To better understand this article it helps to have read the previous articles on "Did Jesus Have Two Mothers"? Having acquainted yourself with this necessary information then let us continue our study into the astronomical background for the later "Jesus Story".
Well if you understood the title to this article then you have already understood that such an occurrence, a historical and literal birth of the "same person" twice in the same year is not biologically possible for there is only one time that one person is born "literally" and such a thing violates the Cosmic Laws of the Universe. Well that Cosmic Law applies until you read the early Church Fathers who speak of the two supposed births of Jesus Christ in the same year. Yet in spite of such logic and biological principles and Universal Law we are astounded when reading the early Church Fathers to their absolute ignorance of such a fact let alone their own admission of their deception and lying to further their religious agendas; in particular their presentation of "Jesus Christ" to the masses. Let us examine the evidences and in so doing the results of our inquiry should tell the discriminating reader that these early Church Fathers were aware that their "Jesus Christ" and their resultant "Jesus Story" was not only a hoax but in the final analysis nothing more than an astronomical phenomena which was later "personified" and presented to the masses as if a literal historical reality when in fact it was not.
Answer for yourself: It is one thing to say it; another to prove it. What is the inescapable conclusion if we see that the early Church Fathers taught that "Jesus Christ" was born both at the Winter Solstice as well as the Spring Equinox? Well for starters we will be hard pressed to believe that "Jesus Christ" was a real "literal historical" person. This of course brings into doubt any and all Christian Doctrines and Dogmas which have been taught by Christianity as connected with either the person of Jesus Christ or events and sayings in his life. As if that is not enough we are then pushed to reconsider the whole of the "Salvation Message" of Christianity since it is squarely based upon the supposed life and sacrifice of this "historical Rabbi-Messiah" of the first century. Let us begin looking at the facts and evidence in this regard.
In the first 200 years of Christian history, no mention is made of the calendar date of Jesus' birth. Not until the year 336 do we find the first mention of a celebration of His birth.
Answer for yourself: Why this omission? In the case of the Church fathers, the reason is that, during the three centuries after Christ's life on earth, the event considered most worthy of commemoration was the date of His death. In comparison, the date of His birth was considered insignificant. As the Encyclopedia Americana explains, "Christmas... was, according to many authorities, not celebrated in the first centuries of the Christian church, as the Christian usage in general was to celebrate the death of remarkable persons rather than their birth..." (1944 edition, "Christmas").
What is of interest to us in this article is the fact that in spite of all this speculation the original date of Jesus' birth was never known for certain in Christianity. But toward the end of the second century, Clement of Alexandria was known to have cited various opinions of concerning Christ's birth date, the two most prominent of which were January 6th and December 25th. Later in the fifth century, Augustine commented: "For He is believed to have been conceived on the 25th of March (Spring Equinox), upon which day He also suffered... but He was born according to tradition upon December 25th" (Winter Solstice) (De Trinitate, Augustine).
Notice with me that neither the writer of the Gospel of Luke nor the writer of the Gospel of Matthew gave any indication of Jesus' actual birthday. Like many things Christian, the origin of this supposed date for the birth of the "Christ Child" comes from the celebrations and rituals of the Ancient existing religions which beginning Christianity had to compete against. Here too, we see Christianity assimilating portions of the Ancient Wisdom and Astrotheology into its structure for its own unique interpretation of "the Christ" and his supposed birthday.
One of the remarkable things about early Christianity is the fact that the early devotees made no mention of the birth of their supposed saviour or even his supposedly fleshly existence for that matter. The conflicting genealogies in our current Gospels are believed by modern scholars to have been added to the existing Gospels after the second century. The earliest Gospel, Mark, speaks nothing about the ancestry, birth and genealogy of Jesus and contemporary Greek and Roman writers and historians of that period have nothing to say about him either save vague, generic references to the title of "the Christ". In some cases where writers like Josephus and Paul make "specific" mentions of Jesus, these references turn out to be forgeries written in by zealous students, and redacting bishops. Also, there was strong opposition to the "pagan" custom of celebrating birthdays ironic when one considers that from top to bottom "paganism" is woven into Christianity's beliefs and customs.At first, his birth date was on January 6th; however, by the 4th century it was noticed that Christian worshippers were also partaking in Mithraic celebrations of the Sun [natalis solis invicti] on December 25th. Realizing that their followers were gravitating towards the worship of Mithra, Roman Christian authorities moved the feast date of Jesus from January 6th to December 25th. Trying to compete with an earlier religious celebration was not such a good idea Rome figured so wisdom prevailed; "is you can't beat them, join them". Such were the lengths these early proselytisers were prepared to go to win or retain converts.
In Rome December 25 was made popular by Pope Liberius in 354 and became the rule in the West in 435 when the first "Christ mass" was officiated by Pope Sixtus III. This coincided with the date of a celebration by the Romans to their primary god, the Sun, and to Mithras, a popular Persian sun god supposedly born on the same day. The Roman Catholic writer Mario Righetti candidly admits that, "to facilitate the acceptance of the faith by the pagan masses, the Church of Rome found it convenient to institute the 25th of December as the feast of the birth of Christ to divert them from the pagan feast, celebrated on the same day in honor of the 'Invincible Sun' Mithras, the conqueror of darkness" (Manual of Liturgical History, 1955, Vol. 2, p. 67).
Protestant historian Henry Chadwick sums up the controversy: "Moreover, early in the fourth century there begins in the West (where first and by whom is not known) the celebration of December 25th, the birthday of the Sun-god at the winter solstice, as the date for the nativity of Christ. How easy it was for Christianity and solar religion to become entangled at the popular level is strikingly illustrated by a mid-fifth century sermon of Pope Leo the Great, rebuking his over-cautious flock for paying reverence to the Sun on the steps of St. Peter's before turning their back on it to worship inside the westward-facing basilica" (The Early Church, Penguin Books, London, 1967, p. 126).
The Encyclopedia Americana makes this clear: "In the fifth century, the Western Church ordered it [Christ's birth] to be observed forever on the day of the old Roman feast of the birth of Sol [the sun god], as no certain knowledge of the day of Christ's birth existed" (1944 edition, "Christmas").
I assume the reader is familiar with December 25th being the Winter Solstice but let me reiterate that December 25th was the date of the birth of the Sun from the dead at the Winter Solstice. After this momentous day in the Sun's path through the Zodiac, the winter, having reached its peak, slowly gives way to spring. The Winter Solstice therefore, had been traditionally in Roman times, a period of unrestrained celebration. The celebration was called the "Dies Natalis Solis Invicti" or "the birthday of the unconquered Sun." In the pagan religion of Mithraism, which was a form of Sun-worship, the Winter Solstice was naturally an occasion of great celebration since the death of "old man winter" was assured as the Sun was "raised from the dead" and renewed its northward trek in the Sky after remaining motionless in the Sky for 3 days as if dead. It was during these 3 days that the Sun, or the personified "Son of the Sun" fought the Devil; or as we more properly understand "fought the Dark-Evil, the D-Evil, the DEvil", the Devil (see it?); thus the "descent into hell for 3 days" where the Christs fight the darkness of Winter (the Devil) which we read about in the lives of the Solar Sungods as well as the "Jesus Story". As the Sun rose from its "grave of darkness and Winter cold" it brings with it again the hope of Spring and Harvests which was literally "salvation" and "life" to mankind. The worship of Sol Invictus, the Sun God, became so popular that by A.D. 274, the Roman Emperor Aurelian (c212-275) gave official sanction to December 25th, the Winter Solstice, as the birthday of that God.
The December 25 calendar date often overlaps the Winter Solstice, honoured throughout the ancient world for the annual return of the Sun, and the longer hours of daylight needed for the planting of the next year's crops. The Winter Solstice was the mythical birth date of a number of archetypal fertility gods, such as Mithra, Adonis, Dionysus, Osiris, Baal, and many other versions of the Solar Sun God, who bore such important titles as the:
Most pagan mysteries celebrated the birth of an "allegorical" Divine Child at the Winter Solstice and this paralleled the "birth" of the Sun.
Being a new religion in town is not always easy. Christianity in it battle with the pagan religions for converts had to make compromises in order to survive and therefore was forced to slowly assimilate their celebrations and beliefs into its religious synthesis. Christmas day became one of the assimilated celebrations. Over time this became a very successful day of observance and its popularity grew:
As with the earlier prototypes whose body and blood given in sacrifice enriched the earth and caused wondrous plants to grow, so do countless popular legends and songs tell of flowers and medicinal herbs that grew under the cross or on Jesus' tomb. As the dead and resurrected Savior, the archetype in a long "pattern" of dying and rising gods, Jesus is clearly the embodiment of the same similar mythos and marks the continuation of such earlier gods as Mithra, Baal, Dionysus, and others.
We saw above that Rome sanctioned Dec. 25th as the birthday of Jesus. But not all agreed that the "Christ Child's" birth was to be reckoned at the Winter Solstice in December. As stated, up until the fourth century AD, many Christians were celebrating Jesus' birth on January 6. At the time, December 25 was the traditional birth-holiday of the Persian savior Mithra. Catholic Church Fathers were angered at the celebration of this other Sun King proceeding their own festivities, so they appropriated the earlier date and moved Jesus' own birthday up by some twelve days. Now you know where the famous Christmas Carol "the Twelve days of Christmas" came from. January 6 became known as The Feast of the Magi, or Three Kings Day. Not only was Mithra's birthday of December 25 adopted by Christians, but also the halo of light surrounding baby Jesus' head, the resurrection of both the god and his faithful followers, and numerous other aspects were all borrowed by the early Christian church directly from the preceding mythos of the Mithraic cult.
Christianity was divided throughout its kingdom regarding the birth of Jesus. In early on Christianity there were fierce debates about whether December 25th or January 6th should be celebrated as the birthday of Jesus. Lurking for consideration was March 25, the Spring Equinox as well as we shall see.
Uncertainty about Jesus birthday in the early third century is reflected in a disputed passage of the presbyter Hippolytus, who was banished to Sardinia by Maximin in 235, and in an authentic statement of Clement of Alexandria. While Hippolytus favoured January second, the learned Clement of Alexandria (Strom., i. 21) enumerates several dates given by the Alexandrian chronographers, notably the twenty-fifth of the Egyptian month Pachon (May 20th) in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus and the twenty-fourth or twenty-fifth of Pharmuthi (April eighteenth or nineteenth) of the year A.D. 1, although he favoured May twentieth. This shows that no Church festival in honour of the day was established before the middle of the third century.
Mentioned above was that Origen at that time in a sermon denounced the idea of keeping Jesus birthday like that of Pharaoh and said that only sinners such as Herod were so honoured. Arnobius later similarly ridiculed giving birthdays to "gods." A Latin treatise, De pascha computus (of ca. 243), placed Jesus birth on March 21st since that was the supposed day on which God created the Sun (Gen. 1:1419), thus typifying the "Sun of righteousness" as Malachi (4:2) called the expected Messiah.
A century before Polycarp, martyred in Smyrna in 155, gave the same date, the date around the Spring Equinox (March 21st) for the birth and baptism placing it on a Wednesday because of the creation of the Sun on that day.
The Incarnation of Jesus (bodily manifestation of a supernatural being in the flesh) was assigned to the 25th of March because this day, as early as Tertullian, was believed to be the date of His Passion.
Answer for yourself: Why is Polycarp's remarks concerning March 21st so important? Theologies come and go and the further you get away from a seminal idea or theology or religious belief the "story changes". This is human nature unfortunately. We can find easily what the early Church Fathers "believed" about the birth of Jesus in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th centuries but let us not forget that as time progressed the variety of "beliefs" increased accordingly. Therefore all the more important is Polycarp's admission to the birth of Jesus at the Spring Equinox. Polycarp's statement as to the Spring Equinox birth of Jesus is the earliest testament to the belief about the birth of "the Christ" that we have outside the New Testament and this time period, March 21st, approximates very closely the Spring Equinox. Polycarp is one generation removed from those alive in the first century and is the oldest attestation that we have today other than the Gospel accounts which are highly unreliable.
Answer for yourself: What should Polycarp's early comments on the birth of Jesus being at the Spring Equinox teach us? It should teach us that the further we can go back concerning the birth of this "Jesus" we find that it is reckoned from the Spring Equinox. In time as Christianity will spread to the masses and the leaders of this new religion will see that it will become fortuitous for this new emerging Christian Faith to adopt the Dec. 25th. birth of the Sungods, for the birth of the "Christian Jesus" in order to gain converts. So before us we have for a supposed historical person who supposedly lived in the first century fully grown men, religious pillars in this new religion of Christianity, professing that this Messiah-to-be had two physical births in the same year that just happen to align perfectly with Astronomical Phenomena; phenomena by the way which was already well known by the Ancients for thousands of years and reiterated previously over and over again in the lives of their Sungods as expressed through myths, allegories, similes, legends, etc.
So in examining the evidence we see that the Spring Equinox was first mentioned outside the Bible as the date for the birth of Jesus and that Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church until much later. We also see that before the 5th century there was no general consensus of opinion as to when the birth of Jesus should come in the calendar, whether on Jan. 6, March 25 or Dec. 25.
Meanwhile, in the East, January 6 was chosen, a date the Greeks had celebrated as the birth of the god Dionysus and the Egyptians as the birth of the god Osiris. Jan. 6 was earlier fixed upon as the date of the baptism or spiritual birth of Christ, and the feast of Epiphany was celebrated by the Basilidian Gnostics in the second century and by catholic Christians by about the beginning of the fourth century. The Armenian church still celebrates January 6th as Christmas to this day (Freke & Gandy: The Jesus Mysteries: p41). It would appear to the "thinking believer" that this whole concept of "birth of the Christ" has to do totally with Astronomy one way or the other; either the Winter Solstice or the Spring Equinox and the path of the Sun through the Houses of the Zodiac reflective of these Solstices and Equinoxes reflective of the "Age" as determined by the Precession of the Equinoxes. Hidden in this celestial phenomena is the Spiritual Message from the Creator to mankind speaking of the necessity of "two births" for mankind; a natural and a spiritual birth.
Answer for yourself: Did you see it? Christ's example for mankind is "two births; a natural and a spiritual birth" (Spring Equinox, March 25th [natural birth] followed by the Winter Solstice, December 25th [spiritual birth]).
In truth this should not be shocking for we have heard it our whole lives:
1 Cor 15:46 46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. (KJV)
Amazingly God is showing man that he must "be born again" by the path of the Sun through the Houses of the Zodiac and we never knew; that is before now. Read that again. The real "good news" (Gospel) is in the Sky above our heads. God's Salvation Message" is written above our heads as is the whole "Jesus Story" from Matthew 1 through Matthew 28; no not the story of some Jewish "historical person" but "your story"; God's intended plan for the Soul's incarnation, maturation in this physical plane of existence, and return to Heaven once again and Egypt knew this and this Ancient Divine Concept is at the very heart of Egyptian Religion; the father of Judaism. Egypt lies destroyed today but no nation or evil invented by mankind has been able to destroy their children "the Jews" or the Egyptian Faith they inherited which goes under the name of Judaism today.
Gen 1:14-15 14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. (KJV)
Brown-Drivers-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon:
The Hebrew word for "signs":
It makes all the more sense when we see that these seasons, Equinoxes and Solstices are "distinguishing marks" to bring mankind into "remembrance" while at the same time "warn all mankind" that they "must be born again"!
Answer for yourself: Do the early Church Fathers say that Jesus had two different births assigned to two different days on the Calendar and did they get this from the Constellations Virgo and Pisces? We saw that they did in the above linked articles. If you take the time to read them then you can see that they did beyond any doubt thus proving that "Jesus Christ" to these early Church Fathers was "astronomical" and not "historical". Now we find the very same teaching, that "Jesus Christ" is not "historical" but rather "allegorical" when other Church Fathers connect his conception, incarnation, and birth with the Winter Solstice and the Spring Equinox (allegorical again for the two births required of mankind; one natural and one spiritual).
Answer for yourself: What should this teach us? It would appear to the insightful student that the Creator is speaking to mankind from His abode in Heaven the same message over and over again and this message concerns the Soul of mankind and man's necessity of "two births; one natural and one spiritual".
Answer for yourself: Does the fact that the early Church Fathers admitting to the two births for a supposed "historical Jesus" set the stage for us to reconsider if even they, these early Church Fathers whose works we read today, possibly knew that the "Jesus Story" was nothing more than a religious myth and that it was not a "literal" historical narrative? Have we today, as Christians, been totally misled to accept a "historical Jesus" when the truth of the matter is that "the Christ" of which these early Church Fathers spoke is a Metaphysical reality speaking to mankind about his Spiritual condition before God?
To the new reader don't be alarmed when I tell you that the birth of Jesus Christ in the New Testament is purely astronomical. You could have already guessed that if you put together the Winter Solstice with December 25th, the alleged birthday of the Son of God (the personified "Son of the Sun"). In order to make Christianity palatable to the pagan masses strenuous efforts were made to associate Christ with the Roman Sun-god, Helios. Pagan symbols were abstracted in order to teach the Christian Gospel, and Christ was readily associated with SOL INVICTUS -- the Invincible Sun. It was thus inevitable that the chief pagan Sun-worshipping day, 25 December, the Birthday of the Sun, became associated with the Birth of Christ. Indeed, the adoption of 25 December for the celebration of Christmas is perhaps the most explicit example of Sun-worship's influence on the orthodox Christian liturgical calendar. Many of the Christmas traditions known and beloved by the West are, as we know, direct adoptions of idolatrous pagan customs.
Unknown to most Christians is the fact that Augustine, whom some believe to be the greatest Father of Christianity, and Clement of Alexandria held to the tradition that the birth of "Jesus" was at the Winter Solstice and his incarnation was at the Spring Equinox. They understood that the birthday of Jesus is determined by the full moon of Easter (the Spring Equinox). Easter is observed on a Sunday between March 22 and April 25 (around the time of the Spring Equinox). The commonly stated rule, that Easter Day is the first Sunday after the full moon that occurs next after the Vernal Equinox. So we need to think and connect the ideas of "Easter" with the "Vernal Equinox" although the actual date might be off a couple of days.
There are 4 things we need to recognize:
Having adopted 25 December as the Birthday of Christ the Roman Catholic fathers were anxious to distance themselves from the responsibility of having borrowed a pagan festival and to avoid being accused of being betrayers of the Faith. Augustine and Leo the Great, for instance, strongly reprimanded those Christians who at Christmas worshipped the Sun rather than the birth of Christ [both were on the same day] (Augustine, Sermo in Nativitate Domine 7, PL 38, 1007 & 1032). It was the opinion of some of the fathers that both the conception and passion of Christ occurred at the time of the Vernal Equinox on 25 March (Polycarp and others...remember?).
Answer for yourself: How is the Spring Equinox and incarnation of Jesus connected to the Winter Solstice? Reckoning from that date the nine months of pregnancy of Mary (conceived, incarnated at the Spring Equinox, the date of the birth of Christ was be computed by necessity to be the 25 December (the Winter Solstice).
Not all agreed. More recently, some Christians have assumed that Jesus was conceived on 6 April and born nine months later, on 6 January, thus supporting the Eastern Orthodox position and the earlier position of the fathers before the festival was transferred from January 6th to 25 December in order to accommodate the masses and increase converts. Which ever date is defended -- 25 December or 6 January -- the computations used to defend them represent an a posteriori rationale advanced to justify an already existing date and practice that goes back as far as Ancient Egypt (Osiris). As far as 25 December is concerned, J.A.Jungmann has written: "It has become progressively clear that the real reason for the choice of 25 December was the pagan feast of the DIES NATALIS SOLIS INVICTI which was celebrated in those days with great splendour." (Joseph A. Jungmann, The Early Liturgy to the Time of Gregory the Great, 1962, p.147).
Answer for yourself: What was behind the transfer of the birth of Jesus from January 6th to December 25th by the Western Church?
In the Orient (East) the birth and baptism of Jesus were celebrated by the Eastern Church on the 5 & 6 January, respectively. All the available evidence strongly indicates that the 5/6 January date for Christ's birth was an assimilation of another pagan festival, namely the "Epiphany", which commemorated the birth and growth of light (B. Botte, "Les Denominations du dimanche dans la tradition chretienne," LE DIMANCHE, Lex Orandi 39, 1965, pp.14f). Epiphany therefore, is a Day of celebration of how mankind has not been left in darkness. It is a festival of light following the rebirth of the Sun at the Winter Solstice. Lest we forget the Sun is rising daily higher in the Sky and light is increasing every day as "Old Man Winter" is being defeated by the Sun. Salvation is coming to mankind once again to be realized in the Harvests of Spring and Summer. The term "Epiphany", which still remains in the orthodox liturgical calendar in the Catholic and Protestant world, literally means the "manifestation of a superhuman being". As O. Cullmann has explicitly stated: "The choice of the dates themselves, both January 6th and December 25th, was determined by the fact that both these dates were pagan festivals whose meaning provided a starting point for the specifically Christian conception of Christmas" (O. Cullmann, The Early Church, 1956, p.35).
Behind it all we find Egypt once again. Philip H. Pfatteicher, Festivals and Commemorations, p. 34, writes the following about Epiphany. Both Christmas and Epiphany are related to pagan solstice festivals. In Egypt in 1996 B.C., the Winter Solstice occurred on January 6, and there was a night festival on January 5-6 celebrating the birth of the god Osiris from the virgin. The waters of the Nile, it was thought, acquired miraculous powers and turned to wine that night.
Answer for yourself: Whose birth in Egypt was reckoned to occur at the Winter Solstice?
The birth of Osiris in Egyptian pagan worship also correlated with the Winter Solstice. An Egyptian Winter Solstice celebration of the birth of Osiris, the divine representation of masculine fertility, on January 6th became the Christian Epiphany. The Church declared that it signified the manifestation of Jesus divinity. Yet, the spirit of both Christmas and the Christian Epiphany embodied timeless celebrations of the Winter Solstice. The difference between them was due more to a difference in calendars than a difference in meaning; the Egyptian calendar was twelve days behind the Julian calendar. (Ellerbe, Helen, The Dark Side of Christian History, Morning Star Books, 1995. p.146).
The Greeks identified Dionysus with Osiris and so on 6 January the sacred waters were blessed in both the religions of Osiris and Dionysus! Epiphany is a continuation of these Pagan rites. The Egyptian Gnostics known as Basilidians, seeing the immersion ceremonies as a symbol of the baptism of Jesus, celebrated it on 6 January and gradually Christians elsewhere adopted this date as the anniversary of the Jesus baptism. By 386 AD the two great Christian festivals were Easter, the festival of the crucifixion, and Epiphany when rivers and springs were blessed and water was drawn and saved for baptisms throughout the year. Aristides Rhetor in about 160 AD tells us that water drawn from the Nile at the Festival of the Immersion is at its purest. Stored in wine jars, he says, it improves with time just like wine. And so does the myth! Two centuries later Epiphanius writes that the stored water actually changes into wine! In Dionysus worship, water turns to wine on 6 January. The miracle at Cana when Jesus turned water into wine is celebrated in the Christian calendar on 6 January!
Again all of these dates, March 25th, December 25th, January 6th find their original importance in Ancient Egyptian Religion in the myths of Osiris, Horus, and Isis. A few more comments on Epiphany (January 6th). A cycle of 40 days after the Egyptian Last Supper (November 27th) and the death of Osiris takes us to the Epiphany on January 6th. This date as you can see was adopted by the Christian faith and introduced into its religious calendar.
Like the Ancient Egyptian traditions, the original intent of Epiphany in the Eastern Church is for one to be baptized (the sacrament of Baptism). Baptism represents in the Egyptian Religion the figurative death and rebirth.
Answer for yourself: What are we to learn here? Again we see Egypt teaching the necessity for "two births" for mankind. A "born again" cycle typically takes 40 days (from November 27th and the death of Osiris) to January 6th). At the end of the cycle, January 6th, the people bathe in the Nile (baptism) and the fast is broken and they are "born again".
The results of such a study teach beyond all doubt that all the scholarly evidence therefore clearly points to the Ancient origins of the traditional birthdays celebrated by the Western and Eastern Churches and their utilization to merely justify syncretizing of Ancient Egyptian Religion with a "literalized and historicized" Christianity. Nowhere in any of these studies will we find unforged or uncontested evidence that promotes a historical Jesus that was born on either 25 December or 6 January.
We seem to consistently be mentioning the Winter Solstice and the Spring Equinox. That these celestial events as tied to the births of Ancient Sungods and "Karests/Christs" should give us pause to think that possibly behind what we assume to be a supposed historical person is nothing but spiritual allegories of the path of the Sun through the seasons and Zodiac. The evidence mounts and in so doing proves the astronomical and non-human nature of the birth itself, which is identical with that of the full moon of Easter in Egypt (3 months after the "natural birth" of the Christ child at the Winter Solstice we experience the "spiritual birth" of the "the Karest/Christ" child in mankind at Spring Equinox. The Divine Allegory is complete.
Gerald Massey, in his The Historical Jesus And The Mythical Christ, teaches us that Casini, the French Astronomer, demonstrated the fact that the date assigned for the birth of "the Christ" is an Astronomical epoch in which the middle conjunction of the moon with the Sun happened on the 24th March, at half-past one o'clock in the morning, at the meridian of Jerusalem, the very day of the Vernal (Spring) equinox.
The following day (the 25th of March) was the day of the Incarnation, according to Augustine, (354-430 C.E.) but the date of the Birth, according to Clement Alexander (150-211 C,E,)
Answer for yourself: What did we just see? Again we see that Clement Alexander agreed with Polycarp's date of the Spring Equinox for the birth of Jesus. Augustine will assume the Jesus' incarnation occurred on the Spring Equinox. That early Christianity was divided over the Astronomical significance of Jesus' birth and incarnation is easy to see. What I believe we need focus upon is that two of the earliest Church Fathers, Polycarp and Clement of Alexander agreed with the Spiring Equinox for the birth of Jesus.
Answer for yourself: Could this mean the whole "Jesus Story" is not historical or literal but nothing more than Astronomical parody and allegory and we not know it?
So We Have Seen That Two different birth days are assigned to Jesus and his birth by the Christian Fathers:
Answer for yourself: What should this teach us?
First of all, these dates, Dec. 25th (Winter Solstice) and March 24th/25th (Vernal Equinox) cannot both be historical. Study will reveal to you that these traditions for the "birth of 'the Karest/Christ" arise from Ancient Egypt thousands and thousands of years ago. These two dates, Dec. 25th (Winter Solstice) and March 24th/25th (Vernal Equinox), refer to the two birthdays of the double Horus in Egypt.
Answer for yourself: What is meant by the saying "double Horus"? Does it refer to mankind's dual nature? Yes it does.
It was a saying of Philos that the logos is double. This it is as the double Horus, or as Jesus and the Christ, who was dual natured; as manifestor for the Virgin Mother and afterwards for God the Father:
The reader is again prompted to understand this "dual nature" of Horus who is a prototype for mankind who has both a "natural" and "spiritual" nature. Horus, "the Egyptian Karest/Christ" is "the pattern" for mankind (mankind is a mixture of human/divine; matter/spirit; childhood/adulthood; male/female). These two expressions of duality in mankind, blended in one person (the Karest/Christ example), constituted the double Horus who was that double logos spoken of by Philo, the figure of which was founded, as Egyptian, on the two halves of the soul, or pair of gods in the mystery of Tattu (Rit., ch. 17). Horus in these two characters was Horus, the child and Horus who becomes bird-headed at the transformation in his baptism (born again nature).
Answer for yourself: Why "bird headed"? Such symbolism depicted the fantastic eyesight of the hawk; it is believed a hawk has an eyesight 8 times greater than the normal human. Behind such a symbolic depiction of mankind is the spiritual idea of increased Spiritual Enlightenment possible to the human species. Thus the "anointed" of Egypt, the Egyptian "Karest/Christ", Horus, is to bring Spiritual Enlightenment to mankind where he can see beyond the natural realm into the depths of the Spiritual realm.
Horus' personal epithet was "Iusa" the "ever-becoming son" of "Ptah," (God) the "Father."
Answer for yourself: Could this "ever coming one" or "every coming one" refer to the anticipated coming of mankind's "Spiritual Birth" as "sons and daughters of God" that is laid out it the Equinoxes and Solstices? THINK!
Answer for yourself: What is the meaning of "Iusa"?
According to Gerald Massey, Alvin Kuhn, Godfrey Higgins, and others the later name of Jesus was derived from the Egyptian Iusa, which means "the coming divine Son who heals or saves".
Answer for yourself: Can we trace the etymology of the names Jesus from Ancient Egypt? Yes we can.
The "S" in Jesus's name curiously matches an Egyptian suffix written either SA, SE, SI, SU, or SAF, SEF, SIF or SUFalternatively SAPH, SEPH, SIPH or SUPH. The "F" is an Egyptian ending for the masculine singular so the meaning of it is the son, heir, prince or masculine successor to the father. When the original symbol of divinity, IO or IE, JO or JE, was combined with the Egyptian suffix for the succeeding heir, SU or SA, the resultant was the name IUSA, IUSE, IUSU, or IOSE; or IESU, JESU, IUSEF, IOSEF, JOSEF. One of the many forms was JESU and another was JOSEF. The final F, in JOSEF, became sibilant at times and gave us the eventual form of JESUS. The name then meant the "divine son," and combined in the Egyptian IU the idea of the coming one. Hence JESUS was the Egyptian Messiah, the coming son of the divine life.
Jesus therefore means the divine son, and combined in the Egyptian IU the idea of the coming one. Hence JESUS was the Messiah, the coming son of the divine life. Indeed messiah is a combination of the Egyptian word "MS" and the Egyptian word for god, "IAH." MS means son so the meaning of Messiah is precisely son of God. It is the same word as Rameses where Ra, the name of the sun god replaces Iah and the words are reversed in order. Scholars, Christian and Jewish alike, say Messiah means the anointed one, deriving Messiah from the word for anointing with oil. They have, of course, got the derivations back to front. The word for making someone a son of God by anointing them with oil was derived from the purpose of the ritual, not the other way round.
Answer for yourself: What did we just see? There in Egypt, some ten thousand years B.C., we find the character of this functionary under the name of IUSA, JESU, or JESUS. Later he was the Iu-em-hetep, which means "the divine son who comes with peace (hetep). But most interestingly, this last word also means seven. Hence Jesus is he who comes as the seventh principle to complete the six elementary powers of natural evolution with the gift of divine intelligence, which supplants the elementary chaos with the rulership of love and intelligence and thus brings peace into a warring situation (flesh vs spirit). . Hence finally, Jesus is the seventh cosmic principle, announced in all religious lore as he who comes to bring peace and good will to men. And as such he was announced in the Christian Gospels. But there was more than one Jesus or IUSA or IU before the coming of the alleged historical Jesus. All nations had this Divine Concept but called it by different names. Even more startling is the revelation that there are over thirty Sun-god figures in the cults of the various nations of old, but there are immediately in the Bible itself, in the Old Testament, some twenty more Sun-god characters under the very name of Jesus! We just don't recognize them by other names.
As you can see Etymology, the study of the sources and development of words, can be a very good friend for the truth seeker. Follow with me if you would please:
Zeus, aka "Zeus Pateras," who we now automatically believe to be a myth and not a historical figure, takes his name from the Indian version, "Dyaus Pitar." Dyaus Pitar in turn is related to the Egyptian "Ptah," and from both Pitar and Ptah comes the word "pater," or "father." "Zeus" equals "Dyaus," which became "Deos," "Deus" and "Dios" - "God." "Zeus Pateras," like Dyaus Pitar, means,"God the Father," a very ancient concept that in no way originated with "Jesus" and Christianity. There is no question of Zeus being a historical character. Only simpletons would maintain such a belief. Dyaus Pitar becomes "Jupiter" in Roman mythology, and likewise is not representative of an actual, historical character either. None of the Sungods were "literal" or "historical figures". In Egyptian mythology, Ptah, the Father, is the unseen god-force, and the Sun was viewed as Ptah's visible proxy (symbol) who brings everlasting life to the earth; hence, the "son of God" is really the "Sun of God." Indeed, according to Hotema, the very name "Christ" comes from the Hindi word "Kris" (as in Krishna), which is a name for the Sun (The Egyptian Book of the Dead by Massey, pp. 1-2, Morals and Dogma of Freemasonry, p. 78. Taylor: "'. . . Chrishna in Irish means the Sun.'"
Furthermore, since Horus was called "Iusa/Iao/Iesu" the "KRST," and Krishna/Christna was called "Jezeus," centuries before any Jewish character similarly named, it would be safe to assume that Jesus Christ is just a repeat of Horus and Krishna, among the rest. According to Rev. Taylor, the title "Christ" in its Hebraic form meaning "Anointed" ("Masiah") was held by all kings of Israel, as well as being "so commonly assumed by all sorts of impostors, conjurers, and pretenders to supernatural communications, that the very claim to it is in the gospel itself considered as an indication of imposture . . " (Taylor, The Diegesis, p. 7). Hotema states that the name "Jesus Christ" was not formally adopted in its present form until after the first Council of Nicea, i.e., in 325 C.E. (Introduction to The Egyptian Book of the Dead by Massey, p. 9).
We are half-way home. We have now to track the ever-coming child Iusa, Iusu or Jesus in the sphere of time as the son of Iusãas and of Atum (the Invisible God), who was Ra in his first sovereignty; not merely in the round of the lesser year, but in the movement of precession as determined by the changing equinox or by the shifting position of the pole (axis of the earth in relationship to the pole star [today Polaris]). As we have shown, the Zodiacal signs were set in heaven according to the seasons of the Egyptian year and in the annual circuit of the Sun. The birthplace of the Inundation of the Nile and the Grapes was figured in or near the sign of Virgo or the Virgin, the mother of the child who brought the new life to the land in water as Ichthus the fish and in food as Horus on his papyrus (Gerald Massey, Ancient Egypt, the Light of the World, published 1907 AD, p 728). In the earlier articles we death with "Jesus' two births and two mothers"; one Virgo and one Pisces. If you are unfamiliar with this symbolism I strongly suggest that you read the articles.
Alvin Kuhn relates: "Egypt knelt at the shrine of the Madonna and child, Isis and Horus and Egypt had long known Jesus, Iusa - born of immaculate parenthood, circumcised, baptized, tempted, glorified on the mount, persecuted, resurrected, and elevated to heaven. Egypt had listened to the Sermon on the Mount, and the Sayings of Iusa for ages. But Egypt's Christ was not a living person and neither was it historicized in Judean times - but God's Karest/Christ has existed at all times. In other words the Gospels "life" of Jesus turns out to be out to be nothing but the garbled and fragmentary copy of the Egyptian and other prototypes, never lived. But the light of Egypt Occidental religion can now find its way from medieval darkness to Sunlit truth. The Dark Ages can now be brought to their dismal end means there is more to the later-day allegories than former - a way for the construction by the individual of that long sought divinity requires a much greater comprehension of the allegorical methodology" (Alvin Kuhn, Who is this King of Glory).
Horus's personal epithet was "Iusa," the "ever-becoming son" of "Ptah," the "Father" (Churchward, The Origin and Evolution of Religion, p. 365). He was called the "Holy Child." Horus was called "the KRST," or "Anointed One," long before the Christians duplicated the story (Churchward, ibid., p. 397. see also The Egyptian Book of the Dead by Massey, pp. 13 and 64; MC). Iusa, the Jesus of On, like Horus in the Osirian cult, was born bi-mater. His two mothers were Iusãas (Isis) and Neb-hetep (Nephthys), the two consorts of Atum-Ra. These two mothers were at first two sisters in the mythos. One of them was the mother in the western mountain, or later in the Winter Solstice (the Mother of the Winter Solstice); the other gave birth to Horus on the horizon in the Eastern Equinox (the Mother of the Spring Equinox). Here again is the two births by the two mothers in Heaven that speaks of the metaphysical reality of the necessity of two births for mankind and two natures of mankind; one physical and one spiritual.
Answer for yourself: Again what are we to learn here? Here is the "Divine Pattern" for mankind's path through life once again: "First the Natural birth (what we see in Heaven in the Spring Equinox) and then the Spiritual birth (what we see taught in Heaven/Sky paralleled in the Winter Solstice).
John 3:7 7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. (KJV)
We have been speaking of the "two births" and "two mothers" of mankind; one natural and one Spiritual. In so doing the early Church fathers, not longer possessing the Ancient "keys" to interpret the religious myths and "gnosis" fought over two supposed historical births for one supposed human being. When all along the whole "Jesus Story" is an Ancient Egyptian Astronomical Allegory expressing Divine Metaphysical Truths to which Rome was oblivious.
Over the centuries the Winter Solstice and the Spring Equinox had gotten "blurred" in the thinking of Rome and lost to both was the Spiritual Dynamic and the "two births" of mankind behind them both. Long lost was Polycarp's and Clement's understanding of the Spring Equinox as the birth of "the Christ Jesus" and how it integrates with the Winter Solstice that occurs in the whole of flesh of mankind.
The Winter Solstice is the most mysterious, magical and wonderful turning point in the yearly cycle of the Sun. At the time of greatest darkness in the Sun's cycle, where we experience the shortest day of the year and the longest night, the Sun enters the sign of Capricorn (thus the birth of Isua or Jesus at the Winter Solstice). At this time of the year the Sun has reached its southernmost point in the journey of its orbital path. Then, for about three days it appears to standstill, hence the name Solstice which means "Standstill of the Sun". During this three day period, the Sun appears to rise and set at almost exactly the same point, then it slowly makes its journey North again. We experience this powerful event as the return of the light. Now the days are growing longer and the nights shorter. At first it is barely noticeable but a shift has definitely taken place that holds the promise of the Spring and Summer to come.
In the ancient world this awesome time was commemorated by rites and magical workings to ensure the return of the light. For at this time spirit and consciousness have made their deepest descent into matter and have experienced the greatest darkness. Because of this, the theme of death and rebirth was played out in story, myth and ritual across the ancient world. A sacrifice for the good of humanity required that a God die, enter the underworld and overcome death to be reborn as the Child of Promise. This is how the birth of the Sun became the birth of the Son.
Plutarch tells us that Isis was delivered of Horus, the child, about the time of the Winter Solstice (Dec. 25th like Jesus),and that the festival of the second or adult Horus followed the Vernal/Spring Equinox. Hence, the Winter Solstice and Spring Equinox were both assigned to the one birth of both Horus and later to Jesus by the Christologists; and again, that which is impossible as human history and natural law and fact is possible in religious myth only as found in two Horuses (Spring Equinox/Winter Solstice), the dual form of the Solar God in Egypt (the Double Horus) (Gerald Massey, Ancient Egypt, the Light of the World, published 1907 AD, p 786).
Now we can better understand how it could be that the following day (the 25th of March), after the Spring Equinox, was the day of the Incarnation, according to Augustine, but the date of the birth, of Jesus according to Clement Alexander.
Answer for yourself: Again, why is this a problem for today's Christian? Unlike ages ago when the truth of the mythos was understood today's Christians possess almost no knowledge of this whatsoever; thereby they are easily misled into false worship and idolatry by the worship of this "man-made" Jesus as a God by Rome. Such is the unforgivable sin according to Judaism and the New Testament.
The bottom line in closing is that we are confronted with a major problem for two birthdays are assigned to Jesus by the Christian Fathers, one at the Winter Solstice (December 25th) and the other one at the Vernal Equinox.
Answer for yourself: How can Jesus have "two births" and "two mothers"? You might be surprised to find out how but to do so we have to look to the Heavens and the stars and not at a supposed human being or a historical personage that supposedly lived in the first century.
Obviously, these two conflicting dates for the supposed birth of Jesus cannot both be historical; either one or the other is or maybe neither. What we find upon study in Egyptian religion that such an idea of the two dates for the birth of "the Christ" are based on the two birthdays of the double Horus in Egypt.
Plutarch above tells us that Isis was delivered of Horus, the child, about the time of the Winter Solstice, and that the festival of the second or adult Horus followed the Vernal Equinox. The Vernal/Spring Equinox follows the Winter Solstice by 3 months. Even so we must take note that the Winter Solstice and Spring Equinox were both assigned to the one birth of Horus and later these same dates were applied to the one birth of Jesus by the Early Church Fathers. Again, that which is physically impossible as human history is the natural fact in relation to the two Horuses, the dual form of the Solar God in Egypt; but not impossible at all if this whole thing, the "Jesus Story", is a "myth" based upon Astronomy.
Answer for yourself: Now we want to think ahead for a while. Counting from the Vernal Equinox, from March 24th, then let me ask you what happens 9 months (the time for a baby's gestation in the womb) after this conjunction of the Sun and Moon (personified Sungod and Moon goddess) which occurred on the 24th of March?
Answer for yourself: What is an astronomical conjunction? The position of two celestial bodies on the celestial sphere when they have the same celestial longitude. They occupy the same "longitude" as if they overlapped or became one. Using sexual symbology it is as if they mated and produced an offspring.
Answer for yourself: What is this Astronomical Offspring? It is a "child". Follow closely what I say next.
Nine months after this conjunction of the solar father (Sun-Osiris...husband of Isis) and the lunar mother (Moon-Isis...wife of Osiris), which occurred on March 24th, the Spring Equinox, the divine child was born 9 months later at the Winter solstice, December 25th.
It fits perfectly. The Winter Solstice just happens to be the birth of the young Sun-god Mithras as well as one of the birth dates for Horus in Egypt. It also is Jesus' as well. Unknown to most Christians we know that the Ancient Egyptians paraded a manger and child resting in it (Sun in Capricorn) thus representing Horus, the "Karest Child" through the streets of Egypt at the time of the Winter Solstice (typically around Dec. 21). Horus was born of the virgin Isis-Meri (Mary) on December 25th in a cave/manger with his birth being announced by a star in the East (Sirius) and attended by three wise men (the 3 stars in the belt of Orion that just happens to point to the Christmas star Sirius). It sure does not appear too hard to see the "Star" as one might think.
Answer for yourself: And why a manger? Simply because the Sun is in the House of Capricorn at the time of the Winter Solstice, the time for the birth of the Karest Child/Christ Child and the Constellation of Capricorn contains the "manger" configuration of stars. Matthew says Jesus was born in a house; Luke says he was born in a manger. They do not contradict as much as it appears. A House defines one of the twelve sectors of the Zodiac. The manger is more specific in pointing to the house of Capricorn. There are reasons for the choice of manger. Matthew says Jesus was born in a house; Luke says he was born in a manger. They do not contradict as much as it appears when one thinks that this "house" refers to the House of the Zodiac; in particular the House of Capricorn. There are reasons for the choice of manger. The zodiac constellation preceding Capricorn is Sagittarius, half man half horse. As the Sun descends, the horse is seen to be riding down towards its stable, or manger, into Capricorn. Also, it is a dark time of the year and mangers are dark places. In the legend of the Twelve Labors of Hercules, when Hercules was in Capricorn, he was to clean out the stables of King Augeas.
Plutarch tells us that the virgin mother Isis was "delivered of Harpocrates (ie. Horus considered as a child of the mother alone) about the Winter tropic (Winter solstice..Dec. 25th), he being in the first shootings and sprouts very imperfect and tender. Which is the reason, as the Egyptians say, that when the lentils begin to spring up (Spring Equinox) they offer him their tops for firstfruits" (Gerald Massey, The Historical Jesus And The Mythical Christ, p. 40).
They also observe the festival of Isis' afterbirth (the Hebrew Shiloh), or Horus, the son of the father, after the Vernal equinox.
Answer for yourself: Not possessing this "gnosis" and "knowledge" from Ancient Egypt concerning this Astronomical theology then could this be why the early Church Fathers debated and argued among themselves concerning the time for the birth of a supposed historical Jesus? Is it because they lost the "gnosis" and did not understand the Astronomical and Spiritual import behind the stories they inherited and in so doing mistakenly cast them and taught them as if supposed historical narratives when in fact they were not? It sure is.
These two astronomical dates were continued by Equinoctial Christianity, who could not account for them in the absence of the gnosis or ancient knowledge of them which they no longer possessed since lacking the "keys" to understand the Ancient Egyptian wisdom and Religion. Lacking this gnosis or knowledge from Egypt concerning the astronomy behind the Osiris myth, the Winter solstice and Vernal/Spring Equinox then both these calendar dates reflecting Astronomical realities were both "assigned as the time for the one birth" of Jesus as you saw above which is impossible as human history, but is true to the mythos and the two Horuses. The birthday of Mithra, the invincible one, was celebrated as an ancient festival, on the 25th of December, the day of the Winter solstice, our Christmas day. Mithra, like Jesus, was born in a cave, and wherever Mithra was worshipped, the cave was consecrated to him; as the "highly- mysterious cavern" was sacred to the Sun-god in Egypt. "The Pattern" can be traced from nation to nation until we get to Rome and then we lose it.
Answer for yourself: Was Jesus born in a cave?
The above testimonies should make us realize that the idea of a cave is connected to "darkness", the "Winter Solstice", and the "manger" were similar Astronomical ideas that were connected with the birth of the "Christ child".
The cave (darkness), or Winter Solstice (darkness) in Capricorn, December 22-25th, was the birthplace of the Mithraic Messiah from 2410 to 255 B.C.E. until the dawn of the Age of Pisces, and this was continued as the cave or birthplace of the Christian Messiah/Christ after it ceased to be applicable to the solar god. Justin Martyr, Christianity's first great apologist, says that Christ was born on the same day that the Sun was reborn in "Stabula Augiae", and the stable of Augias, cleansed by Herakles in his sixth labor, corresponds to the cave of the Sea-goat (Capricorn). "The Pattern" continues but is not recognized and the "literalization" of the Christ continues even though it might appear that some knew but taught not the truth of the matter thus serving a higher agenda.This is no higher agenda than truth!
Answer for yourself: So what have we seen? Both the cave and the stable are two types of the birthplace of the Sun at the Winter Solstice (time of great darkness). Justin Martyr, determined to include both, ignorantly asserts that Christ was "born in the stable and afterwards took refuge in the cave". He has to include the mythos in his relating of the "Jesus Story".
No Christ or Messiah, however, whether called Mithras, Horus, or Jesus Christ could have been born in the stable of Augias or the Cave of Abba Udda on the 25th of December after the date of 255 B.C.E., because the Solstice had passed out of that Zodiac sign into the asterism of the Archer.
Answer for yourself: What should this teach us? Namely, that Justin Martyr had nothing but the Mithraic tradition and myth of the by-gone birthday to prove the birth of the assumed Historical Christ 255 years later! In other words he lied about the birth of an assumed historical Messiah! Justin Martyr taught "religious myth" as if was literal truth. He taught "Astrological Myth" as literal history and everyone fell for it and does so today as well.
Answer for yourself: What conclusion should we bring?
The supposed historical Christ had no other birthday than that of the solar god, the birthday of the year, whether reckoned from the Solstice or the Equinox. Rather revealing is the quote of Chrysostom, who wrote on the nativity of Christ, in Antioch, about 380 A.D. Now this is almost 400 years since the time for the supposed historical Jesus. Now pay attention to what he says. He states: "It is not yet ten years since this day was made known to us". What? The date for Jesus' birth was determined ten years before 380 A.D.? What is going on?
He says further: "Among these inhabiting the west, it (this Winter Solstice date) was known before from ancient and primitive times, and to the dwellers from Thrace to Cadis (Gadeira), it was previously familiar and well known."
But this birthday of the Lord was not well known in the East, at Antioch, where the name of Christians was said to have been first adopted, on the verge of the Holy Land itself. We also learn that as late as the fifth century Leo the Great was compelled to rebuke the "pestiferous persusion" of those Christians who were found to be celebrating Christmas day "not for the birth of Christ, but for the resurrection of the Sun". The actual origins of Equinoctial Christianity were not then superseded.
This date of 255 B.C. (the Age of Pisces) was the true day of birth, or rather of re-birth for the celestial Christ, and there was no valid reason for changing the time of the world. The Gospels contain a confused and confusing record of early Christian belief: things most truly believed (Luke) concerning certain mythical matters, which were ignorantly mistaken for human and historical. The Jesus of our Gospels is but little of a human reality, in spite of all attempts to naturalize the Mythical Christ, and make the story look rational. The Christian religion and the "Jesus Story" was not founded on a man, but on a divinity; that is, a mythical character. So far from being derived from the model man, the typical Christ was made up from the features of various Gods (neteru) and fused in a portrait of a dozen different persons. In such a literary design the many merged into one that is not anybody. And as fast as the composite Christ falls to pieces as we study, each feature is claimed by various Ancient religious myths and each scene in the "Jesus Story" is gathered up by the original owner.
If you understand that the "Jesus Story" is the personification of the Divine Soul as it descended into matter, or should I say the flesh of mankind then it bears upon our minds to recognize the Divinity of the "Jesus Christ" which resided in each child of God. Jesus Christ, as seen in his two births that even Church Fathers acknowledge, knew that their "Jesus Christ" never could be any other than a divinity; that is, a character who was not "literal" or "human". They understood this Divine Concept, at least the earliest of them did like Polycarp and Clement of Alexandria, and this Divine Idea and Concept was entirely mythical and could be traced back into the history of mankind as the Ancient Divinity that was the core of many pagan myths thousands of years before our era; as far back as Ancient Egypt.
The hard realities are inescapable since Christianity ties mankind's salvation to the historical Jesus and his physical death and resurrection for mankind and the necessity of such a belief for one's personal salvation. Nothing is more certain, according to honest evidence, than that the Christian scheme of redemption is founded on a fable misinterpreted; that the prophecy of fulfillment was solely astronomical, and the Coming One as the Christ who came every time anew with every Sunrise, with every new House of the Zodiac in which the Sun rose and at the beginning of each new Age (mistranslated as 'world', was but a metaphorical figure, a type of Divine Allegory, which never could take form in historic personality. The conclusion is inescapable. The history in our Gospels is from beginning to end the identifiable story of the Sun-God, and the Gnostic Christ who never could be made flesh.
It is rather simple really. When we did not know the one it was possible to believe the other; but when once we truly know, read the evidences and gather the facts, see the parallels between the Ancient Sungods, come to possess the "keys" for the Astronomical interpretation of the Sun "personified" as it moves through the Zodiac and at the same time notice the unbelievable parallels to the "Jesus Story" in the Gospels, from beginning to end, and become knowledgeable about the "Gnostic Christ", then the false belief is no longer possible. But the good news is that behind all our misunderstanding and deception lies God's instruction to you and me for the Spiritual Maturation of our Souls in this earthly existence. The "Jesus Story" is to be yours and my experience for "the Christ" lives within us and is not limited to but one person long ago in Palestine as Rome would have you believe. The Stars and the Sun teach us so. Thank you God that we can know the truth before we die and prepare to meet You and love You while we live in this flesh the way you so commanded, desire, and deserve.
In our CD of all out websites contained on one disk we provide a "study plan" for the student and give detailed instructions as how to study these websites "in order" to facilitate one's study. Please inquire for the CD for such through study will take you some time if you ever hope of cracking the "Jesus Puzzle" and coming to the answer of the question: "Who do men say I am?" Hidden in this study is the manner by which you, a Christian, can come to the point in your life where the true power and demonstration of the Power of God in your life can be found and experience, where you can "say" to the mountains in your life "be gone" and they really flee. Just ask my wife who raised the Christ to life in her life, in time to reverse the diseases in her life in a few short months, and is alive today when medical science said there was no hope. A mistaken literal and historical understanding of the sacred Scriptures "killeth," but a "mystical" and "metaphysical" understanding of the true indwelling Christ in you, as the real St. Paul teaches, raises you from the dead in this Earthly life and gives you the power and demonstration of the Power of God in your life. No tricks here, but just truth, truth kept from us by a less than truthful group of men that changed the original understanding of the Ancient Wisdom to keep humanity ignorant and in fear, thus selfishly controlling them when they no longer had enough swords to do so. Don't let this ignorance of the truth continue in your life. It is time to experience the resurrection of Christ from the dead in you NOW!