Today I will address an issue I don't normally discuss on this forum. Let's talk about the the person we know today as Jesus. Christians all over the world have different understandings of who this person was, but in point of fact, people do not even know what his real name was. Was his name really "Jesus"? Is that even a Hebrew name? No, it is not. It is in fact a Greek name. Is it likely that the person that we understand to be Jesus was even named Jesus? Honest people if they ponder this point for even a brief moment will conclude that perhaps they been missing something all along. And perhaps, the things that they have been missing may actually be crucial to understanding this person and what his mission actually was.
The Old Testament prophesied the coming of the Messiah and gave a name which was "Immanuel". The traditional translation of that name we are told is: "God is with us". This is a poor translation which is designed primarily to further the popular myth of who the Messiah was. "El" means God. "Im" means with. "Manu" does NOT mean us. Manu is a name of a man. A proper translation for the name Immanuel, would be: "God is with Manu".
I get it this new information likely seems quite pointless. But it becomes interesting when one realizes that there was a King who lived at the time of "Jesus" i.e. in the decades prior to the Roman war, who lived just north of Jerusalem, in what is today Syria. King Manu was very well known in his time. He was exceptionally wealthy, and very powerful. He commanded his own army. He had friends throughout the Judaic political and religious hierarchies in Jerusalem and was even a high priest of Israel just prior to the revolt against Rome.
So who was King Manu? It turns out that he had a very unique heritage. He was the great-grandson of Julius Caesar and the Egyptian Queen Cleopatra. Without intending to go into great deal of history here, we need to understand that there was a short period when Cleopatra lived in Rome as Julius Caesar's mistress. She became pregnant with what she hoped would be a son, but it turned out, that she was pregnant with a daughter. She was forced to leave Rome and her daughter was raised in Persia. Manu's grandmother was eventually exiled with her family and a tremendous wealth, to the lands just north of Jerusalem. Manu's mother was born there and gave birth to several children there. They were all princes and princesses. So, king Manu was very well known throughout Judea, his family was very influential, and very wealthy.
Though his heritage was likely not well understood by the people of his day, Manu was literally a lawful heir to the Roman empire as well as a lawful heir to the Egyptian Empire. And he was living just a short distance from Jerusalem in the time that the Jews were eagerly anticipating the arrival of the Messiah. He was a high priest of Israel in the years prior to the revolt against Rome. The Old Testament prophesied about the Messiah, saying "God is with Manu". Think about this for a moment.
All of the Jews in Judea and thought the Roman Empire were expecting a messianic figure – a king. The messianic fever at that time was intense. War with Rome was looking more and more inevitable. And at this precise time there existed a king exceptionally well-known throughout Judea and the surrounding lands whose name was Manu. He had his own private army with over 600 soldiers. He was the great-grandson of Julius Caesar and Queen Cleopatra.
It gets even better than this. It turns out that King Manu was crucified at the end of the Roman war along with two comrades. The other two victims died of their wounds, but Manu survived when a man named Joseph successfully beseeched a Roman general to allow him to be removed from his cross before he died. This historical event occurred roughly 40 years after Jesus' supposed crucifixion wherein a man named Joseph received permission to remove Jesus from his cross. Of course, there is a legitimate question of whether or not Jesus was actually dead at that time, given his supposed "resurrection".
The question I put before you today, is whether or not it is possible that Christianity's main history books, the New Testament, were deliberately edited and distorted keep us from realizing a very important historical truth.
I realize this begs the question of how a historical fiction of such magnitude could have transpired. The answer to that question requires much more space than I am able to provide here. However, in a nutshell the answer lies in the fact that there was a man (whose name is well known to the entire world to this very day), who survived the Roman war. This man had been a general in the Roman army, a Jewish general. For betraying his people in favor of Rome he was given great wealth, power and authority after the war. One of the many perks he received was ownership of one of the largest and most influential Judaic schools in all of Judea.
There, he and many jewish scholars who were in his employ edited the books and Gospels that eventually became the New Testament. They also put the pharisaic 'oral tradition' into writing, known today as the Talmud. What this means, as shocking as it is to believe, is that the "author" of the Talmud also essentially wrote most of what we now know as the New Testament. I know this comes as a tremendous shock. It should. It is breathtaking to the extreme in its implications.
Did this general know (Jesus) King Manu, personally? It turns out that he knew Jesus/Manu very well. He allowed Joseph to remove Jesus/Manu from his cross before he died because he was personally acquainted with all those who were grieving at Jesus/Manu's feet (my guess is that he did not expect Jesus/Manu to survive his wounds). In a future post, I will delve more into the history of this man. Who he was and why he did things that he did. For now, suffice to say, this man was a traitor to all things good, decent and noble.
In summary, God did in fact send the Messiah to the Jews 2000 years ago. His name was not Jesus. His name was Manu. King Manu was the perfect man chosen to unite the world centered upon Jerusalem. He was a powerful king in his own right. He was wealthy, respected, and even held the position of high priest of Israel shortly before the Roman war. He was the great-grandson of Julius Caesar and Cleopatra. He was a legal heir to both the Roman Empire and the Egyptian Empire. He did NOT die 40 years before the Roman war. He fought in the war, was captured at the end, and was crucified for his role in that war. He survived the crucifixion and was exiled/imprisoned far from Judea after his eventual recovery from his wounds.
Could that devastating war have been avoided? YES. Shortly before the outbreak of the Roman war Nero passed away. At that moment there was a tremendous opportunity for King Manu to inherit the position of Emperor of Rome. There was a bloody struggle for that position in which four men in a row died in vain attempts to take that position. If the Jews in Judea had accepted King Manu as their leader and king, Jews throughout the entire Roman Empire would also likely have embraced him. He may well have become Nero's successor as Caesar. Manu would have become the Messiah that the Jews were waiting for. The war with Rome would not have occurred. History as we know it would have been radically different - for the better.
Manu/Jesus was technically a jew, but he was well-learned in both Roman and Egyptian culture. (He was visited at his birth by 3 magi from Persia because of his grandmother's time spent there as a queen.) He was born to be the leader of the entire known world at that time. He was NOTHING like the jews the world knows today. He was not a thief, a usurer, a fraudster, or a conman. He did not sacrifice children or cheer for the genocide and enslavement of non-jews.
What does this information do for us today? For now, we need to recognize that the central message of Christianity is not accurate. Christianity as we understand it today, indeed, Jesus as we understand him today, is a fiction. Jesus/Manu was not actually a pacifist. He was a king who commanded his own army. He often wore a sword. Knowing this, the words "I have come not to bring peace but a sword" take on a new meaning. In addition, when he told his followers to sell what they owned and buy swords, he was speaking literally. He knew that a war with Rome was on the horizon. He was not a pacifist, and the central message he brought was not "Turn the other cheek". Suddenly the title put on his cross, "King of the Jews", makes perfect sense. He was in fact a king.
To better understand how the story of Jesus/Manu was so thoroughly distorted we need to understand exactly who was the jewish General of the Roman army who betrayed his people and was rewarded for his betrayal with ownership of the most influential rabbinical school in Judea. Who was this man who put the oral Talmud into writing? The man who edited the gospels and the books of the New Testament? Why did he go to such great lengths to obfuscate Jesus/Manu's life to the point that Christianity to this day falsely believes Jesus died 40 years before the Roman war, when in fact he was a central leader in that war?
The Truth is stranger than fiction. But the Truth is the Truth, and will eventually be known by all. Be on the lookout for the next chapter, where we find out who this mysterious jewish Benedict Arnold was. You already know his name.
ความคิดเห็น