sincerity in the upper levels of priestly government and what he did say very clearly when we analyse his overall concepts, was that centralised faiths run like autocratic governments, overlooked the real suffering and aspirations of a people. The Roman Catholic Church gave the temple back to each community where the faith was practiced, but it retained, as Constantine did, the autocratic hold on its people by adopting the Roman concept of Divinity with a human face. This had to lead to the strict mental control of the so called Christians in a manner more suited to the Pharisees than to the intellectual, highly sensitive Jesus who was quite happy to lead only those who understood him. It is without doubt the body of knowledge which Jesus had acquired through his traditional and travelling education which eventually led him to accept this final sacrifice. As far as the priests of the House of Judah were concerned he was an enemy from within with an incredible understanding of the origins of the tribes and its prophetic literature. Jesus was out to destroy the concept that Judea was Israel and that the Israeli people were Jews. In fact, from the recruiting process that followed it was clear that the Jews represented a small faction of the peoples of the territories north of its borders. The fact, obvious to the Nazarenes and the Essenes, was corroborated by the reality that this was just one tribe of a scattered eleven or even twelve. Hardly a concept for a united Israel called Judea! What the Romans appear to have written at the top of the cross and no doubt provided by Joseph of Arimathea or even his friend Pilate, was “Jesus the Nazarene, King of Israel” not of the Jews. (INRI). This deliberate
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23