SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Ask God -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jamey who wrote (24652)2/22/1999 9:46:00 PM
From: Sam Ferguson  Respond to of 39621
 
Irenæus was born in the early part of the second century, between 120 and 140 A.D. He was Bishop of Lyons, France, and a personal acquaintance of Polycarp; and he repeats a tradition testified to by
the elders, which he alleges was directly derived from John, the "disciple of the Lord," to the effect that Jesus was not crucified at 33 years of age, but that he passed through every age, and lived on to
be an oldish man. Now, in accordance with the dates given, Jehoshua Ben-Pandira may have been between 50 and 60 years of age when put to death, and his tradition alone furnishes a clue to the
Nihilistic statement of Irenæus.

When the true tradition of Ben-Pandira is recovered, it shows that he was the sole historical Jesus who was hung on a tree by the Jews, not crucified in the Roman fashion, and authenticates the claim now to be made on behalf of the astronomical allegory to the dispensational Jesus, the Kronian Christ, the mythical Messiah of the Canonical Gospels, and the Jesus of Paul, who was not the carnalised Christ. For I hold that the Jesus of the "other Gospel," according to the Apostles Cephas and James, who was utterly repudiated by Paul, was none other than Ben-Pandira, the Nazarene, of whom James was a follower, according to a comment on him found in the Book Abodazura.

Anyway, there are two Jesuses, or Jesus and the Christ, one of whom is repudiated by Paul.

But Jehoshua, the son of Pandira, can never be converted into Jesus Christ, the son of a virgin mother, as an historic character. Nor can the dates given ever be reconciled with contemporary history. The historical Herod, who sought to slay the young child Jesus, is known to have died four years before the date of the Christian era, assigned for the birth of Jesus. So much for the historic Jesus.

And now for the mythical Christ. Here we can tread on firmer
ground.The mythical Messiah was always born of a Virgin Mother--a factor unknown in natural phenomena, and one that cannot be historical, one that can only be explained by means of the Mythos,
and those conditions of primitive sociology which are mirrored in mythology and preserved in theology. The virgin mother has been represented in Egypt by the maiden Queen, Mut-em-ua, the future mother of Amenhept III. some 16 centuries B.C., who impersonated the eternal virgin that produced the eternal child.

Four consecutive scenes reproduced are found pourtrayed upon the innermost walls of the Holy of Holies in the Temple of Luxor, which was built by Amenhept III., a Pharaoh of the 17th dynasty. The first scene on the left hand shows the God Taht, the Lunar Mercury, the Annunciator of the Gods, in the act of hailing the Virgin Queen, and announcing to her that she is to give birth to the coming Son. In the next scene the God Kneph (in conjunction with Hathor) gives the new life. This is the Holy Ghost or Spirit that causes the Immaculate Conception, Kneph being the spirit by name in Egyptian. The natural effects are made apparent in the virgin's swelling form.

Next the mother is seated on the mid-wife's stool, and the newborn child is supported in the hands of one of the nurses. The fourth scene is that of the Adoration. Here the child is enthroned, receiving
homage from the Gods and gifts from men. Behind the deity Kneph, on the right, three spirits--the Three Magi, or Kings of the Legend, are kneeling and offering presents with their right hand, and life
with their left. The child thus announced, incarnated, born, and worshipped, was the Pharaonic representative of the Aten Sun in Egypt, the God Adon of Syria, and Hebrew Adonai; the child-Christ of the Aten Cult; the miraculous conception of the ever-virgin mother, personated by Mut-em-ua, as mother of the "only one," and representative of the divine mother of the youthful Sun-God.

These scenes, which were mythical in Egypt, have been copied or reproduced as historical in the Canonical Gospels, where they stand like four corner-stones to the Historic Structure, and prove that the foundations are mythical. Jesus was not only born of the mythical motherhood; his descent on the maternal side is traced in
accordance with this origin of the mythical Christ. The virgin was also called the harlot, because she represented the pre-monogamic stage of intercourse; and Jesus descends from four forms of the
harlot--Thamar, Rahab, Ruth and Bathsheba--each of whom is a form of the "stranger in Israel," and is not a Hebrew woman. Such history, however, does not show that illicit intercourse was the natural
mode of the divine descent; nor does it imply unparalleled human profligacy. It only proves the Mythos.

In human sociology the son of the mother preceded the father, as son of the woman who was a mother, but not a wife. This character is likewise claimed for Jesus, who is made to declare that he
was earlier than Abraham, who was the typical Great Father of the Jews; whether considered to be mythical or historical. Jesus states emphatically that he existed before Abraham was. This is only
possible to the mythical Christ, who preceded the father as son of the virgin mother; and we shall find it so throughout. All that is non-natural and impossible as human history, is possible, natural and
explicable as Mythos.

It can be explained by the Mythos, because it originated in that which alone accounts for it. For it comes to this at last: the more hidden the meaning in the Gospel history, the more satisfactorily is it
explained by the Mythos; and the more mystical the Christian doctrine, the more easily can it be proved to be mythical.

The birth of Christ is astronomical. The birthday is determined by the full moon of Easter. This can only occur once every 19 years, as we have it illustrated by the Epact or Golden Number of the Prayer Book. Understand me! Jesus, the Christ, can only have a birthday, or resurrection, once in 19 years, in accordance with the Metonic Cycle, because his parents are the sun and moon; and those appear in the earliest known representation of the Man upon the Cross! This proves the astronomical and non-human nature of the birth itself, which is identical with that of the full moon of Easter in Egypt.




To: Jamey who wrote (24652)2/22/1999 9:59:00 PM
From: IN_GOD_I_TRUST  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 39621
 
Santiago,

I didn't mean anything hurtful, or even mean by it.

I am trying to read this thread, without much involvement, trying to understand all the different positions here. One of the ways is to understand the labels people use for others, and for that matter on themselves. I thought these definitions help me clear up some peoples background, and hoped it might help other readers have a deeper understanding for what is going on here. If they are wrong ( I posted the website I got them from) then I welcome you letting me know. But please realize I do not mean anything hurtful by them. In fact, they are not my definitions at all but another ministries.

One of the things God has been showing me through my evangelistic efforts, and in reading this thread, is many other "Christian" positions other than my own. I am trying to appreciate them, and evaluate them against scripture. If they have merit, I embrace them. If not, I dismiss them. I dismiss them as my beliefs, but appreciate them when talking to others to try to understand them and discuss the scriptures in a Godly way.

I realize that no one man is perfect, especially myself, and not every belief everyone has is 100% true. But we should strive to try to evaluate our beliefs objectively, and try to be as sure as we can before we start teaching others that they are in line with God's word.

In conclusion, please understand my statements are not directed at you. I am not stating any opinion about your beliefs in this post, just trying to tell you where I am in my growth state now. I post the definitions as a part of my attempt to understand positions, and maybe to help another trying to understand your dialogue on this thread. I humbly apologize if they were offensive to you. And just remember, these definitions might be wrong to you, but are valid to at least this ministry I got them from.

God Bless,
Steve



To: Jamey who wrote (24652)2/22/1999 10:02:00 PM
From: Jamey  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 39621
 
Steve, You must be careful about attempting to hang an untrue meaning to a word, especially when the word, dispensation, is found in the Holy Bible.

This is the simple meaning of the word:

DISPENSATIONALISM. A system of theology recognizing different stewardships of man under God. Dispensationalism was popularized by C. I. Scofield, with later refinements. Dispensationalism is distinguished by: (1) consistent literal interpretation; (2) clear distinction between Israel and the church; (3) the glory of God as God's ultimate purpose in the world.