According to the doctrines taught by the Roman church in Europe for more

than 1500 years:

1) Jesus was 'God';

2) Jesus was crucified as a "vicarious atonement for the sins of all
man-
kind" because he was rejected by "the Jews" as 'God' (rather than bec-
ause they were instigated by the Jewish priesthood, whose wealth and
power were threatened by the *Doctrine* that Jesus taught); and,

3) Jesus will return in a Second Coming; ushering in an age of universal

Peace, and the complete elimination of all disease, suffering and death
from the face of the planet.

And, while these doctrines are now widely believed by hundreds of
millions of Roman and Protestant Christians, they raise a very impor-
tant question:

"How would the course of human history have been changed over the
past 2000 years if "the Jews" had *not* rejected Jesus as 'God'?"

Well, obviously, if "the Jews" had not rejected Jesus as 'God', Jesus
would *still* be alive and living in Jerusalem; since, of course, 'God'
lives forever.

If "the Jews" had not rejected Jesus as 'God', there would have been no
wars over the past 2000 years; nor would there have been any disease,
any suffering, or any death on this planet for the past 2000 years. That
is,
if "the Jews" had not rejected Jesus as 'God', we would now be some
2000 years into the 'Messianic Age' which Christians describe as oc-
curing only after the *Second* Coming of Jesus. In other words, were it
not for "the Jews" having rejected Jesus as 'God'; there would have been

no *need* for any Second Coming.

The Ph. D. Christian theologians would argue, of course, that this is a
very *primitive*, unsophisticated and uneducated perspective; that it
is, perhaps, the intellectual perspective of an illiterate *five* year
old.

They would probably say that there are a dozen reasons why this is
not accurate--that it was the the "Will of God" for Jesus to have been
crucified; that it was "necessary"--for some unkown or very complicated
reason--for Jesus to die as a 'vicarious atonement'; or that the Proph-
ecies always spoke of the over-riding importance of the Second Com-
ing rather than the First Coming as bringing about the 'Messianic Age',
etc. etc. etc.

The problem with this argument, of course, is that the vast majority of
Christians in Europe during the Middle Ages *were* primitive, unsoph-
isticated, uneducated and illiterate; with the intellectual capacity of
what today might be a *five* year old. And how can such Christians be
expected to respond to the assertions of Roman theology that "the
Jews" were responsible for the death of Jesus?

They would very quickly understand that it is "the Jews" that are now
responsible for ALL the evil in the world; because, if they had not
rejected Jesus as 'God', THIS would be the 'Messianic Age'.

If they were suffering the horrors of war, "the Jews" were responsible
for that. If they had lost their loved ones to the plague, "the Jews"
were responsible for that. (That is, if Jesus were still alive in
Jerusalem,
all that would be required to be healed of any disease would be to
go to Jerusalem to see Jesus and be healed.) If they had suffered
any economic difficulties, "the Jews" were responsible for that.
If the Christians in Europe were in *any* way displeased with their
lives, "the Jews" were responsible because they had *prevented*
the onset of the 'Messianic Age' hundreds of years before by
rejecting Jesus as 'God'. (And, soon, 'factual' elements were drawn
into each of these fantasies to make them more 'real': "the Jews"
poisoned wells causing the plague, "the Jews" controlled econ-
omies and nations, resulting in wars and depressions, etc. etc.)

Because of these very *specific* doctrines of Christian theology--
doctrines which STILL have not been renounced by Christianity,
*despite* the propaganda about Vatican II 'renouncing' the "teach-
ing of contempt"--"the Jews" were held to be responsible *forever*
for ALL evil in the world because they had rejected 'God' 'Himself'.

That is, whenever the Christian theologians talk blissfully and
maniacally about what it will be like when Jesus returns, they are
talking about what it *could* have been like NOW, if it had not been
for "the Jews".

And, when Christian theologians talk about Jesus being 'God' and
the 'vicarious atonement' for sin, they are reminding people of just
how *evil* "the Jews" are for having rejected 'God'--utterly
irrespective
of whether the complicated doctrines of Christian theology attempt
to explain the *necessity* of this.

And this "teaching of contempt" has been taught to Europeans for
1500 YEARS. It is something that they have received with their
mother's milk.

It should have come as no surprise at all that, when a modern, intel-
lectual and sophisticated society such as Germany descended into
primitive economic and social chaos, the equally primitive con-
clusions deriving from Christian theology would come to the fore;
concluding that "the Jews" must be responsible for any and every
evil which is experienced in the modern world.

The problem today, of course, is that the economic, technological
and intellectual complexity of modern society is several orders of
magnitude beyond that which existed in Nazi Germany. And such
complexity also implies *vulnerability*; in which case it would be
expected that any serious disruption of society would--through ter-
orism, biological warfare, economic depression, AIDS, etc, etc--
once again, result in the emergence of the primitive thought proc-
esses inculcated into European civilization for hundreds upon
hundreds upon hundreds of years: blame "the Jews".

With regards to Mel Gibson's "The Passion", then, such a viciously
graphic and unabashed 'validation' and propagation of the doctrine
of 'vicarious atonement' can only be expected to stoke hatred of
the Jews--if not, especially, in the United States; then, certainly, in
the anti-Semitic Muslim nations throughout the Middle East and to
a certain extent in Europe. (Although I very *seriously* disagree
with the way in which the Jewish religious establishment has res-
ponded to this film.)

But just *watch* how the media responds to the release of this
movie:

Even though this movie will probably be seen by tens of millions
of people, will the media allow to be publicized any serious chal-
lenge to the doctrine of 'vicarious atonement', or any serious dis-
cussion of the way Jesus is characterized in the Talmud?

Unlikely.

The Catholics or Christians would want such ideas to be censored
and suppressed as "anti-Catholic" or "anti-Christian bigotry", while
the ADL would want such things censored and suppressed as being
"anti-Semitic"--in an effort, of course, to preserve the BUSINESS of
Judaeo-Christian theology.

And, because the media in the United States is a shill for the Jewish
and the Christian religious officials, the anti-Semitism which Jews
and even Christians *profess* to hate, will, almost certainly, increase
while the witless Jewish and Christian religious officials scratch
their heads and wonder why...

Until, that is, they decide to blame it ALL on the Muslim religious
officials; who, by the way, have become, to a large extent, loyal fol-
lowers of the European anti-Semites.


See my web page for a detailed description of the Knowledge that has
been rejected and the Teaching that has been forgotten by the Jewish,
Christian and Muslim religious officials. (cf. Hosea 4:4-6 and Daniel
12:9-10):

http://www.deadseanaghammadiresearch.com

Michael Cecil

According to the doctrines taught by the Roman church in Europe for more

than 1500 years:

1) Jesus was 'God';

2) Jesus was crucified as a "vicarious atonement for the sins of all
man-
kind" because he was rejected by "the Jews" as 'God' (rather than bec-
ause they were instigated by the Jewish priesthood, whose wealth and
power were threatened by the *Doctrine* that Jesus taught); and,

3) Jesus will return in a Second Coming; ushering in an age of universal

Peace, and the complete elimination of all disease, suffering and death
from the face of the planet.

And, while these doctrines are now widely believed by hundreds of
millions of Roman and Protestant Christians, they raise a very impor-
tant question:

"How would the course of human history have been changed over the
past 2000 years if "the Jews" had *not* rejected Jesus as 'God'?"

Well, obviously, if "the Jews" had not rejected Jesus as 'God', Jesus
would *still* be alive and living in Jerusalem; since, of course, 'God'
lives forever.

If "the Jews" had not rejected Jesus as 'God', there would have been no
wars over the past 2000 years; nor would there have been any disease,
any suffering, or any death on this planet for the past 2000 years. That
is,
if "the Jews" had not rejected Jesus as 'God', we would now be some
2000 years into the 'Messianic Age' which Christians describe as oc-
curing only after the *Second* Coming of Jesus. In other words, were it
not for "the Jews" having rejected Jesus as 'God'; there would have been

no *need* for any Second Coming.

The Ph. D. Christian theologians would argue, of course, that this is a
very *primitive*, unsophisticated and uneducated perspective; that it
is, perhaps, the intellectual perspective of an illiterate *five* year
old.

They would probably say that there are a dozen reasons why this is
not accurate--that it was the the "Will of God" for Jesus to have been
crucified; that it was "necessary"--for some unkown or very complicated
reason--for Jesus to die as a 'vicarious atonement'; or that the Proph-
ecies always spoke of the over-riding importance of the Second Com-
ing rather than the First Coming as bringing about the 'Messianic Age',
etc. etc. etc.

The problem with this argument, of course, is that the vast majority of
Christians in Europe during the Middle Ages *were* primitive, unsoph-
isticated, uneducated and illiterate; with the intellectual capacity of
what today might be a *five* year old. And how can such Christians be
expected to respond to the assertions of Roman theology that "the
Jews" were responsible for the death of Jesus?

They would very quickly understand that it is "the Jews" that are now
responsible for ALL the evil in the world; because, if they had not
rejected Jesus as 'God', THIS would be the 'Messianic Age'.

If they were suffering the horrors of war, "the Jews" were responsible
for that. If they had lost their loved ones to the plague, "the Jews"
were responsible for that. (That is, if Jesus were still alive in
Jerusalem,
all that would be required to be healed of any disease would be to
go to Jerusalem to see Jesus and be healed.) If they had suffered
any economic difficulties, "the Jews" were responsible for that.
If the Christians in Europe were in *any* way displeased with their
lives, "the Jews" were responsible because they had *prevented*
the onset of the 'Messianic Age' hundreds of years before by
rejecting Jesus as 'God'. (And, soon, 'factual' elements were drawn
into each of these fantasies to make them more 'real': "the Jews"
poisoned wells causing the plague, "the Jews" controlled econ-
omies and nations, resulting in wars and depressions, etc. etc.)

Because of these very *specific* doctrines of Christian theology--
doctrines which STILL have not been renounced by Christianity,
*despite* the propaganda about Vatican II 'renouncing' the "teach-
ing of contempt"--"the Jews" were held to be responsible *forever*
for ALL evil in the world because they had rejected 'God' 'Himself'.

That is, whenever the Christian theologians talk blissfully and
maniacally about what it will be like when Jesus returns, they are
talking about what it *could* have been like NOW, if it had not been
for "the Jews".

And, when Christian theologians talk about Jesus being 'God' and
the 'vicarious atonement' for sin, they are reminding people of just
how *evil* "the Jews" are for having rejected 'God'--utterly
irrespective
of whether the complicated doctrines of Christian theology attempt
to explain the *necessity* of this.

And this "teaching of contempt" has been taught to Europeans for
1500 YEARS. It is something that they have received with their
mother's milk.

It should have come as no surprise at all that, when a modern, intel-
lectual and sophisticated society such as Germany descended into
primitive economic and social chaos, the equally primitive con-
clusions deriving from Christian theology would come to the fore;
concluding that "the Jews" must be responsible for any and every
evil which is experienced in the modern world.

The problem today, of course, is that the economic, technological
and intellectual complexity of modern society is several orders of
magnitude beyond that which existed in Nazi Germany. And such
complexity also implies *vulnerability*; in which case it would be
expected that any serious disruption of society would--through ter-
orism, biological warfare, economic depression, AIDS, etc, etc--
once again, result in the emergence of the primitive thought proc-
esses inculcated into European civilization for hundreds upon
hundreds upon hundreds of years: blame "the Jews".

With regards to Mel Gibson's "The Passion", then, such a viciously
graphic and unabashed 'validation' and propagation of the doctrine
of 'vicarious atonement' can only be expected to stoke hatred of
the Jews--if not, especially, in the United States; then, certainly, in
the anti-Semitic Muslim nations throughout the Middle East and to
a certain extent in Europe. (Although I very *seriously* disagree
with the way in which the Jewish religious establishment has res-
ponded to this film.)

But just *watch* how the media responds to the release of this
movie:

Even though this movie will probably be seen by tens of millions
of people, will the media allow to be publicized any serious chal-
lenge to the doctrine of 'vicarious atonement', or any serious dis-
cussion of the way Jesus is characterized in the Talmud?

Unlikely.

The Catholics or Christians would want such ideas to be censored
and suppressed as "anti-Catholic" or "anti-Christian bigotry", while
the ADL would want such things censored and suppressed as being
"anti-Semitic"--in an effort, of course, to preserve the BUSINESS of
Judaeo-Christian theology.

And, because the media in the United States is a shill for the Jewish
and the Christian religious officials, the anti-Semitism which Jews
and even Christians *profess* to hate, will, almost certainly, increase
while the witless Jewish and Christian religious officials scratch
their heads and wonder why...

Until, that is, they decide to blame it ALL on the Muslim religious
officials; who, by the way, have become, to a large extent, loyal fol-
lowers of the European anti-Semites.


See my web page for a detailed description of the Knowledge that has
been rejected and the Teaching that has been forgotten by the Jewish,
Christian and Muslim religious officials. (cf. Hosea 4:4-6 and Daniel
12:9-10):

http://www.deadseanaghammadiresearch.com

Michael Cecil