SUGABABI 06 says:
“Jesus hung out with the pagans as he hung out with the Christians.”

My reply: …And he was sent by Jehovih his father to earth, to save mankind and he “THE LORD” came and his name was Fragapatti … this happened 10,000 thousand years before the myth of Jesus. (Note the similarity between Jehovih and Jehovah from the Old Testament.)

Jesus never existed his myth is a copy of a copy of a copy repeated throughout generations in many different eastern cultures, and I would like to site one of many books I have read about the subject. From:”THE JESUS MYSTERIES” by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy: “We have become convinced that the story of Jesus is not a biography of a historical Messiah, but a myth based on perennial Pagan stories, Christianity was not a new and unique revelation but actually a Jewish adaptation of the ancient Pagan Mystery Religions”

The Jews plagiarized 90 percent of the Old Testament from sacred text from other cultures that were written hundreds and thousands of years before. It is a historical fact that the Jewish where not a highly cultured people, in comparison to other more advanced civilizations that lived and thrived at the same time. They lacked breadth of literature, music, painting and philosophy, preferring to stick to trade, traveling continuously around the Middle East adopting and adapting from other cultures. That’s the way the Old Testament come about, when they settle in the new occupied land of Canaan after conquering it. (By the way, I have Semitic ancestry, so don’t even go there with anti-Semitism.)

So the New Testament, which was based in the Old Testament, came about during Constantine’s time. This was the time when the myth of Jesus was establish in a generalized way; although the origin of this myth began with the sect call Q, which settled in the north of what is now called the Holy Land, approximately 87 A.C. They created it for occultist reasons, but that is a whole other posting. (Could it possibly be that the all western civilization it is based on Jewish plagiarism?) But lets get back to the Jesus factor and the book I mentioned.

“At the heart of the mysteries (Pagans) were myths concerning a dying and resurrecting goodman, who was known by many different names. In Egypt he was Osiris, in Greece Dionysus, in Asia Minor Attis, in Syria Adonis, in Italy Bachus, in Persia Mithras. Fundamentally all this godmen are the same mythical being … We were able to construct Jesus’ supposed biography from mythic motif previously relating to Osiris-Dionysus:

# Osiris-Dionysus is God made flesh, the savior and “Son of God”
# Osiris-Dionysus’ father is God And His mother is a mortal virgin.
# Osiris-Dionysus is born in a cave or a humble cowshed on December 25 before three shepherds.
# Osiris-Dionysus offers his followers the chance to be born again through the rites of baptism.
# Osiris-Dionysus miraculously tursn water into wine at the marriage ceremony.
# Osiris-Dionysus rides triumphantly into town on a donkey while people wave palm leaves to honor him.
# Osiris-Dionysus dies at Easter time as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.
# Osiris-Dionysus: After his death he descends to hell, and then on the third day he rises from the dead and ascends to heaven in glory.
# Osiris-Dionysus’ followers await his return as the judge during the Last Days.
# Osiris-Dionysus’ death and resurrection are celebrated by a ritual meal of bread and wine, which symbolize his body and blood”

Now these are more than similarities with the “life” of Jesus. This is what was plagiarized. It was even more obvious after Constantine (350 A.C. to 400 A.C.) the time they really took up the task of inventing Jesus Christ for the masses.

Then SUGABABI 06 said: “If we could be perfect by ourselves then why would we need God?”

My reply” This is the point. W e do not need “him.” we only need to achieve Divine Anarchy. I truly appreciated your candor, and your willingness to question and try to establish an honest debate without recurring to name calling. However, I have studied religions (esoteric and exoteric, and occultism) all my life, and I want to expose to the public how we are immersed in lies and how destructive to humanity the whole sham is.
Now the roots of the myth, “The goodman” story, is something that I will cover in the future. If you honored me with your visit, you’ll find out. Thank you.
(The bible is an historical document but by not stretch of the imagination is historically accurate)


Answering to Anonymous who said: “You have to take into account that not all people of a particular religion act the same way”

My reply: Yes, I think they do proudly and unreservedly make visible their alliance to one religion or another, CREATING A POLARITY. They polarize themselves, putting themselves above the rest because they are followers of “THE TRUTH,” which other religions don’t hold (otherwise they would have chosen to be in a different religion.) Religions always discriminate: The treatment for someone “outside the faith” (pagan, gentile, infidel—especially when it comes to marriage!) is always different than the treatment of those who share that faith, hence the polarity.
And, your next concern, you said: ”While I concur that religion is quite flawed and is used by some as a means of manipulation, you also have to see the beneficial effects of religions that are inherent in the value systems and laws imposed by many of them.”

My reply: From my point of view there is absolutely nothing beneficial about the effects of religions and their inherent value systems. Since men have created them, they are from the start polluted by men’s EGOS.

Further more religion was created by men using their rational brains (their left brains, the brain that gives you speech, the mathematical, geometrical brain the brain that is related to matter not the spirit) See JULIAN JAYNES-one of the 10 most important psychologist of our times--in his book “THE ORIGIN OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE BREAK-DOWN OF THE BICAMERAL MIND. He explains that men had, in the ancient past, the ability to use both brains the right and the left The right was used predominantly to be in contact with their “gods,” and in a much lesser way the left was used for menial everyday work.

A primordial man that JULIAN JAYNES calls “the god run man.” This man did not need religion because he was connected to the source directly. This man, he states, loses the use of the right brain because of a cataclysm. Suddenly, this man finds himself disconnected from the source, and here is when man starts to write scriptures to catalog the ideas of the “gods” (see by Willis Barnstone “THE OTHER BIBLE” Ancient Alternative Scriptures and you will find here a chapter “The Hypostasis of the Archons” The Archons are also called the Rulers or the Watchers. These are the ones who ruled over men, and the ones who cut the connection and left men on earth limping with only the right brain working--the brain they wrote scriptures with to remember their “gods’ teaching.” But because of their nascent egos, this knowledge was polluted from the beginning and become more so up until today .

See also chapter called The book of the Secrets of Enoch 1 and 2, and you’ll realize who these Rulers were and what kind of technology they had. And if you follow my page, I will try to give you a glimpse of way they did what they did. I will stop here because this gets too complicated to explain all at once, and I’d rather do it in increments. But suffice to say that the Watchers knew what they were doing and what was they were going to provoke with their departure: men with a limping brain that was going to produced a limping philosophy/religion, an imperfect understanding of the truth--like a car in the desert with the tires on one side deflated, so that it ends up going around in circles never going anywhere. That is what is call the OROBORUS that I have mentioned, The Wheel of IXION, the rational limping brain that LUCIFER supposedly started.

We are in jail until we figure the way out.

Then you said: “Oh, I hate to be a pain but you took "To be or not to be" out of context as it clearly refers to the question of suicide”

My reply: I would like to respectfully disagree with you there too. I understand you are analyzing it in a literary context, like the general public erroneously does because they still think that Shakspere, or who is commonly known as Shakespeare, wrote it. But the real context is OCCULTIST linked with Rosicrucians, and the man behind “to be or not to be” is Sir Francis Bacon a ‘Mason’, (see ”MASONIC HERMETIC QABALISTIC & ROSICRUCIAN SYMBOLICAL PHILOSOPHY by MANLY P.HALL”) with a long lineage of knowledge that comes from the times of the Sumerians passing through the Egyptian Mysteries. So, “To be or no to be” is not what you think it is.

Finally, you point out the following: “You also appear to be creating a label for yourself through your own preaching of "Divine Anarchy" which seems to somewhat contradict your post in a paradoxical kind of way”

My reply: Yes, you are right, I have created a label but it is purely for demonstrative purpose, to work with your left brain, because if I demonstrated Divine Anarchy instead of creating the label, I will be creating a POLARITY, which I do not want to do. If you read carefully what Divine Anarchy is, you’ll conclude that there is no label to define it; there is no structure; there is not hierarchy; there is no preaching of any kind that can capture its wholeness. It goes against the very idea of Divine Anarchy.

By the way I do really appreciated your comment.

J.A.L DANARCHYST