Reflections on What Easter Really Meant To Me

Currently employed full time, I have few hours to spare on writing projects such as this one. Fortunately corporate Australia permits an extra day’s forced holiday over Eostre, so I have been able devote time to penning something on the tafaska cause; a cause, I might add, swamped by ambiguous sentiment. Easter, as with the other Christian-Pagan festival called Christmas, is a celebration of harvest (dedicated from the Goddess Eostre). It represents the death of the season, marked by grieving tears (who said grieving could not be happy?) of the Songkran, and the other welcomes a new birth that ushers in the burning summer sun. Infancy stages are marked and drawn out, so it naturally takes a devil of a long time for the sun (sol) to emerge in full bloom. Conversely, when the cold snap sets in one day out of the blue, it will refuse to shake for several months. Occasionally a seasonal death (metaphor) will linger, but when the cold’s in, it is there to stay.

Embroiled in the Easter message (which is an encapsulation of season changes, differing depending on locations) are numerous metaphors. Perhaps most significant is the death of Tiamat one and a half billion years ago when the planet was subsequently reborn as the Earth. Made popular through living necessity, the harvest festival is far removed from heavenly politics. There is evidence of cosmic philosophy in the Pol Vuh and other ancient records, but the sheer weight of celebrations of abundance shows what the ancients took the most seriously. Indeed, for them, only clearly sincere devotion to God would permit a bountiful harvest, or, In other words, God’s blessing and presumed associated goodwill needed a “trade”. Perhaps inspired by a perceived breakdown in community devotion, at some juncture human sacrifice became the popular way of demonstrating allegiance to God, evidenced by the Wiccan and those dreadful Mayan/Aztec practices of the deep past.

True “Gnostic” Christianity also emphasises the importance of harvest, being the staple for good life. “Evil” is the measure of sickness and disease and not the “justifier” that supports vicious, unholy opinions. Legacies found in some (but by no means all) documents euphemistically labelled “Dead Sea Scrolls” expand a pantheist narrative line fused with Eastern philosophy offering a variation of existential Zen Buddhism. Though the quantum layer is not mentioned directly (and is presumably unknown) by the Gnostics, their interpretations of the dynamics of spiritual (vibrational) existence are defined as states, characters and emotions and these mimic atomic expressive fluctuations.  I discuss the importance of this style of reasoning in detail in my book “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”.

While in shameless promotion mode, it would be remiss of me not to mention that I now offer professional consultation sessions. Current enquiries from potential clients have been split into two equal streams. Interest has been shared between the individual pursuit of divine purpose and wider communal discovery – corporeal deep genetic (potentially extra-terrestrial) heritage. I can evaluate and expand both arenas. Each session (via Skype) comes at a reasonable fee of $100 per hour, providing the currency is valid and of the US variety. Preconceptions are forbidden. Closed minds are unwelcome. Those interested in learning more should first read this article detailing an extended two hour consultation conducted recently, Captivated parties will find a contact point there for private communication.

Easter is a Christian religious festival, so to commercialise it in any way would be to insult God. Do our supermarkets give away spiced buns or chocolate eggs said to represent the mock crucifixion and rebirth of Jesus?  Other than everything seems to be “on sale” to sell these days, I saw no “giveaways” over the holiday. If Easter meant anything it seemed to represent only profit and loss. It also seemed to represent maintaining an illogical heathen fantasy that ridicules prosperity. Moreover the real Jesus would be horrified by what Christianity has become. Foul blabbermouths crusade bitterly on behalf of hollow, cynical virtues that are there only to enshrine order for order’s sake. They do not uphold the ethos of Jesus; that deliberate open hearted discovery tour and rite to passage.

No, Christianity succumbed to vile attack from the enemies beginning with the Nicolaitans partnering Constantine tyranny. But serious scholars know plans were well underway much earlier. I continue to argue Mark or Marcus, compiler of the synoptic gospel, was really a Roman aristocrat. His argument that Jesus was a part mortal Son of God satisfies all contemporary Roman ideals. If Jesus ministry, in deference to traditional dates, logically and provably (by analysis of journeying timelines) mapped the Jerusalem siege period (66-69AD), then far from there being an extended aural period (irrational in every sense), the Roman version of the life of Jesus was hot off the press right after they won the battle over Jerusalem.

The only unsatisfied enigma is as to why Disciple Peter was needed as star witness. The capture and imprisonment of what I originally believed to be one of Jesus’ chief bodyguards coincided with the collapse of Jerusalem. Given Peter’s prominence as a de facto priest in Mark’s “Acts of the Apostles”, clearly there is more to this picture than meets the eye. Thus, recently, I concluded that Peter’s association with Jesus (the figurehead) was more metaphorical than factual. Instead, he was one of the key Gnostics inside Jerusalem at the time of the siege while Jesus was journeying on the outside. Perhaps Peter’s sleeping at the time of Jesus’ capture represented the miscalculation of a Roman breach and attack of the city which ultimately ended the rebellion.

Contrary to popular opinion, the “Romans” (as were the Greeks prior) had been defeated by the Babylonian King David when the Mediterranean peoples were locally known as Philistines. The Philistines never disappeared. They relocated far from harm’s way, reconsolidated but did not undertake any large scale imperialist conquests until they had become sufficiently strong many centuries later. It is also worth mentioning that understanding of human genetics (genome) makes for greater confusion. Because the ancient Caucasian races all unrestrictedly interbred, authentic genetic traits have been indiscriminately spread over the great group today.

Originally, green eyed, red haired Celts, for instance, were a distinct variety separate of the black haired, grey eyed race and so on. It is hardly surprising the Genome project honestly judges Ashkenazi Jews as bulk-standard “whites”, much to the protest of Zionist supremacists of course. In fact green eyed, red haired priestly Celts are distinctly recorded as Viracocha’s (perhaps some sort of “Anunaki” manifestation) emissaries commissioned to transport Olmec man (presumed Negro) to Mayan South America. Each attired in loose fitting tunics tied at the waist by a coarse rope or sash, feet supported by open toed leather sandals, they appeared no different in descriptive appearance to modern day Benedictine monks.

Guatemala is most commonly referenced as the most up-to-date heritage of the Maya and tribes who have been recorded observing dozens of Earth bonding ceremonies over the Easter period. No wonder the violent imperialist Sandinistas focused on breaking the culture of that great land as a primo priority. Because of the spiritual integrity of genuine timeless ceremonies, all are destined to find a role as a holistic Easter cause. To presume spiritual disintegration of the whole and censorship of any of its parts does not violate the will of God is preposterous indeed. Divides were caused by those that assumed their own superiority and accorded that social apartheid was “justified” by these differences alone. Indeed it was overt racism that permitted the collapse of the Satan Star as the primary act of existence. I discuss the consequences in depth in my book “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”.

The earliest known copy of any New Testament manuscript heralds from the early Christian church located in Alexandria. The document in question arguably dates prior to 200AD and is perhaps contemporary with many of the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is odd that it did survive at all, because Constantine nobbled just about all other literatures his thugs could purge from the great Alexandrian library. Our enigmatic manuscript is a copy (the original would have been sketched between 66 and 69AD) of the Fourth Gospel, which is posthumously known as “John’s”.

Aiding by compelling arguments presented by Richard Leigh (et al) in “The Holy Blood, The Holy Grail”, I conclude that John’s Gospel is a very early bastardisation of the word of the real Jesus based on parts of (not tampered with) memoirs recorded by his brother-in-law, Lazarus (son of Joseph of Arimathea). John, the “alias”, was chosen because it derives from a Hebrew expression with means “God is gracious”. It is not beyond the realms of consideration that perhaps Jesus released his own version of “John” prior to the doctored version heralding from Alexandria.

It Jesus’ version did exist, it either has not survived or is hidden from public scrutiny. Either way, should the dating of the Alexandrian bogus scroll be deemed accurate, logic dictates distortion of Essene Gnosticism was well underway from the inside even as the early church was establishing formal roots. Mark, in Acts of the Apostles, it would be fair to say, does more than hint at deep politics collectivising the early church. This doubtlessly reflected turbulent times inside Jerusalem under siege, so why wouldn’t that turmoil carry over? In normal circumstances, Paul, an unmistakable hard line Pharisee, would have failed at every attempt at infiltration.

By the Synod of Hippo (394AD) Gnosticism was dead, as an authority. Roman Catholicism had its way and the Pharisees could breathe easy.  Doctrinal “sin” made man accountable to God. Indeed emphasis on Moses’ legacy pushed the concept a stage further by implying man, as a naturally imperfect sinful being, must be subservient to God. His “commandments” or orders from God prepared for unscripted tyranny. None of these ten “primary requirements” of man were or are possible to follow to the letter. Moses had crafted laws that would imply perennial guilt on the sincerely spiritual and this is why the early Christian church, under sentence from Catholicism, became the popular resolve. Priests (who were no different to anyone else) were “apparently” bestowed with mystical powers that allowed them to veto “sin” on behalf of their helpless God.

The tradition expanded as a form of universal transcendentalism delivered through the belief in the divinity of Virgin Mary. Emphasised by the Catholic Church’s relatively recent move on the tail of the New Age “Cosmic Christ” bandwagon highlights just how much Mary had undermined Jesus prior. Her effigy (idol) still holds so much power some believe it is a direct channel to God.  I am speaking superficially, of course, and do not responsibly suggest this could be the case. Although it should also be noted that the spiritual value of objects must never be underestimated. When fused in combination with the power of belief, “miracles” might be possible (underscored by our lack of understanding as to the true role of atoms, the building blocks of existence).

The ancients knew that only when very similarly tuned peoples lived on a planet; it would absorb and reflect the group emotional character bandwidth as pulsating echoes. Consequentially, as one infected planet crossed another’s path or came into the zone of influence, inhabitants would be deeply affected by the others’ mood. Even today ignorant horologists make a living from this presumption. Belief in energy saturated effigies is one thing, but the Catholic mumbo-jumbo certainly obscures the truth that Mary was a Roman royal and her idolisation was a deliberate ploy to give her the eternal prestige her status vested.

The Jews were no different in this regard. Melchizedek, the “king”, was a comparative oaf who adopted traditional folklore as a cover for his own historic prosperity. The same trick is partially played scripting Jesus and, undeniably, some of the tradition highlighted by Melchizedek is drawn upon, and why not, if Jesus was of royal blood? Hebrew chroniclers were metaphor makers. Miracles, if implausible, added colour to vestige. A royal shouldn’t be comparable to a commoner. The gospel writer “Matthew” (meaning, from Hebrew, gift of God) pushes the argument that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, which (contrary to Greek philosophic barbarism of terms) says he was the rightful shepherd king to the people of the time. Private debate continues today as to whether he, by any stretch of the truth, could be proven to be seventieth in line (taken from Ezekiel’s prophecy) after Adam.

Jesus’ own identity, I have stated several times, is a Latin joke; an anagram found in the name Josephus. Not coincidentally, if the ministry of Jesus coincided with the Siege of Jerusalem, it would have ushered in Josephus’ coming of age (euphemised by the baptism performed by John the Baptist, son of Zechariah, and one of the progressive steps to messianic authority). His father was a High Priest of the line of King David. All religious scribes were from royal families. There were no equal opportunities in these times. However, because of presumed blood heritage, theoretically any scribe could make a bee-line for regal power. The case was made by Matthew and Mark in no uncertain terms. Jesus/Josephus/Joseph ben Matthias was placed as a direct descendant of David to give added strength to stressed patronage.

Historically, corporeal (of the body) politics between Pharisees (judges) and Sadducees (scribes) was thought to act as an order balancer. This affected law making outcomes determined by the scales of power. Therefore, the most significant outcome of the Roman sacking of Jerusalem was the end of the Sanhedrin (religious government). From that point on, the Sadducees were axed leaving only totalitarian pharisaic (judgemental) domination to thrive. The corresponding exodus from Judea not only rendered Jews without a nation, but also began a new age of spiritual dogma. In effect the payoff for divine tyranny ensured complicit Jews could celebrate the fact they were no longer “goyim” (nationals) because they had no nation.

Rabid distortion of the Moses instructions (emphasised in the Book of Leviticus and others) logically ensued. Per this new irrational epoch, corrupt “Jews” no longer needed to be responsible goyim as they weren’t goyim (being nationless). Corruption was turned sour by the void in explanation as to why Moses’ generalisation tarred the goy “lower than the common beast”. Inhumane, immoral, unjustified behaviour prevailed as a result of abuse of privilege (God presumed the Jews had higher spirituality than other nationals given their grounding in faith) and this message should thrashed home by all decent, God loving Rabbis. Logic proposes Moses actually only targeted goyim that put their “nation” ahead of responsible humanity. Perhaps the answer would be found in the “lost” tabernacles protected by the Arc of the Covenant? Therefore, Israelites that suppose otherwise defy Moses and mock their true God.

With the critical loss of nationhood, the Pharisees have exploited the fact ever since. Even today Haredim deny the legality of Israel as a nation state. Why? They do so to crudely preserve pharisaic injustices whereby the Israelites can have a nation, but are not regarded as “nationals”, because ambiguity determines their nation is not certainly divinely legitimate. For those oblivious to Mosaic doctrine, it was said, of Earth’s peoples, the tribe of Levi was the most worthy under God. Under this vein of responsibility, they could guide the wider Jewish brethren, who were corporeally known as “God’s chosen people”. Finally, whatever could be done for the rest, God’s spawn, was up to the furtive moral probity of the chosen. The doctrine, in the suggestion that the Jews were God’s “chosen people”, implies Judaism is “the” unblemished authentic divine instruction. It also implies that Jews must lead by example.

Remember, none of Moses’ ten fundamental commandments’ are possible to follow to the letter; particularly given the belief that a divine authority would expect any instruction to be observed beyond fully. Therefore, if the commandments were issued “under divine authority” as described, then God was a pretty poor judge of human faculty. Indeed the philosophy behind the commandments pragmatically only encourages human beings to nit-pick ways out of responsibility, perhaps using the same five star lawyers corporates favour today, or resign to resolute spiritual incompetence. The commandments seem to have been drafted to ensure all humans are sure to fail (from the divine perspective). Given this consideration, it is hardly surprising that the Jews have assumed their arbitrary role as chosen, proto divine, people is something of an in-house joke. Faced with the impossible task of demonstrating divinity (based on the commandments), certainly Jews are no different to other humans. They innocently kill things. They have unworthy thoughts. They don’t truly believe less love something they don’t know is true. Moses “as paraphrased” gave his people a simple choice: follow the doctrine and be more worthy than anyone else or fudge it, manipulate it and abuse it.

Up to the point the Sanhedrin was disbanded, similar to politics of today, merit in decision making relied on a two party system. Over hundreds of years the some sorry debates went round and round, drawing the same old time-endured predictable conclusions. That is why Jesus was not particularly satisfied by the Sadducees as he vehemently opposed the Pharisees. Complimenting today’s political machinations, certain groups and views were marginalised to the point of deliberate ignorance or worse. Those deemed a threat to order were persecuted. Today, in conjunction, many people are “persuaded to believe” fate is merely coincidental or random by corrupt, “partisan” sciences, when the reverse is true. The Sanhedrin collapsed because its internal politics had become stale, The Roman “attack” on Jerusalem acted as a “cover story”. I used the term “attack” glibly as no evidence has been forthcoming (beyond more or less instant persecution of Gnostic Christians) to support claims. Like the sensation “holocaust” (creating more ambiguity over the spiritual “legality” of Israel), the supposedly destroyed temple may have equally been “imaginary”, in light of its defiance of strict prophesy.

Between 66-69AD Jesus was on the political campaign trail one jump ahead of authorities. Politics have become much more civil in the modern age. The roguish “pro-sovereignty” Irish party, Sinn Fein, was overtly censored for years by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) on behalf of successive British governments. Though no “Jesus” by any stretch of the imagination, telecasts of leader Gerry Adams’ speeches were silenced but for newsreaders’ doctored talk-overs. His voice was said to be too intoxicating with the potential of corrupting listeners. In other words, his arguments were too valid, too compelling to be allowed to be heard and compares with predicable censorship in Jesus’ time, which is the main reason all religious texts offer so much innuendo and metaphor. No one (in sanity) could put a real name to this stuff unless he was a seriously important personage with a giant army to back his mouth up.

Though Flavius can mean golden (sometimes referring “blond haired” boys) or imperial, the Roman Flavian Dynasty is famous for its wreaths (dual metaphor – the laureate poet wearing a crown of thorns?). Encapsulated by the anagram “Josephus”, a royal poet laureate gives birth to spiritual Jesus, in turn sacrificed for sin under a crown of thorns. Mystics know this symbolism is discombobulated and stretches much further. The crown of thorns represents the barbed rose cross reinforced by the “crucifixion”. It is Jesus’ Rosicrucian/Atlantean calling card. Sadly few have the presence of mind to scrutinise this less consider implications. Rather than being one the Rosicrucians, I interpret the message stating Jesus and all Gnostics were up against the Roman version of that order which transferred to the Catholic Church, as is currently the case today. It also confirms that Zionist pharisaic nationless hard liners have partnered with Rosicrucian Philistines in order to secure the globe. Zion approximates an ancient Hebrew word that means fortress or prison.

Easter, the Christian festival, simply calculates Jesus’ death and rebirth as euphemised by the crucifixion/resurrection stories. The four gospels treat the resurrection accounts very differently. In Mark the episode is missing. Matthew passes off the occurrence almost as an aside, perhaps even “with indifference”. Luke slightly improves on Matthew’s trite delivery by adding a short précis of the outline found in Mark’s Acts of the Apostles. In the Acts of the Apostles account Jesus is presented as so disfigured by his harrowing ordeal, he is barely recognisable. Only by “his words” (metaphor – the “legacy of Jesus” and beware of false prophets too) can some of the apostles “see” (another couched metaphor – damned by censorship). For Mark (the Roman who possibly was the character that is labelled Judas Iscariot) Jesus was spent, done, finished and only belong with the other dead (and out of fashion) prophets, so he sent him off in a cloud (we have the expression today “head in the clouds” meaning “to be unrealistic”. It appears to also be a contemporary Roman idiom, so might it apply here?).

It is the legacy of Jesus that was the great threat to pharisaic order and this needed to be censored as all cost. Over the Easter period, I had an enlightening discussion with an Islamic scholar. Unbeknownst to me, the one thing that separates Jesus from all other mystics is he refrained from use of the instructions “no” or “don’t”. Mohamed, we both concluded, took the pharisaic “forced order” path, which, upon reflection, is not entirely “without merit”. His doctrine assuring “alms for the poor” significantly improves on Jesus’ own suggestive Feeding of the Five Thousand and Good Samaritan parables. Was support of others to be made obligatory, then social communion would be a small step away. It is no wonder that the very first Islamic war was fought over the interpretation of Mohamed’s alms for the poor doctrine.

That is why Easter has succumbed to crass commercial “Passover” and the desperate, disadvantaged and poor have been left, all but forsaken.