Jesus Lied - He Was Only Human: Debunking the New Testament (4 page)

Here’s the deal: Jesus was a Jew. He was raised by Jewish parents; he observed all the Jewish holidays; he prayed at the Jewish Temple; he prayed to the Jewish God; his followers had to be Jewish. Jesus loved everything Jewy about being a Jew. He loved his Jewishness more than Woody Allen loves his. So much so, that he put his unwavering endorsement behind the Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament:

This is a complete, unflinching, unfaltering sponsorship of all 613 commandments of the Old Testament Law of the 12 tribes of Israel. This quite clearly, and very concisely means that Jesus embraced with both of his respective man bosoms, laws that we today find unashamedly, utterly, completely, totally, morally repugnant. Laws such as:

They’re but a teeny snippet of some of the more barbaric Hebrew laws that Moses and Jesus embraced. Why? BECAUSE HE WAS A JEW, AND BLOODY PROUD OF IT! Which meant he loved his circumcised penis, and abhorred and disrespected the uncircumcised masses of all other nations.

“Move back you unclean snorkel dicks,” is most likely what he yelled when venturing through non-Jewish towns. While you may well think that what I’ve written here is utterly absurd, the Bible contains more than 200 references to battles waged earnestly between the two alternate models of penis! Seriously!

To be uncut meant you were a filthy foreigner in the eyes of all Jews, of that time. King David even makes mention of Goliath’s penis in his pre-battle self-arousal speech. David, prior to becoming King, steps forward to slay the 9 foot tall Goliath with naught but a sling and stone, when none of his much older and bigger compatriots will do so. David screams at his colleagues, embarrassed by their cowardice, “How can you blokes be afraid of this pathetic sod? Look at him. Yeah he’s 3 meters tall but look at his dick, he’s sporting one of those convertible models. He’s like a little girl. I will beat his ass.”
(1 Samuel 17:26)
…And he did.

There is no reason for us to mince words. The ancient Hebrews were a tribe of violent, xenophobic bigots! Don’t believe me? Read Exodus through Kings. An orgy of ethnic cleansing is illustrated right there for the bloody lusty reader.

A genocidal contempt for all non-Hebrew societies is unashamedly illustrated via the leadership of Moses to Joshua, from David to Solomon. And after all Jesus, so the Bible alleges, was the direct descendent of David. Ethnic cleansing was in his blood. He was Hebrew through and through, right down to the leather straps on his sandals. Let us remind ourselves how the ancient Jews felt about neighboring societies that practiced religion freedom:

Moreover, we have New Testament examples of Jesus’ wrath and contempt for non-Jews, as depicted in Matthew’s narrative of the Canaanite woman brought before Jesus. The woman’s daughter is suffering from a high fever. She and Jesus believe she is demonically possessed, which in modern terms most likely means that she has epilepsy. Nonetheless, the germ theory of disease is still unknown to Jesus, which seems odd that the Son of the Creator, or God himself, be unaware of dangerous microscopic organisms. (Imagine how many lives Jesus would have saved in child birth alone, from year one through to the 19
^th
century, if he had of let us in on that little health secret?) The woman pleads with Jesus that he exorcise the demon or demons within her daughter. Jesus replies coldly, “Piss off, you’re not a Jew”. The woman sobs uncontrollably and her desperate pleas become more vocal. Jesus shouts;

The woman cries in further desperation. Jesus looks at her scornfully, and says:

Anyone familiar with Middle Eastern culture will tell you that to refer to any person or persons as a dog, is as low an insult as any individual can hurl at another. Why? Dogs eat carrion and scraps, defecate, urinate and mate etc with no inhibitions. Henceforth, they were associated with being bad mannered, of low moral integrity, and having no honor. What Jesus, in effect, was saying, “Piss off, you sub-human thing, you”.

Sure, you can accuse me of over dramatization all you want, but this is the essence of his message. He’s made it clear in this dialogue that he is concerned for Jews only, as was his nation’s psyche at the time, and anyone unfortunate, in his eyes, not to have been born a descendent of Jacob is unworthy of the scraps from his table. This is a damning passage - make no mistake about it. This is racist Jesus in full flight!

If we are to examine the historical Jesus then we must see him only as a Rabbi that put his own spin or flavor on the Jewish law or Bible. He saw himself as conduit to bring his people, the Jews, back in step with not only the law but with God too, this is, if you’ve read the Old Testament, an overarching theme (i.e. prophets coming to return the 12 tribes to their Law, their Lore and their God).

Moreover, if we look at the principle tenets of the Christian faith it is this: Those that believe that Jesus was the Son of God, who died on the cross to atone for all of our past and future sins, will experience everlasting life in the kingdom of Heaven. This is not something Jesus ever said. Jesus’ position was clear, heaven would be reserved exclusively for the ‘“righteous.” In other words, he was referring to those that obeyed God’s law to the letter. The doctrine of salvation through belief in Jesus comes from the marketing whizz huckster Saint Paul in his letter to the newly established Church in Rome in approximately 60 AD:

Paul outlines that salvation comes through believing only in Jesus’ death and resurrection, and therefore in one whoosh of the pen completely overturned what Jesus had to say about the importance of observing the law to the letter. In another verse, Paul even makes the claim that observing the law will only hinder one’s prospects of obtaining the magical VIP pass into heaven when he writes:

Nowhere in the New Testament does Jesus make any statement regarding the supposedly sacrificial purpose behind his death. It is Paul, and the Gospels that give their differing reasons for Jesus’ crucifixion. Paul says he died for our sins. Luke says it was to make the Jews realize they are sinful and therefore need to turn to God for forgiveness. Mark says it is an atoning sacrifice for the original sin. Don’t be confused, atonement and forgiveness are two different things, but we will tackle that in a later chapter.

The point is, these respective philosophies and theologies concerning the death of Jesus-the-Jew, which form the central tenet for the Christian religion, are built on commentary not only external to Jesus and foreign to his beliefs, but by people that never actually met him. Not only had these authors never met the guy, but also, Jesus had been dead for some time before they’d even been born. Furthermore, with no written testament from Jesus’ own hand, anything the Gospel writers penned was their own conjecture based on lore.

Christianity was, therefore, never established on the words of Jesus but rather the writings of others, most of whom are unknown to us, all of whom never heard Jesus speak a solitary word. Effectively, all these authors had accomplished was to learn of the fanciful fairy-tales about this man named Jesus and then so extrapolated on them to their own ends.

At this point, I feel compelled to point out that I am giving just a broad brush over the origins of Christianity. Much of this book concerns the Gospels and Paul, and for now we will skip ahead to how this religion came into prominence and ultimately western civilization’s consciousness.

Where do we begin? Well, first of all it would be an understatement to say that it began with humble beginnings. In fact, that would be an overstatement. For the first three centuries after the death of Jesus, those that called themselves Christians numbered less than 40,000 throughout the Roman Empire. Considering that the Jewish population at that time is estimated to have been approximately 4,000,000 people. This places the Christian total at, give or take, 1% of their Jewish counterparts. This amounts to little more than a fringe minority. Even today’s Scientologists have greater market share, and those guys are freaking crazzy. (I’ve intentionally misspelled crazy to give the adjective added emphasis ie Mel Gibson is crazzy)

Moreover, the Christian belief system seemed so whacky and absurd to Jews, and non-Jews alike that the early believers were routinely arrested for insanity and fed to the lions as sport. Karen Armstrong in her book
A History of God
writes:

The educated class of Rome and Athens looked to philosophy rather than religion when it came to the search for enlightenment. With the intelligencia finding personal comfort in the teachings of Plato and Socrates, these same educated individuals regarded the God of Abraham as a ferocious, barbaric, and primitive deity... which isn’t that big a stretch, considering that the God of the Old Testament is all of those things and more.

Moreover, the Christian belief that a god could suffer a gruesome, disgraceful death on a dirty, dusty, isolated and obscure corner of the Roman Empire seemed beyond the pale of rationality for most first century thinkers. Ultimately, from a Roman perspective, Christianity seemed neither a religion nor a philosophy, and accordingly it was shunned as CRAZY! (Cap locks to denote crazier than Mel Gibson CRAZY) Imagine that…

What set Christianity apart from other religions of the time, though, was its desperate need to convert others to its faith. The early martyrs of the Church, Saint Paul, Saint Peter, and Saint Valentine were all beheaded, and went to their deaths willingly for their religious belief. This fact puzzled Romans in particular, who believed blood sacrifice to be the archaic machinations of a socially retarded ancient civilization. Martin Goodman, author
Rome & Jerusalem
, writes: