A brief history of Christianity as it results
from my studies and intuition
by Jan Erik Sigdell
There were around Jesus two circles: 1) the outer circle
of people who listened to him speaking and 2) the inner circle of his
disciples and persons close to him. It is obvious from John 16:12 that he did
not say things in the outer circle that he doubtlessly said in the
inner circle: “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear
them now.”
Out of the inner circle arouse the Gnostic Christianity
that was earlier than the Paulinian Christianity. As is told in the Gnostic text
The Gospel of Truth, YHWH became angry because of what Jesus was teaching
and had him nailed to a cross. See
Yaldabaoth in the Gnostic texts, where it is shown that “Yaldabaoth” is
a Gnostic name for YHWH and where it is explained why YHWH in the Gospel of
Truth is called “Error”. So why was YHWH angry at him? Because he in the
inner circle, according to Pistis Sophia (another Gnostic text), told
that YHWH is not the real god, and talked about how we can be saved from YHWH.
YHWH expected that Jesus’ teachings would gradually be forgotten
after his death, but the contrary occurred. Jesus’ sacrifice gave more power to
them and they were carried on by the Gnostic Christians. Therefore, YHWH, as a
strategy, wanted to replace that original Christianity with a new one that
serves his purposes and inspired Paul to establish a kind of “Christianity
light” that does not have the profound truths of the Gnostic Christianity and
lacks what Jesus had taught about YHWH in the inner circle, but instead tells
other things YHWH wants the people to believe. See
Jesus’ Main Mission.
This way, Christianity gradually became replaced by the Paulinian
Christianity. YHWH then manipulated Constantine to reject the Gnostic
Christianity at the Council in Nicaea in 325, where the basis for the Church, as
it developed from there, became the Paulinian Christianity.
Acts 9:4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto
him, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?”
9:5 And he said, “Who art thou, Lord?” And the Lord said, “”I am
Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.”
9:6 And he trembling and astonished said, “Lord, what wilt thou
have me to do?” And the Lord said unto him, “Arise, and go into the city, and it
shall be told thee what thou must do.”
Did this, really, come from Jesus, or from YHWH pretending to be
Jesus? Let us compare with another “inspiration”. It is told that Constantine
had a vision (some sources say a dream) in which he saw the cross and heard “In
this sign you will be victorious.” Then he had the cross painted on the shields
of his soldiers and was victorious in his wars. Did this come from Jesus? Jesus
taught us “You shall not kill”, “Love your enemies” and “Who takes to the sword
will be undone by the sword”, which is a grave contradiction to the vision of
Constantine. Jesus would have told him to make peace and forgive his enemies!
Therefore, that vision could not have come from Jesus. Did it come from YHWH,
who wanted to have an apparently Christian Church that serves his
interests? His interests in manipulating and controlling the people? If that is
so, it may also cast some doubts about the vision of Paul…
In the same sense we may question, who it really was, who tempted
Jesus in Luc 4:1-13. Was it, maybe, YHWH – trying to bring him off from his
mission?
However, the Gnostic Christianity, that – by the way – also knew
about reincarnation and taught it (which apparently YHWH for some reason did not
like), did not disappear completely. Some Gnostics remained in the Balkans, more
or less where Bulgaria is to day, and later moved to Southern France, where the
Cathar community formed. The Cathars (the “pure ones”) followed Jesus’ teachings
so well that they were vegetarians and never killed an animal – “Thou shalt not
kill!” They also knew and taught reincarnation. In the 13th century
this community was completely eradicated in a cruel genocide, a veritable
holocaust against them, by the people of the Church! An extremely unchristian
action! One of the great sins of the Church – besides the Inquisition which
cruelly worked in a way YHWH will have liked… Cf.
About Jesus and Mary Magdalene.
As concerns reincarnation one may assume that this is one of the
things Jesus referred to in John 16:12…
The Gnostic Texts were destroyed during the attempts to eradicate
the movement. Luckily, a large number of them were discovered in Nag Hammadi in
Egypt in 1945, so that we to day again have access to most of this treasure of
immensely important information.
Discussion of a statement by Michael
Tellinger
Michael Tellinger has written a valuable book
[1] about the origin of humankind. In Chapter 15, he, however, writes “…Jesus became an
unwitting ‘mouthpiece’ for the bloodthirsty Nefilim god, preparing the ground
for the continued enslavement of humanity. …unconsciously weaving the propaganda
of a power-hungry Anunnaki god. … The uncanny parallels between the murky
origins of humanity, comparing to the origins of Christ, point to the real
possibility that whoever crafted humanity, followed it up with a second wave of
premeditated propaganda and ultimate control.”
His remark “…the one truly puzzling feature is
the lack of reference to messiah in the Old Testament. The word ‘messiah’ first
appears in John 1:41…” is not really true. In the King James’ Bible, it appears
in Dan 9:25-26, but since the Hebrew word mashiach is usually translated
as “(the) anointed (one)”, we have to search the Bible for the latter word.
“Anointed” is found in 84 verses and in a few of them, it may be understood
similarly to the Christian understanding. However, this is not of major
importance for the discussion here. It is, however, remarkable that Tellinger
writes about “the origins of Christ” (above), when according to him no such
origins can be found in the Bible.
The Bible and the whole official Christianity
of the Church hypnotize us to identify Jesus with Christ, which is a cause of
much misunderstanding. The Jesus of Christianity was for obvious reasons unknown
before he was born in Bethlehem. The name “Yeshua” was given him there like a
name is given to every child that is born. But who was he before he incarnated
as this Yeshua? That we don’t know. It is, therefore, logically and naturally
expected that no “Yeshua” is mentioned in the Old Testament that could be the
one of Christianity (there is another Yeshua mentioned in Old
Testament Apocrypha: Yeshua ben Sirah).
So who, then, is Christ? In official
Christianity, he is a very high entity, close to God, who is assumed to have
incarnated as Jesus. Does this make sense? That Christ, being such a high
entity, would incarnate in a human body appears quite unimaginable. It is much
more likely that he sent a messenger to humanity, and that this messenger
was Jesus.
But “Christ” is not a name! It is the
Greek translation (Christós) of the word mashiach, “the anointed
one”, which is adopted in almost every modern language. We do not know a name
for him. There is much confusion here. Several persons in the Old Testament were
“anointed” and the word mashiach is used not only for Christ or for
Jesus. Christ will most probably also not be mentioned in the Old Testament as
mashiach in a “Christian” sense. He will rather have been unknown to
those who wrote the parchments that after a long time were to become the Old
Testament. He became known to us mainly through his message sent through Jesus.
So where do we find more information about
this? There is a tradition of a very basic importance to Christianity that has
been blacked out in texts and history since some 2000 years: The Gnostic
Christianity. It very early became subject of rude controversy and denial,
and its texts were destroyed in the first centuries. However, a collection
secretly survived as if by a divine salvation plan and was rediscovered in 1945 in
Nag Hammadi in Egypt. Here we get a very different view of Christianity from
what the Church wants us to believe. It looks like Tellinger is not aware of
what is written in these texts, so that he misses an important historical link
about treason and falsification of the message that Jesus brought us.
There obviously were two circles around
Jesus: an outer circle and an inner one, as mentioned above. What Jesus said in
public, i.e. in the outer circle, will not be the whole message, since people
were not ready to hear and understand it. Furthermore, the essential part of the
message was highly “explosive” and controversial for his time.
So what was then this “explosive” part of the
message? If one studies the texts of the Gnostic Christians, it becomes obvious:
Yahweh is not the real god! There is one far above him that Jesus called
“Father”. Yahweh is an Anunnaku (I use this simplified singular, since
“Anunnaki” is plural) but the “Father” is above all Anunnaki. Such a message
was, of course, “mortal” to bring in those days and it is very obvious, indeed,
that Yahweh wanted this Jesus dead, and he succeeded to have him killed, hoping
that this message would soon be forgotten. But it was not! It survived for a few
centuries among the Gnostic Christians, who used the name Yaldabaoth (and one or
two other) for Yahweh, probably so that outsiders should not easily understand
who was meant. Yahweh also was successful in eradicating most of the Gnostic
Christians and their texts, even though some of it survived in secret
organizations and it then again surfaced among the Cathars. Then it surfaced in
1945 in Nag Hammadi to challenge Yahweh’s primary control instrument in the
Western world: the Church that did and does anything possible to discredit
Gnostic Christianity.
This means that we have two Jesuses:
the real one and a fake pseudo-Jesus of the Church. Since Yahweh could
not fully eliminate the tradition of the message, he cleverly changed it to
serve his purposes and interests. The first step was to let Paul appear on the
stage and teach a different Christianity. Out of that later arose a Church as an
institution to manipulate the population with a “Christianity” that made people
believe that Jesus’ “Father” would be Yahweh. In John 8:31-47 Jesus is quoted as
telling something to the people that contradicts this, but it is – as expected –
interpreted very differently by the Church.
What Tellinger writes about Jesus is true,
after all – about the fake Jesus of the Church! But not about the real Jesus…
Tellinger refers repeatedly to Zecharia
Sitchins books. Sitchin obscured and downplayed important introductory lines in
the Babylonian creation story Enuma Elish: “When above heaven had not yet
been named and below the Earth had not yet been called by a name, when Apsű
primeval, their begetter, Mummu and Ti’âmat, who gave birth to them all, mingled
their waters together…” [2]. Did Sitchin have an Anunnaki connection, since he
seems to “revere” them as the real creators? In his interpretation, Apsű is the
Sun and Ti’âmat a planet that extremely long ago burst into pieces that to day
form the asteroid belt. But it can also be taken more literally: Apsű can be
understood as the primordial creator and Ti’âmat as his consort. They are, then,
the very first entities from and by which the universe was created. Apsű could
mythologically be associated with the Sun, but identifying him
with it is another thing. Ti’âmat could be associated with a no more
existing planet and the civilization it is said to have had, but – again –
identification is another matter. One reason why I point this out becomes
clearer when I compare with Gnostic creation story in The Apocryphon of John
[3], which mentions an incomprehensible and unnamed original creator and his
manifested creative power Barbelo who is regarded as female, giving birth to the
creation. The creation then proceeded in steps, which “further down” lead to
darker and more material realms. On a low level, Yaldabaoth (= Yahweh, see
above) arose, who became the lord of such a realm of darkness.
In the Babylonian creation story, Apsű and
Ti’âmat created more entities and then, a step “further down”, the ones that
became known as the Anunnaki. These became a kind of “celestial rowdies” and
disturbed their creators: “…their doing was painful to them. There way was not
good…” [2]. Therefore, Apsű wanted to reverse their creation (take them back
into his primordial energy), but Ti’âmat did not want this to be done, since –
after all – she was their mother. Then things proceeded in an increasingly
negative way that has parallels to the Gnostic creation story.
According to Enuma Elish, the Anunnaki then “killed” Apsű and Ti’âmat.
But can the original creators really be killed? Of course not! It will really
mean that the Anunnaki turned their backs to them to live, act and rule as if
they were dead, letting their people believe that they were. They shut
themselves off from the rest of the creation to conceal themselves in their own
limited world.
My understanding is that the “Father” Jesus
talked about is the “unnamed creator” of the Gnostics and Apsű of the
Babylonians, who is above all Anunnaki – and certainly not Yahweh!
References
1. Michael Tellinger: Slave
Species of God, Zulu Planet, Johannesburg, 2005.
2. Alexander Heidel: The
Babylonian Genesis, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2nd
ed., 1960.
3.
The Apokryphon of John.
Shorter version and
long version.
Later somewhat extended as Slave Species of the Gods,
Bear &Co. Rochester, 2012.