The Mandaeans

The Mandaeans were gnostics who broke away from the diaspora believed that John The Baptist was their prophet and teacher and they declared that Jesus Christ was either a false prophet or a total fabrication.

Published in: on January 29, 2007 at 11:03 am  Comments (3)  


It seems to me that Unitarians have the right to develop their own religious opinions. And this it seems is the only kind of “liberal” stance it has. One still discusses the Christian God. One may discuss other Gods but hey, if you don`t believe in a trinity then you`re not going to believe in Shiva who is multi-God. Some of your members believe in jesus Christ, though only as some kind of religious leader to be followed and not worshipped. However, following a leader or a teacher is merely a sublimated form of worship. They assert that Jesus is a great exemplar which they ought to copy in order to perfect their union with God. This rhetoric has all the trappings of a theological mess of the odds and ends of the Catholic Church. Unitatrianism has that something “religious” about it and it is big but it is masked over by pragmatic connoiseurs of theological rhetoric.

You are still very much that “Christian Church” you Unitarians only that you reject and try to cut away 2000 years of the past indoctrination unbeknown to you that you are still an indoctrinatory movement of Christian God worship!

This is a joke:

“Unitarian Universalism is a liberal religion born of the Jewish and Christian traditions. We keep our minds open to the religious questions people have struggled with in all times and places.”

But surely any answer arrived at has to be facilitated into the Jewish religious formulae; into your “tradition”?

“We believe that personal experience, conscience and reason should be the final authorities in religion.”

Since when has Reason been a final authority in religion? And is not “personal experience” personal and therefore is not or cannot be based upon reason or conscience because it cannot be trusted to impart the truth?

“In the end religious authority lies not in a book or person or institution, but in ourselves.”

But the book is under the pillow, isn`t it you Unitarians!

“We put religious insights to the test of our hearts and minds. We uphold the free search for truth.”

It is only free insofar as it is keeping in with the Christian “tradition”; within its theological formulas and trappings.

“We will not be bound by a statement of belief. We do not ask anyone to ascribe to a creed. We say ours is a noncreedal religion. Ours is a free faith.”

Boulderdash! This is merely a play on words. A confusion of the actual meaning and summoning up of every word used. Is not “faith” a statement of belief? Of course, it is!

“We believe that religious wisdom is everchanging. Human understanding of life and death, the world and its mysteries, is never final.”

Humans today have understood nothing of life and consequently nothing of death. And there is no reason for believing that this “understanding” of life and death is any kind of wisdom that is everchanging.

“Revelation is continuous. We celebrate unfolding truths known to teachers, prophets and sages throughout the ages.”

Sounds like Madam Blavatzsky and her theosophist movement.

“We affirm the worth of all women and men. We believe people should be encouraged to think for themselves.”

Yet you also encourage people to have “faith” which is non-thinking imperative.

“We know people differ in their opinions and life-styles and believe these differences generally should be honoured. We seek to act as a moral force in the world, believing that ethical living is the supreme witness of religion.”

Obviously lessons of the past concerning religion is completely lost here. Religions, originally were forces for social change and for making people “moral” but the means to make people moral had to be immoral.

“The here and now and the effects our actions will have on future generations deeply concern us. We know that our relationships with one another, with other peoples, races and nations, should be governed by justice,equity and compassion.”

It sounds nice doesn`t it? And it may tug at the heart strings here and there. But what is the reality? The reality is that religion today in its many forms, branches and denominations are little communities that would like to weild some power over the masses. Let us be honest with ourselves: justice is power, equity is power and compassion is power (albeit made sublime). God is power. When one discharges power over others one ceases immediatley to be liberal; one becomes a tyrant. God becomes a tyrant [e.g. Old Testament] and then he has to be overthrown and then we will have to create another god but this time his power is more sublime; God speaks to the heart, advises and counsells us in the “good” and the “moral” [e.g. New Testament]. Power is still there. And isn`t compassion another way of saying “leave alone” or “let be”? In other words: not to discharge your power.

Published in: on January 21, 2007 at 1:42 pm  Leave a Comment  

Jesus Christ

The name “Jesus” was according to my sources was coined first by St. Paul [I don`t think he ever existed] who idenitifed his epileptic vision of some crminal on a cross with that of a pagan God-man called Dionysus [the dieing and resurrecting pagan god-man]. The name “Yesous” which I believe means “anointed one” in Greek means “Jesus”. And “Yesous” was the name given to Dionysus [and Adonis] apparently. The whole saga of drinking blood and eating the body [of Christ] was first used by the Dionysian and Orphic cults who after having slaughtered a lamb of God and nailing it upon a tree would drink its blood and eat its flesh so as to be “reborn” anew.

 In the Christian story of Jesus the similarities are startling. We find that a Jew bids his disciples eat his flesh and drink his blood. 12 apostles sit around the son of God like they do in the Dionysian Moon Dance [the Hierophant priest represents the son of god]. 12 disciples of Dionysus each representing the 12 signs of the zodiac. Jesus and his Jews drank wine and ate bread or fish and so do the Disciples of Dionysus. Jesus talks about a kingdom of God that belongs to children and so too does the Dionysians when they talk about a secret garden were they can become like children again! Jesus preaches morals like “turn the other cheek…” and so too does Plato [in the Crito], who said it better and first had the idea, and the Neo-Platonists and also the Stoics have a similar argument.

Jesus as the son of God is a fake. The little cult of a Jewish rabbi hell bent on overthrowing the establishment may have a been true and its leader [Yeshua] apparently may have been a real historical person albeit unrecorded. But there is not a single reason for believing that this anarchist of a Jewish cult had a divinity or was the “son of God” [the one true God at least]. Just as the Jews had their “son of God” which was Jesus Christ so too did the Greeks have their “son of God” which was Dionysus or Adonis or Perseus. The Greeks were the first to get their son of God; the Jews merely followed the trend.

And as for shame one need only mention the Dark Ages. In those times the Church thought it was righteous enough to make barbarians [Europeans..i.e of the North] of every kind into moral and virtuous human beings. The means they employed to do so was anything but moral!! Through fear, shame and guilt the Catholic Church and other devout Christians made men into sick animals; inviting them into their Churches were they could be healed and taught right from wrong – what? As if they knew what constituted right and wrong?! The Catholic church was deeply anti-intellectual! They expanded their theology on their own doctrines particularly “sin”, “salvation” and ‘The Devil’. St. Augustine was one of its most ardent theologians of this Catholic movement. Who needs the Devil when you have Augustine!! On the heels of the theologians came all the popes who eventually made saints not by the good that they did but by the doctrines that they enforced on the credulous and impressionable. One need only mention Pope Callixtus and immediately the Catholic Church is tainted forever and given the “evil” stamp! Of course, we can go right back to the council of Nicea and Constantine and all those early popes of Rome who couldn`t really shake off their pagan origins – just what did they signify? One of them was a pimp!

Published in: on January 21, 2007 at 12:56 pm  Comments (2)