Christianity
is not historical or original in any way, nor is it a restoration of
Judaism, but in the Judaic fashion compiles many borrowed traditions
and alters them so as to form a syncretist counterfeit. In its bid to
be a universal religion, the Christian church fraudulently
reinterpreted strictly esoteric practices in a limited theological
and historical manner, while abnegating much of Mosaic law before
forming an even harsher law.
The
desire for a universal religion and government uniting an empire was
seen as early as the time of the Sumerians, and continued on to the
time of Alexander the Great who sought to Hellenize the world, which
task was taken up later by the Romans. Thus, what made such a
syncretist religion possible was the fact that much of the Middle
East and the Mediterranean were already multicultural, as evidenced
by the University of Alexandria.
The
Greek philosophers taught us in which manner the gods were in part
based on the stars. The same is true with all myths. So too are the
gospels based on astrology, particularly the sun’s path through the
constellations, as Hill’s Astral
Worship and Murdock’s
Christ Conspiracy
shows. This is why Revelation
4:5 declares that the
planets are “seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which
are the seven spirits of God.” And Revelation
1:19-20 instructs to
write the prophecy of “the mystery of the seven stars.” Jesus,
moreover, was born in Manger, a constellation beneath Cancer, and
rode into Jerusalem on the Asses, the stars to the north and south in
Cancer.
In
the case of borrowing, the earliest source of inspiration for the
gospels comes from the Shamanic tale of Ursus, the Great Bear, who
comes down from the heavens to aid mankind. Similar tales of
sacrifice and redemption include the Arabian and Nazarene Isa, the
Assyrian Adad and Marduk, the Chaldean Crite, the Greek Aesclepius,
Apollo, Dionysus, Hercules, Prometheus, and Zeus, the Egyptian
Alcides, Hermes, Horus, Osiris, and Serapis, the Indian Buddha,
Indra, Krishna, and Salivahana, the Persian Mithras and Zoroaster,
the Phrygian Attis, the Roman Jove, Jupiter, Romulus, and Quirinis,
the Sumerian Dumuzi and Ishtar, the Syrian Tammuz, and the Thracian
Zalmoxis.
One
of the main sources of inspiration was the legend of Dionysus who was
born to a virgin in the town of Sabaoth; he was called Savior,
performed miracles, changed water into wine, rode in a triumphal
procession on an ass, offered his flesh and blood in ritual, was
sacrificed by the Titans, and was resurrected. In one legend, he was
persecuted by Lycurgus, king of the Edonians of Thrace, who rebelled
against the spiritual authority as represented in the king’s
attempt to slaughter the infant Dionysus and extinguish Ambrosia, and
later by expelling him from his kingdom and denying his divinity,
claiming that Dionysus violated his mother (who symbolized wisdom),
because the sacramental mixed wine, he said, was bad medicine.
Lycurgus was driven to madness by the wine and killed his son Dryas
(Oak), meaning “strength, knowledge,” thinking he was a vine.
Dionysus then put a curse upon the land until the king was
sacrificed, which alone restored the kingdom.i
It
is important to note that cults of Dionysus existed in Jerusalem
where he was known as IES or Jes, meaning “the one light.”
Dionysus was modeled after the Egyptian Osiris and Horus, whose myths
involved the exact same circumstances that were later to be seen in
the gospels.
Another
important source was the shepherd god Attis, who was born to the
virgin goddess Cybele, was crucified (by Chaldeans, according to one
tale), was resurrected after three days, and whose flesh and blood
was consumed as a sacrament (because he filled the world). Attis,
along with Mithras, had a temple dedicated to him on Vatican Hill
before it was taken over by the Christians.
There
is also the legend of Romulus and Remus, according to which King
Numitor was exiled from the spiritual kingdom and was overthrown by
his brother Amulius (the sorcerer). The daughter of Numitor and
vestal virgin Rhea Silvia copulates with Mars and gives birth to the
twins Romulus and Remus, who represent the Spirit and the soul. When
Amulius got word of this he accused Rhea Silvia of violating her oath
and ordered the twins killed by exposure. The servant charged with
the task placed them in a basket and cast them into the river Tiber
where they eventually floated into a fig tree sacred to Juno. There
they were looked after by the river-god Tiberinus, who gives them to
a she-wolf to suckle in a cave beneath Palatine Hill. Once grown,
Romulus and Remus overthrow Amulius and reinstate their grandfather
Numitor as king of Alba Longa, symbolizing the restoration of the
spiritual center and the primordial state. Before the founding of
Rome, however, the twins get into a disagreement over who is to rule
and which hill to make the center. The dispute was solved when Remus
was killed by Romulus, thereby making him immortal.
Plutarch
wrote that during the thirty-seventh year of Rome, Romulus offered a
public sacrifice, when “suddenly the sky was darkened, a thick
cloud of storm and rain settled on the earth; the common people fled
in fright, and were dispersed; and in this whirlwind Romulus
disappeared, his body being never found either living or dead. A foul
suspicion presently attached to the patricians, and rumors were
current among the people as if that they, weary of kingly government,
and exasperated of late by the imperious deportment of Romulus toward
them, had plotted against his life and made him away, so that they
might assume the authority and government into their own hands. This
suspicion they sought to turn aside by decreeing divine honors to
Romulus, as to one not dead, but translated to a higher condition.
And Proculus, a man of note, took oath that he saw Romulus caught up
into heaven in his arms and vestments, and heard him, as he ascended,
cry out that they should hereafter style him by the name of
Quirinus.”
According
to Livy, “a few voices began to proclaim Romulus’ divinity; the
cry was taken up, and at last every man present hailed him as a god
and son of a god, and prayed to him to be forever gracious and to
protect his children. However, even on this great occasion there
were, I believe, a few dissenters who secretly maintained that the
king had been torn to pieces by the senators. At all events the story
got about, though in veiled terms; but it was not important, as awe
and admiration for Romulus’ greatness set the seal upon the other
version of his end, which was, moreover, given further credit by the
timely action of a certain Julius Proculus, a man, we are told,
honored for his wise counsel on weighty matters. The loss of the king
had left the people in an uneasy mood and suspicious of the senators,
and Proculus, aware of the prevalent temper, conceived the shrewd
idea of addressing the Assembly. Romulus, he declared, the father of
our city descended from heaven at dawn this morning and appeared to
me. In awe and reverence I stood before him, praying for permission
to look upon his face without sin. ‘Go,’ he said, ‘and tell the
Romans that by heaven’s will my Rome shall be capital of the world.
Let them learn to be soldiers. Let them know, and teach their
children, that no power on earth can stand against Roman arms.’
Having spoken these words, he was taken up again into the sky.”
This
story coincides with the later gospels of Christ. And it is
interesting to note that after Quirinus, the Romans dedicated a
festival called Equirria, during which a scapegoat or innocent goat
or person was blamed and punished for the sins, crimes, and
sufferings of others, and was driven out of the city symbolizing
redemption.
Notwithstanding,
the myths and legends are not meant to be purely historical, but are
symbolic of the spiritual battle, of which Proclus writes, “the
true warfare with the giants takes place in souls: whenever reason
and intellect rule in them, the goods of the Olympians and Athena
prevail, and the entire life is kingly and philosophical; but
whenever the passions reign, or in general the worse and earth-born
elements, then the constitution within them is tyranny.”
Notwithstanding, the Semitic religions are gross falsifications of
history or pious frauds which have distorted the myths and presented
them as being exclusive to their own religion.
There
is evidence that the apostle Paul, who may or may not have existed in
some form, was modeled after such figures as Orpheus and Apollonius
of Tyana, who also served as a basis for Jesus. Moses also had his
equivalent in Minos, son of Zeus, who represented the Universal Ruler
by entering a mountain cave every nine years and emerging with the
tablets of the law to show that the law had a sacred foundation.
Although
Moses can be identified with such constellations as Orion, Perseus,
and Ophiuchus, Manetho turns him into a mythical person stating that
Moses was an Egyptian priest named Osarseph who, after he and his
leper followers were banished to Canaan, led a rebellion against
Egypt, which resulted in a short reign and religious oppression
before the usurpers were overthrown and the Egyptian tradition was
restored. Josephus and Irenaeus state that Moses married an Ethiopian
princess on the condition that she would procure the deliverance of
her city into his power. For this marriage God cursed him and caused
Miriam to be leprous. Tacitus also wrote that a disfiguring disease
broke out over Egypt and by order of the gods the king rounded up the
detested peoples who were led by Moses and expelled them into the
desert, but after a long journey they came upon a land in which they
founded Jerusalem, which Strabo says was conquered not by arms but by
political and religious promises.
We
are certain this is the case, for as the Jewish exodus is a falsified
account of history, whereby, as Uzdavinys states, the Jews borrowed
tales of the Hyksos invasion and Akhenaten rebels and retold them
through a Jewish viewpoint. By 1570 b.c.e., the Hyksos were expelled,
paving the way for the largest Egyptian empire in history, created by
Thutmose III in the fifteenth century, extending all throughout the
thirteenth century with Rameses and Merneptah, all of whom conquered
Canaan and decimated the Israelite population. We must conclude that
the names and legends of the pharaohs were rewritten by the Jews into
a false history mocking the pharaoh and portraying the Jews as
heroes, whereas the truth is that for hundreds of years the
Israelites had sought to overthrow the nations by preaching a new
religion and political system which was in every way subversive to
tradition; to wit: Deuteronomy
7, Isaiah 60, Zechariah 14,
and even John 4:22.
Likewise, Christianity originated as a Jewish conspiracy to rule the
world through a common religion and hierarchy delivered to them by a
fraudulent messiah and prophecy.
After
the most extensive archaeological projects conducted to prove the
history of the old and new testaments of the bible, not a single
piece of evidence has been found to support any of its mythological
fictions—not of the exodus from Egypt, nor the conquest of Canaan,
nor the kingdom of David, which supposedly spanned from the Nile to
the Euphrates, nor yet of Jesus.
Moreover,
after the Hyksos invasion of Egypt in 1730 b.c.e., the Egyptians
received regular detailed reports from their many spies in Palestine
and Syria. Among the tens of thousands of ancient Egyptian documents
that have been deciphered not a single item has been found telling of
anything remotely resembling biblical events, save for a single
mention of Israel believed to refer to a small territory in the south
of Palestine. Therefore, the Judaic myths, as like all myths, indeed
refer to our time and no other.
The
Semitist Error
Whereas
the civilizationist error views modern civilization as the standard
by which civilization is measured, the Semitist error holds that
Judaism is the model for all civilizations. Far from a universal or
even organic religion, Semitism had been imposed on different peoples
through deception, which philosophers like Manetho, Celsus, Porphyry,
and Julian charged as a conspiracy originating with Moses. The modus
operandi was to
present a new religion and political system, opposing it to all
previous forms, which arising conflict was to be solved by conversion
to a system of totalitarian control.
According
to Tacitus, “Moses gave a new form of worship and a system of
religious ceremonies the reverse of everything known to any other age
or country. Whatever is held sacred by the Romans, with the Jews is
profane; and what in other nations is unlawful and impure, with them
is fully established.” This conspiracy continued with Christianity
in exactly the same manner. Whereas Celsus recognized that the Jews
borrowed their doctrine from other cultures, mainly the Assyrians and
Egyptians, and then opposed certain aspects of it to appear as “a
chosen people set apart,” the Christians borrowed their doctrine
from the Jews, Greeks, Gnostics, and Romans, and then declared their
church as the only true religion, due in part to its
pseudo-historical content. On the contrary, Porphyry recognized that
even the history of the four evangelists is false.
Celsus
and Porphyry, who were of the opinion that a people should preserve
their ancestral traditions, saw the gentile Christians as traitors to
their people, as deceivers, impostors, and atheists. Christianity was
merely the “new superstition.” Celsus wrote that Christians
taught their doctrine only to the “ignorant, uneducated, and
foolish persons,” for they were “only able to gain control over
the silly, base, and stupid.” In order to win over the people, the
Christian teachers turned spouse against spouse and children against
their parents, as Jesus instructed.
Julian
took this criticism further, writing that Christianity is a “fiction
of men composed by wickedness” which “has in it nothing divine,”
but “by making full use of that part of the soul which loves fable
and is childish and foolish, it has induced men to believe that the
monstrous tale is truth.” He charged Paul with duplicity, since
when speaking to the Jews he said that their god is only of Israel
and they are the chosen people, but when speaking to the Greeks he
said that the Jewish god is also a god of gentiles.
Julian,
like Celsus, recognized the differences between races as the basis
for ancestral gods, explaining that “God the creator is the father
and king of all things, but other functions he assigned to gods of
nations and cities, each of whom administer his own department in
accordance with his own nature; for since in the father all things
are one and complete, while in the separate deities one quality or
another predominates, thus the nations over which the gods preside
follow each the essential character of their proper god.” And “as
for men’s laws, it is evident that men have established them to
correspond with their own natural dispositions; that is to say,
constitutional and humane laws were established by those in whom a
humane disposition had been fostered above all else, savage and
inhuman laws by those in whom there lurked and was inherent the
contrary disposition; for lawgivers have succeeded in adding but
little by their discipline to the natural characters and aptitudes of
men.” Differences in “character and laws” of a people were
established by “some presiding national god and his subordinates.
For different natures must first have existed in all those things
that among the nations were to be differentiated. This at any rate is
seen if one observes how very different in their bodies are the
Germans and Scythians from the Libyans and Ethiopians.”
Julian
opposed the commandment which forbid the worship of other gods, for
contrary to the Jewish error, there cannot be any jealousy in God. As
this fallacy falls, so goes the absurd falsehood which attempts to
explain the diversity of races and civilizations. According to
Genesis, there originally existed one city, one people, and one
language, but God confounded their language and scattered them
throughout the earth fearing that, since man was of one mind to which
nothing was withheld, man might construct a tower to the heavens and
overthrow him. Now, what sort of god would experience fear, spite,
and jealousy and commit mischief because of it?
Nevertheless,
we agree that the attempt to make the races one is mischievous and
therefore Paul was wrong to spread Semitism to the gentiles, while
Christian exclusivism is even more grievous an error. Julian remarks
here that “among mankind the difference between the customs and the
political constitutions of the nations is in every way greater than
the difference in their language.”
However,
it is impossible to reason with Semitists who believe in the false
genealogies and chronologies which claim that mankind began in 4190
b.c.e., that the races Shem, Ham, and Japheth only came about in 2625
b.c.e., that woman came from the rib of man, and that Noah fit two of
every animal species on a tiny boat for forty days to escape a deluge
in 2528 b.c.e.!
The
Apostolic Illusion
The
doctrine of apostolic succession states that the authority and
infallibility of the church derives from the apostles who attained
the Spirit and established the Christian doctrine, which was
transmitted orally. Yet, if to these men all things were revealed, as
John states, then why was so much left out in their teachings as to
be obscurantist rather than purely metaphysical? Surely, there was no
doctrinal continuity, as evidenced by the constant changes that have
taken place over the entire time-frame of the religion. Nor was there
anything spiritual being transmitted in the sacraments, virtually or
otherwise.
It
is also evident that nothing spiritual was really transmitted by the
laying on of hands during ordinations, for the majority of the church
clergy were clueless as to the metaphysical meaning of their own
doctrine, nor did the majority of them attain spiritual states; those
few who did owed their achievements to outside influences, such as
Platonism and Sufism.
Therefore,
we find that if there was an initiatic chain in the beginning started
by the apostles it didn’t last long, disappearing around the time
Christianity became an exoteric missionary religion.
The
church systematically eradicated any movement which showed any signs
of initiatic power, on the pretext that they possessed a doctrine and
a method outside of the church. Ultimately, the church required
uniformity: one doctrine, one method, one church to perpetuate the
lie of apostolic succession; hence Ephesians
4:5, “One Lord, one
faith, one baptism.”
Just
as Judaism was torn by several conflicting sects, Christianity began
with even more conflicting parties, primarily for the fact that it
was rooted in a multicultural syncretism. This data conflicts with
the very idea of a messiah and his apostles, for if by messiah it is
meant the spiritual influence, and apostle is taken to mean a prophet
or messenger, then how could it really be said that such men attained
a divine revelation of Christian prophecy if it began with an
indefinite amount of conflicting variations fabricated by copying and
altering other myths and legends?
The
four official gospels were written down centuries later, most likely
by compiling bits and pieces of several apocryphal gospels, adding
lines as one saw fit, and then suppressing all other works as dubious
and untrue. As it is widely accepted that many of the apostolic
epistles were pseudepigrapha
or biblical forgeries, then by what measure is the authority of these
writings? And by what authority does the church claim its doctrine
and rites, which are by no means found in the bible, but are based
rather loosely on certain obscure passages?
Moreover,
as there were and still are many different sects, which church, if
any, possesses the authentic doctrine and rites as supposedly passed
on by the apostles? That such sectarianism has always existed points
to the fact that there was no apostolic succession.
The
forgery 2 Peter
warns of false teachers claiming that “we have not followed
cunningly devised fables…but were eyewitnesses” who “were with
him in the holy mount,” as if it was all history and not myth, and
as if it all came together perfectly from the start. It then assures
us that Christian “prophecy of the scripture is not of any private
interpretation,” for it “came not by the will of man but by holy
men moved by the Spirit.” We are then warned of false prophets and
false teachers who bring about heresies which the many will follow,
and will exploit the people and speak evil of things they don’t
understand. But is this not the church itself which has done these
things? Are not, in fact, the entire gospels and epistles forgeries
and mutilations? Are they not accusing their victims of the very
charges they have committed?
According
to Eusebius, Dionysius claimed that Christian forgers mutilated the
gospels and epistles, calling them the “devil’s apostles.”
Clearly, as there were hundreds of contradictory gospels that placed
the whole religion in doubt, the church saw fit to decide upon a set
number of texts, which was also done by the Jewish scribes centuries
before for the same reason, hence the Jewish texts were taken from
other traditions which were then forged, mutilated, and added on to.
We
therefore deny the Christian prophecy and blast Jesus and the
apostles as crafty lies. The truth is that the church handed power to
itself and enforced its oppressive doctrine by murder and
intimidation. Its entire doctrine, rites, and sacraments are
imaginary, distorted, and mutilated over and against the bible to
which the church has no rightful claim. As it is written, the
anti-messiah rules by deception so as to deceive even the elite, or
those whose office they occupy, and whereas Jesus, and Paul, charged
the Pharisees, and the Jews, to be of the Devil, it is the Christian
clergy who are of the Antichrist. One cannot foolishly blame the
church’s problems on outside influences or infiltrations, for it
was the church on its own volition which destroyed itself and its
people out of hatred, ignorance, and desire for power. The
Reformation occurred merely as a result of the abuse of power
committed by the church, and by the time democracy set in, the
authority rested in the church was broken and thereafter the religion
ceased to have any proper function or efficacy.
In
order to hold onto whatever influence it still possessed, the church
adapted its doctrine to certain socio-political trends, while keeping
its main purpose intact to brainwash and oppress Western man and
obscure him from true knowledge, of which the church possessed only a
parody. In all sincerity, the church is nothing but a rotting,
stinking corpse, which ought to be buried and forgotten. What can be
salvaged from the bible should be, but not before removing all of the
nonsense it contains.
The
Theologist Error
According
to Christian doctrine, Christ’s sacrifice effectively tore the veil
from the holy sanctuary, thus abrogating the priest as intermediary
and enabling the laity to assume a priestly function in accordance
with the covenant. Now, the true covenant is the sacrifice on the
Tree of Life which binds man to God, the final goal of which is a
union with the Supreme Principle, in the face of which man’s will
becomes identical to God’s will.
As
Boehme declared, “man is made out of all the powers of God, out of
all the seven spirits of God, as the angels also are.” These seven
heavens are symbolized by the seven animals sacrificed in the
covenant, the journey through which is man’s fight against the
devil as the inner battle for the intellectual light, which is also
the quest for the Spirit and the judgment of good and evil.
As
evil is overcome, says Boehme, “then the heavenly gate opens” to
the Spirit and the Spirit “sees the divine and heavenly Being, not
externally beyond the body, but in the wellspring of the heart”
wherein the Spirit contemplates. Whosoever attains this gnosis, he
adds, is richer and nobler than any monarch on earth and more potent
and absolute than all earthly powers and authorities.
Unfortunately,
there is no remaining lineage of Christian initiation, nor of
custodians of the orthodox doctrine within the church, save for the
very limited form of Hesychasm, which, as Evola and Pallis have
pointed out, is little more than recruitment into a monastic Order,
of which there is nothing spiritual being transmitted. Beyond this it
is clear that the church has failed to heed Boehme’s warning: “O
ye theologians, the Spirit here opens a door and gate for you! If you
will not now see and feed your sheep and lambs on a green meadow,
instead of a dry, parched heath, you must be accountable for it
before the severe, earnest, and wrathful judgment of God.” As
Schuon says, “The exoteric viewpoint is, in fact, doomed to end by
negating itself once it is no longer vivified by the presence within
it of the esoterism of which it is both the outward radiation and the
veil. So it is that religion, according to the measure in which it
denies metaphysical and initiatory realities and becomes crystallized
in a literalistic dogmatism, inevitably engenders unbelief.” The
anti-esoteric viewpoint thus amounts to nothing less than a sin
against the Holy Spirit for which there is no forgiveness.
Hosea
4:6 states, “My
people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast
rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no
priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will
also forget thy children.” Malachi
2:1-3 commands the
priests, “If ye will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart,
to give glory unto my name, saith the Lord of hosts, I will even send
a curse upon you, and I will curse your blessings: yea, I have cursed
them already, because ye do not lay it to heart. Behold, I will
corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces, even the dung of
your solemn feasts; and one shall take you away with it.” Malachi
4:1 adds that “the
day cometh that shall burn as an oven, and all the proud and all that
do wickedly shall be stubble.”
In
our time, it may be stated without exaggeration that the lion
(empire) and the lamb (church) are the greatest enemies to the West
and to mankind. They no longer value dispassion or detachment which
is that freedom from, and control over, the passions, nor do they
value true principles which have their basis in ultimate reality, but
have wholly given themselves over to political corruption and
devilry. They have replaced ritual and doctrine with a mutable
morality, under the false premise that merely doing good deeds leads
to salvation, and have replaced the last vestiges of traditional
monarchy with a secular, oligarchic tyranny. This new progressive
religion has redefined the good to better conform to the worst
political trends while still claiming that it is the same “eternal
religion.” As sure as the virtues and sacraments have been
distorted, so were they effectively replaced with the equally
distorted “rights.”
Modern
religion sees its natural home in politics both of which are nothing
more than the reduction of intellectual principles to sentiment;
everything is relegated to the moral point of view, since being the
lowest order of philosophy pertaining completely to the realm of
human actions, it is the only form of speculation that doesn’t
escape the modernists’ grasp. Such cannot be called speculative due
to the ambiguity of morality—hence, the incompatibility of
religious doctrines which go no further than the contingent—for
this form of morality is no longer even rational, but has exalted
lesser values over and against higher virtues as to render them the
new “vices.” Now all who oppose the bad are guilty of the sin of
emotion, denying the causes which lay behind one’s thoughts and
acts.
It
may be argued that such a religious distortion was inevitable, if not
inborn in Semitic theology, which acts as a hindrance to man; and
indeed that is its purpose, insofar as it restricts, for the
mentality demanded of one is that of the sinner and lowliest of
creatures, whose very existence one must hate. But in every
tradition, the conflict between exoteric forms and esoteric
principles is the same as between Spirit and matter. If the
peripheral formalism does not point towards the pure substance, but
in fact deviates entirely as to lead one to political progressivism,
then such a form is intrinsically heterodox.
Similarly,
to give a higher importance to the symbols than the formless ideas
they symbolize is far worse a heresy and superstition than to give
greater importance to esoteric ideas which seemingly conflict with
the formal codes. As theological exoterism is a severe sentimental
limitation to the metaphysician, he would surely require the import
of symbols, rites, and principles that would be considered outside of
the scope of religious theology by the clerics. This import is of no
harm whatsoever so long as it doesn’t impinge upon the cohesion of
the religious form itself and as a whole, but in all cases where
eternal principles are concerned it can and must only strengthen it.
As
Schuon points out, the religio
formalis appears
clothed in a “collective soul determined by particular racial and
ethnic factors,” whereas the religio
perennis is situated
more in the universal and formless. Even though the religio
perennis is founded
upon formal elements, it represents the purest and highest level of
spirituality—the underlying universality of all orthodox
religions—which in essence includes the intellectual discernment
between reality and illusion or between the eternal and contingent,
and the attachment of the will to the eternal. It then follows that
religions must be adapted to different races, cultures, and other
contingent factors so as to allow for exacting guidance without
suffocating its adherents in a formalist excesses.
It
is therefore not metaphysics but religious laws that must be under
review by those who not only fully comprehend theology, but also who
have no thoughtless obsessions over the moral codes, which are in
many cases draconian and cruel.
Adding
insult to injury, many of the clerics do not even practice what they
preach. For instance, abstinence and chastity are demanded and
abortion and contraception are forbidden, while at the same time, a
large portion of the clergy are molesting and abusing children,
consorting with prostitutes, and covering up the scandals. Such
hypocrisies offer a clear indication that excessive religious laws
fight against the natural order only to have the natural tendencies
resurface in a deviant behavioral pattern. One cannot blame the sin
entirely on the sinner if the rule is impractical. Along this order,
there is nothing more impractical than assembling together the
supposed intellectual caste and forbidding them to marry and
procreate, for as the intelligence is genetically inherited, its
greatest expressions will have become forever lost. Hence, the clergy
of today are made up of the worst types of men possible, while the
true intellectual elite are entirely absent.
In
regard to the law, Schuon states that there exists a human margin in
which are placed the unessential aspects, exaggerations, and
excesses, which more often than not are obstacles and petty
distractions to the “one thing needful.” We would go further
still to highlight the ambiguity of morality, as expressed in
Christ’s teachings which were meant either to oppose the Pharisees
or to radicalize the law to irrational heights; “for unless your
righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and
Pharisees, ye shall in no way enter into the kingdom of heaven”
(Matthew 5:20).
Indeed, Matthew 5:39-40
and 43-4
are the teachings of an imbecile or a coward. There is no mystery
behind “turn the other cheek” other than it opposes the
Pharisee’s “eye for eye” and the traditional “love God and
hate thy enemy”; for as Aristotle said, “Tolerance and apathy are
the last virtues of a dying society.” By and large, modern religion
is scarcely different from the new age pseudo-religions which all
have in common the following characteristics: individualism,
scientism, moral progressivism, reduction of intuition to subjective
phenomena, and the stubborn aversion to metaphysical principles.
The
Ambiguity of Morality
The
error of the three Semitic religions is the tendency to elevate
morality to an absolute level, and this poses a problem since much of
what passes for morality is marginal. We say morality as to
distinguish it from virtue, where morality is a particular right or
wrong, whereas virtue is a universal quality, such as knowledge,
courage, or love. While true religion consists in willing the good,
morality is only a limitation of the good, and as such cannot be
absolute. Virtue derives from reason which derives from pure
knowledge; yet morality, being especially adapted to contingencies
such as race, caste, and time period, can only be relative, and this
is why there is no unity of religious laws. The ethical worldview is
firmly situated in a duality unique to circumstance.
Man
must decide what is his will to do by necessity and judge by reason
and intellectual discernment. Without free will, man is an ignorant
slave. Such a slave morality inverts the natural hierarchy of
virtues, which normally must be ordered by the intellect with
everything in its proper place.
Texts
like Genesis
and Exodus
dodge this philosophical problem by claiming that God told man what
was his right to do or not to do, but this is a fanciful illusion. No
god spoke when ancient man gathered plants, killed animals, and
defended his territory against enemies, yet this constitutes theft
and murder. Many sins, when misapplied, are also misunderstandings.
Lust, for example, is not a sin in itself, but a natural instinct; it
is a sign of a healthy sexual function which tells one to reproduce.
That
within sedentary civilization laws were set forth to instill order
does not mean that these laws came from God, but from man as temporal
authority. Accordingly, the greater the expansion, particularity, and
detail of the law, the more marginal it becomes, which is to say that
justice depends on unique circumstances which cannot be foreseen in
totality by the letter of the law, nor enforced upon all by some
equal measure. This is why it is the spirit of the law which matters,
save in such cases where the law itself is in error.
When
laws are unjust and rulers corrupt, it then becomes the necessary
duty of the people to dissolve the law by whatever means deemed fit.
As religion has become superficial and distorted, so too is it
necessary to nullify its laws, even as to deny assumed aspects of
God, who is made into an absurdity in Semitic religion, which places
emphasis on the son of God’s personal, historical, and human
nature, which all know to be fictionalized fantasies brought on by a
witch’s spell.
Through
the Semitic prejudice, moreover, Semitic religion is viewed as the
only true religion, while the so-called polytheistic traditions are
viewed as false and savage. It thus affords no other viewpoints aside
from its own; and for this reason, it is most dangerous.
We
must object that Jesus, like Zarathustra and Hermes, was not a man,
but designated a certain spiritual influence over the time and
people; hence, his kingdom was not of this earth, but to come “in
the midst and within.” As the king and lawyers represent the world
soul, Jesus represents the world Spirit. Whereas the messiah is
ultimately the Divine Intellect, his coming implies an event of
severe circumstance, such as which mankind is now facing.
Suffice
it to say, the idea of a Supreme Being as an affirmation of the
Supreme Principle through a Divine Personality is found in all
traditions. This affirmation is synonymous with manifestation, which
in Christianity is the work of the messengers or angels, who are
powers of God and are equivalent to the gods, such as the Greek
arkhai,
transcendent beings or archetypal principles, or the Hindu divyas,
literally “divine beings.” All these are God. For, according to
Aristotle, “God is one, yet has many names, being called after all
the various conditions which he himself inaugurates.” And
Philodemus and Aeschylus write that, “Zeus is air, Zeus is earth,
Zeus is heaven, Zeus is all things and whatever is beyond them.”
It
is therefore senseless to refer to terms such as monotheism and
polytheism, as every orthodox tradition is monotheistic and only
deviations can be considered polytheistic.
It
is yet to be regretted that Semitic religions had became so
radicalized and standardized that they marked a clear break from
tradition, thus bringing the people to the Dark Age, which period is
influenced by peasants, slaves, or pashus,
literally “those in bondage,” being slaves in every sense of the
word, especially to their passions. Speaking specifically of
Christianity, Evola writes, “In general, it is evident that what
has been universalized, rendered exclusive, and exalted are the way,
the truth, and the attitude that pertain only to an inferior human
type or to those lower strata of a society for whom the exoteric
forms of Tradition have been devised; this is precisely one of the
characteristic signs of the climate of the Dark Age or Kali Yuga.”
He
goes on to instruct that, in the Dark Age, death and destruction is
the theme, by which a false and illusive freedom is known by all.
This age, moreover, is characterized by the main bonds which have
stricken the inferior person or servant, those being: sympathy,
delusion (belief in falsehoods), shame, fear, and a total attachment
to all lowly and worldly things. The only means of escaping these
bonds is through the purification of the will and the practicing of a
certain initiatic discipline; yet it was precisely this art that was
eventually stamped out by the church itself, which instead claims
that religious ceremonialism and moralism is the basis for salvation,
completely at odds with the divine truth.
Such
ignorance is intrinsic to Semitic religions which subordinate
metaphysics to an inferior, sentimental, and erroneous theology, and
condemn to heresy and death all who oppose such ambiguous theological
nonsense about God, having no metaphysical bearing whatsoever. It was
the hate-filled Jewish bigotry that Christianity and Islam inherited
which regards pagan civilizations as the ultimate evil and therefore
destroyed those peoples and their heritage. Perhaps the biggest irony
comes from Jesus who threatened and offended the Pharisees and
preached revolution against their law, but quickly turned into a
cowardly liar claiming that, “They hated me without a cause”
(John
15:25).ii
He went so far as to say that, “Blessed are ye, when men shall
revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil
against you falsely, for my sake” (Matthew 5:11). Isn’t it ironic
that the Christians claimed to be persecuted for subverting the
traditional world with a new religion and then proceeded to persecute
all non-Christians, destroying their cultures?
Many
religious proscriptions were made simply out of hatred of other
traditions, as in the forbidding of wine, pork, and apples, since
they were used as pagan sacraments. Religious leaders even opposed
the ritual use of entheogens despite their long history.iii
Even the original Christians used sacrificial cakes and wine mixed
with psychoactive herbs, and several Greek reliefs depict the gods
mixing wine and herbs or receiving mixed wine or draught from a
serpent. Jesus himself drank a mixed wine, sang a hymn, and fell into
a heavy trance (Mark
14).
In that state, he spoke and said, “These signs shall follow them
that believe: in my name shall they cast out devils and speak with
new tongues,” meaning that they shall perform the incantation of
the Divine Name so as to attain spiritual communion; for “they
shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall
not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall
recover.”iv
Needless
to say, the official Christian doctrines and rites are complete
distortions of the gospels, and the religion is an abhorrent fraud.
While Romans
commands Christians to crucify the body of sin and renew their mind
to “prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of
God,” the pious can no more do so than he can understand
traditional symbols; whence Proverbs
states, “The legs of the lame are not equal: so is a parable in the
mouth of fools.”
According
to the church fathers, Christianity was originally secret,
metaphysical, and only for the initiated. Clement of Alexandria says,
“It is for certain chosen men, who have been allowed to pass from
faith to Gnosis, that the sacred mysteries of wisdom have been
preserved under the veil of parables.” However, restriction and
secrecy gave way to a rapid degeneration at which point the intrinsic
virtues were no longer symbols of spiritual realization.
Accordingly,
humility symbolizes the impersonal detachment from the ego, which
allows man to reach the center of being and beyond; charity
symbolizes detachment from the material world; hope symbolizes one’s
aim towards the good; love symbolizes beatitude emerging from Gnosis;
and veracity symbolizes conformity to the Real and the assimilation
of knowledge.
Christianity,
however, only concerns virtues in the moralistic sense as regards the
theological doctrine of sin. While we do not deny the sinful and
irrational tendencies in man who are predominantly passionate, this
behavior is in marked contrast to those who are clearly more
spiritual or intellectual, and for who both reason and intuition come
naturally, and are thus much more behaved, for they humbly reject
false pride and are able to see the higher good as against the
egocentric desire.
Owing
to ignorance concerning the cause of the fall, Christian theology
remains incomplete, thereby lacking a spiritual method to restore the
primordial state. By way of compensation, certain exoteric rites are
adhered to, which can only exist as mere fetishes, since the
sacraments are limited to the moralistic viewpoint of which
forgiveness is the goal, and which amounts to indifference towards
right and wrong and inaction against injustices; hence, the abuse of
passages concerning judgment, such as Matthew
7, Romans 2:1, and 1
Corinthians 4, of
which their true meaning is not to refrain from judging others, but
to judge all things by the Spirit rather than the worldly wisdom.
This necessarily implies that there is a metaphysical reason for
everything. The texts, as written for the sacerdotal caste, do not so
much concern moral judgment but of spiritual discernment; to wit 1
Cor. 1:10; 2:4-5; and
“we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom”
(2:7); “God hath revealed [the mysteries] unto us by his Spirit”
(2:10), which is not of the world but of God (2:12); our teachings
are not of worldly wisdom but of spiritual wisdom (2:13).
Thus
1 Cor. 4:4-5
means not to judge spiritual things by the physical, but only through
metaphysical realization may the spiritual be known. Moreover, “he
that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no
man” (2:15); “all things are lawful unto me, but all things are
not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be
brought under the power of any” (6:12); “for I verily, as absent
in body, but present in Spirit, have judged already, as though I were
present” (5:3).
It
is in the sense that Jesus’ teachings concern not morals, but
spiritual mysteries when he says to the Pharisees, “ye judge after
the flesh; I judge no man” (8:15); for “they understood not that
he spoke to them of the Father” (8:27), and that, “if I judge, my
judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent
me” (8:16). And Galatians
5:18 reads, “But if
ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law”; “for all the
law is fulfilled in one word” (5:14) being love.
So
much of Christianity has been lost that it is in no better a position
today than paganism. In 2
Thessalonians 2:15 and
2 Corinthians 3:2-6,
there is reference to an oral and initiatic tradition which has since
disappeared, and along with it, the spiritual influence has
withdrawn, for we see nothing of the sort as described in John
14:17 in which one is
supposed to receive the “Spirit of Truth” or Gnosis, nor
intellectual intuition from the Holy Spirit sent by the Father, which
will teach one all things and bring them to remembrance (14:26).
From
these developments, one must only conclude that religious salvation
is therefore a fraud, for it purports to be modeled after the
gospels, yet is entirely different in meaning and essence.
Against
Pseudo-Religion
Religions
which are false are those that are based primarily on a
pseudo-morality. Morality is falsified since it is neither absolute,
universal, nor the cause of knowledge, but subverts all knowledge to
a false moral law. The idea of right and wrong in the religious sense
does not derive from a divine source, nor from logic, instinct,
nature, or virtue. Religious morality, rather, is a man-made system
of laws meant to control a people under a political union.
As
we see in Genesis,
mankind lived before the fall without any morality. It was only after
they ate of the tree of knowing good and evil that they had succumbed
to a sense of shame and deluded moral thinking. The fruit was not
forbidden for any reason other than mere force. Nothing was actually
lost from the act, since morality is just a false belief in something
that doesn’t exist in reality. The Devil, therefore, is the
pseudo-religion and its false moral god. This fact can no longer be
doubted, wherefore man aims at attaining a pseudo-moral state, rather
than an actual higher spiritual state. So religion has indeed become
a counter-tradition, a false and misleading way in opposition to all
other traditions.
Morality
does not so much concretely exist in nature, nor can natural laws be
subjected to morality. The animal doesn’t follow a commandment to
abstain from murder, theft, adultery, deceit, or idol worship;
rather, these are the powers that they live by, and so must defend
themselves. Mankind is wrong to devise a false reality in the belief
that he is above nature, if so only to submit to a deceitful and
oppressive master.
Once
the rigid and constrained religious dogmas become accepted, all
logical thinking is subject to termination by the inferior emotions.
Religion is the abuse of the feminine principle. Religion corrupts
Eve, and Eve corrupts Adam. Man then feels ashamed of his very self.
He is taught to hate nature, hate his body, and hate reality. He
thinks he can be “civilized” which is to act contrary to all
normal behaviors.
Religion
pretends to lay claim to a universal and absolute morality which
conflicts with logical reasoning and natural law. However, morals can
only be individual or at best ancestral, because good and evil must
ultimately come down to each and every individual level, and
therefore to those considerations of what one person might lose for
oneself over and against the whole.
Moreover,
the greater the scope and detail of the laws the more ambiguous and
unjust they become. For all laws are negative, even those which
protect rights, because to give a right to one person or act is to
take a right away from another person or act which may determine an
outcome. Thus all laws are about controlling destiny to a certain
degree, and that power is reserved for gods. Even the laws against
murder and theft are not universal, but are meant to secure power for
governments. For if the individual had the power to use force to
instill justice, then he would be taking that power away from
government. But there are many cases where this would be necessary
and good, especially when the government has become corrupted.
Furthermore,
the missionary nature of religion also serves the agenda of the
government, which acts as a vehicle to disseminate propaganda.
Missionary religions have become so invasive by the idea of taking up
a cross to bear and saving others based upon ever-changing lies and
falsehoods of morality that were wrongly attributed to a god that it
has caused the majority of men to be sickened by it. Helping others,
in the religious sense, is another form of arrogance which presumes
that a person is incapable of living without that person’s help.
Such scoundrels and fiends aim to meddle in everyone’s personal
affairs, thinking they know what’s best for any and all persons.
Religious
faith is arrogant in that it forces its beliefs on everyone else
without knowing oneself. It all begins with the belief that only
their myths are true, all others are false; yet they have no
understanding of history, for their myths are nothing more than
rip-offs of much older myths which they claim are false. History to
religion is only of use as a propaganda tool, hence the
pseudo-historical aspects of religions. Justice to religion therefore
cannot be based upon truth but upon false obligations or commands.
Indeed,
everything in religion is a falsified reality. Faith, hope, and
charity are the three falsified virtues which perpetuate the status
quo. Faith is pride in obligatory beliefs no matter how wrong they
have become. Hope is wishing that continuing the same mistakes and
wrong thinking will achieve better results in the future. And charity
is blindly doing good deeds by obligation rather than free will,
where the good is wholly decided upon by religion.
It
is necessary to point out that the largest and longest running
welfare system is in fact the Christian church, with its voluntary
taxes collected by the parishioners that go to feed the holy lie.v
Since the religion has been gutted of all but moralism, it would be
much more efficient if the church was dissolved and replaced by a
much needed moral and philosophical training in the education system.
It serves no other purpose.
Religion
violates man’s natural rights when it lies to him about a
fantastical judgment in the afterlife. Religion itself is the snake
in the garden offering the promise of eternal life for mere belief
and control over behavior. Why should man wish to live forever in
some unknown realm? Why should he give up his own free will and
natural rights to do so? Anyone who believes this is a fool. Without
coercion the church no longer has power over us and the spell is
broken. But the damage is already done. The false image of religion
is implanted.
Instead
of treating man as a child who cannot handle the truth, we should
more properly educate in him in the virtues of the spirit and
surround him in a creative and healthy environment. We should live to
be free, not to work like dogs to take all we can get of material
goods, because these are only temporary and not worth the price it
takes to support them. We ought to conduct ourselves honorably, in
accordance with spiritual and natural principles. And we should never
let any religion or government rule over every aspect of our lives in
such a way as to better control its citizens
We
reject the Christian commandment in Matthew
22:39, “Thou shalt
love thy neighbor as thyself” and again in 25:40, “Inasmuch as ye
have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done
it unto me”; for to do so would be to negate oneself as well as
one’s God. Moreover, we reject the doctrine of poverty as shown in
Luke 6:20-26,
as well as the doctrine of forgiveness, in 6:27-31:
“Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, bless them that
curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. And unto him
that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that
taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also. Give to every
man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask
them not again. And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also
to them likewise.” Nor have the Christians ever practiced mercy and
love towards their enemies. Instead, the church commanded bloodshed
against all opponents. But this doctrine is foolish and suicidal, as
is the religion itself, which the Apocalypse it warns of proves
beyond the shadow of any doubt.
Matthew
5 provides Christians
with a strict guideline to follow in order to carry out Jesus’ two
commandments. The sermon on the mount stresses a life of spiritual
poverty, the emptying of all desires, and the nonresistance to evil.
One is not even allowed to become angry or disagree with his enemies,
but to do everything possible to appease them. The gospels display
the teachings of Jesus put into practice, as he lived his pacifist
philosophy from the opposing of the stoning of an adulterer to the
very moment of going to his death willingly at the hands of the
Pharisees and Romans.
From
his teaching, it is clear that everything that manifested as
Christianity through the early church onward was merely a Satanic
parody of the religion. Beginning with the genocidal wars against the
pagans and heretics, and continuing with the Inquisition, the
knightly Orders, crusades, wars with the Protestants, and modern wars
and interventions, Christianity has taken on a wholly different
meaning than its original intention, as was seen with the early
martyrs who practiced the teachings of Jesus literally, or so we are
led to believe.
These
errors are systemic not only within the Catholic church, but are to
be found within all branches of Christianity and at the individual
level as well, such that very few people actually live as Christians
according to the teachings of Jesus. What then is the value of the
religion itself if the official bodies, reformations, and bulk of
adherents claiming to be orthodox are the furthest thing from it?
___
ii
The
cause was plainly the Jewish conspiracy to rule the world as laid
out in their own religious texts.
iii
Entheogen,
meaning “to become a god within,” is a psychoactive substance
used in sacred rites and common to all traditions.
iv
This
passage, in fact, refers to the partaking of ritual herbs or even
venom in order to induce trance.
(From Reflections on Tradition and Its Malcontents)
No comments:
Post a Comment