invented as a supernatural king of heaven, humanity was content to revere Nature as a Goddess. Now everyone is concerned about a life after death but totally uninterested in life on earth, as long as they can make it as comfortable as possible, with no thought for the earth, Nature, other living people or their own children. This is the gravest mistake we shall ever make, and the last. We return to the real life deity instead of the figmentary one or we’ve had it! Take a look at our Adelphiasophism site.
I know this is probably ’beating a dead horse’, but I ask for patience as I seek the clearest answer. Concerning the Essene belief of Michael and his coming in the clouds of heaven, are he and the messiah one and the same, or separate individuals with the messiah taking precedence over the archangel?
My guess is that the angel was originally the heavenly double of the messiah. The messiah was no more than a specially chosen man, not supernatural in any way but specially gifted by God, while the angel was the leader of the hosts of heaven and the special guardian of Israel. Michael would come at the end to defeat the hosts of Evil and then the kingdom of God could begin, but his earthly equal would meanwhile have been leading the battle against evil amongst men. When the battle was won and earth became part of heaven, the whole would become a pure and uncorruptible world and the earthly leader would be seen then as the same as the heavenly one, but reflected on earth.
The followers of Jesus came to believe, as Jesus seemed to also, that he was the earthly messiah who would see in God’s kingdom, but he was killed instead. The Nazarenes were distraught, but then they heard that the body had disappeared, probably collected by other Essene leaders to be respectfully buried. The followers immediately thought that Jesus must have been resurrected into the kingdom of God, which must therefore have actually started to open its gates. They assumed that they must have had the words of Jesus wrong and that the forty years of conflict did not culminate with his death, but started with it, so another forty years of conflict between good and evil would be necessary before the archangel would arrive with his hosts of angels to clean up the world.
At this point they will have deduced that since the earthly Jesus had joined his father in heaven where his heavenly double already was, what they would see on the arrival of Michael and the hosts would actually be Jesus himself. So they started looking forward to his return. The word parousia means an epiphany of God, so it was the appearance of God on earth—what they expected when the kingdom came. But now this became associated with the coming of Jesus too, and since Michael was the angel of the Lord, the way God appeared to humans without incinerating them, he was also Jesus, and Lo! Jesus is God!
Have you had a chance to read the Laurence Gardner material? There is a third book out now called the Realm of the Lords. I’m curious to know what you thought of it?
I’ve heard the name but know nothing about him or his books.
Again, your work is just incredible and full of insights. It’s for this reason that I thought of asking you about the Gnostic form of Christianity. I’m curious to know what you thought of the message of salvation given by the Gnostics. In particular, I’m interested to learn what that message was and if their concept of God was anything more than mathematical perfection that underlies the precision of the universe.
I have a couple of pages on the gnostics that might answer your questions in the AW! Christianity folder:
If these do not give you enough there is a link there to the gnostic webring, where you should be able to get all the gnosis you need.
