Return to previous text of this essay.
SECTION TEN Most modern Christians seem to believe that the Cross always has been the
supreme symbol of Christianity. To them, "It almost seems incredible that the cross, the supreme symbol of Christianity, should not have come into use to any extent until nearly three hundred years after the death of
Christ." Benson, George Willard. The Cross: Its History And Symbolism, Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, New York, 2005, page 28. Perhaps even more surprising to many modern Christians is
the fact that the oldest known fresco illustrating the Crucifixion is on a sixth-century church in Rome. Benson, supra, page 44. We are told that Jesus is portrayed in that fresco as follows: "His arms are
extended, His head, which droops, is surrounded by a cruciform nimbus. There is no sign of suffering depicted on His countenance. Below are His mother, with hands extended to her Son, and Saint John, looking up and
pointing towards the Savior, who is represented as alive and standing upon a pedestal. No nails pierce His hands or uncrossed feet and there is no wound in His side." Benson, supra, page 45. We are told further that "[a]ll of the early representations of the crucifixion are similar to this one. There is in them no suggestion of death or suffering. No attempt was made at a historical
representation of the crucifixion. Its spiritual significance only was emphasized." Benson, supra, page 45. Continuing with this shocking discussion, we are told that "the primitive
paintings were primarily symbolic. This was also true of the early crucifixes. They were similar in details to the paintings and mosaics. Christ was represented not as suffering and dying but as triumphant over
death." Benson, supra, at page 45. The most shocking statement, to most Christians, with the exception of the Irish and Scots, is that "[i]t was not until nearly the ninth century that His [Jesus'] hands
and feet were pierced with nails and He was represented as dying, a sacrifice for mankind." Benson, supra, at page 45. What have the Goidelic Celts, both Irish and Scots, known since the very dawn of
Christianity, which other Christians seem not to have known? We have known that what mathematical crystallographers nowadays call the "Uniaxial Interference Pattern," that is, the rainbow-colored lines and circles which can
be seen inside of a clear quartz crystal which has been struck at the proper angle with sunlight, is the pattern for the Irish and Scottish Ring Crosses, and for the halo, nimbus, or glory around the heads of Jesus, His Holy
Family, and the saints. Section Five and Section Seven of this essay. Our Irish-Gaelic word for clear quartz is "grianchloch," which literally means "sun stone." De Bhaldraithe, Tomas, English-Irish Dictionary
, Dublin, 1959, at page 570. We Irish and Scots now know, if we did not know previously, that those patterns also were divined from the Grail Mandala, our Goidelic Celtic "Greille," which is a literal representation of
that rainbow-colored pattern. Please take another look at Do such Goidelic Celtic Ring Crosses always portray Jesus the Christ in the
painful throes of death, allegedly intended by God as a sacrifice to save humankind from its original sin? No! Certainly not! Several of the Goidelic Celtic Ring Crosses portray a Risen or Resurrected Christ, with
outstretched arms, triumphant over death, standing upon a platform, and not nailed to a Cross, with His heart, which may or may not be portrayed on a particular Ring Cross, being at the very center of the Ring of the Ring
Cross. Streit, Jakob. Sun and Cross: From Megalithic Culture to Early Christianity in Ireland, Floris Books, Edinburgh, 1984, page 138, Figure 82. In that position at the Cosmic Center of the Ring of the Ring Cross, Christ's
heart also would be at the very center point of a Shekinah sunburst symbol for God, whether or not the heart and Shekinah sunburst are portrayed on a particular Ring Cross, that center point being said to be the geometrical center
of our Cosmos and the single point where God dwells in Heaven. Streit, supra, page 138, Figure 82. Bells and whistles, anyone? Do you see anything in What do these two stone Ring Crosses say to us? What story do they
tell? Perhaps, that Jesus Christ, the Solar Hero of Christianity, who is forever God's appointed Priest of Light in the Order of Melchizedek, the "Great Receiver of Light," is with God in the Center of Heaven, with His arms
outstretched, welcoming us as risen light-beings into the Heavenly Kingdom of Light? Sister Emmerich tells us that Jesus said to Mary, His Mother, "Do not touch me." (338). How does a living person, of corruptible, human flesh, touch a risen
light-being, of incorruptible, spiritual flesh, who is nothing but pure light?
SECTION ELEVEN We
already have mentioned on page 16 of this essay the possibility that the Moses Story has astrological implications. Rabbi Joel C. Dobin suggests in reference to what Christians call the "Old Testament" that the
"richness of its imagery and of its nuance is lost to biblical scholars who do not recognize the mythic origin of the message because they are ignorant of the astrological components of the Bible." Dobin, Joel C., Rabbi.
The Astrological Secrets Of The Hebrew Sages: To Rule Both Day And Night, Inner Traditions International, Ltd., New York, 1983, page 139. Rabbi Dobin hopes that he has done more than
"just reclaim Astrology for Judaism." He hopes he has "also indicated a direction, that can be taken by our daughter religion, Christianity, towards reclaiming an integral portion of its lost, or deliberately abandoned
, heritage." [Emphasis not in original. Emphasis added by the author of this essay.] Dobin, supra, page 226. Lloyd Graham drives the point home in this explicit language: "[T]here is not an
incident in the whole Christ story that is not written in the stars. . . ." Graham, Lloyd M. Deceptions And Myths Of The Bible, Bell Publishing Company, New York, 1979, page 354. I shall refer
you to evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the Christ Story is at least in part an astrological
allegory for the sun's apparent course around the Great Circle of the Ecliptic, and through the twelve signs of the Zodiac, during each solar year. I previously have referred to astrology
as the bastard step-child of astronomy, but the writers of the Old and New Testaments evidently thought astrology
was very important because they embedded it their most important narratives, including the Christ Story. Of course, all of my readers understand the reality of mathematical astronomy, both modern and
ancient, which mathematical science was understood by the pre-Celts of Ireland and Scotland. That astronomical
reality is that the sun stays put at the Cosmic Center, and Planet Earth does the yearly rotation around the Ecliptic as Planet Earth daily revolves around itself. The Prophet Ezekiel's wheel betoch
(inside of) a wheel was/is correct! That evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that segments of the Christ Story happened not on Planet Earth but, instead, happen once-a-year during every solar year as line-form
optical illusions seen on the Grail Mandala in the sky, as the sun apparently, according to ancient and modern astrology, passes each year through the twelve signs of the Zodiac. Would you reject
that evidence without ever looking at it? Or, would you open your mind to the possibility that the Christ Story is in part a visionary "sky story" instead of being entirely what you always have been taught by your clergy,
that is, that the Christ Story is real history of real people in real time and real space? David W. Deley has done a simply marvelous job of making that evidence available to you. Set your browser to: {http://www.members.cox.net/deleyd/religion/index.htm#solarmyth/} David Deley's computerized diagrams are precise and easily understood. He points out that the star asterisms really do not look like
the twelve signs of the Zodiac assigned to them. But my readers know something which David Deley may, or may not know, that is, all twelve of the signs of the Zodiac can be seen as line-form optical illusions within the Grail
Mandala! His presentation may be quickly summarized as follows: Astrologers, modern as well as ancient, ignore the astronomical reality of Precession of the Equinoxes and say, as a matter of
definition, that the Sun is in Capricorn, the goat, on the Winter Solstice, December 22nd. The Sun (Christ) is born-again three days later on December 25th.
The Sun enters Aquarius, the water-bearer, thirty degrees later. The Bible (Book of Luke
3:23) says that Christ began His ministry at "age 30" by visiting John the Baptist (Aquarius) who baptizes Christ with water. Aquarius (John the Baptist) goes below the horizon. The King James' Bible
allegorizes that fact by saying that John was put into prison. [Book of Matthew 4:12] Christ goes on his way to the "Sea of Galilee," where He visits Simon and Peter, two fishermen. [
Book of Matthew 4:18-22] The Sun (Christ) then is Pisces, the sign of the two fish. After passing through Pisces, the Sun (Christ) enters Aries, the Zodiac sign of the ram, sheep, or lamb, and passes the
Vernal Equinox, whereupon the Bible exclaims, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." [Book of John 1:29, also 1:36] We shall skip many of the solar events and Biblical events
discussed and illustrated by David Deley because the purpose of this summary is to convince you that David Deley's computerized animation of this familiar story is the best presentation of it on the Internet, and that you must
visit his web pages to understand what the Biblical authors intended for their readers to understand about the Risen Christ. You cannot possibly understand the intentions of the Biblical authors unless you understand a
modicum of what they understood about ancient astrology, and David Deley teaches that data to you in easily understood diagrams. You need not understand either ancient or modern mathematical astronomy.
Instead, we move to Aquarius' (John the Baptist's) being beheaded by the horizon line (by Herod, the source of darkness), after which that Zodiac sign (Aquarius) arises "from the dead," that is, arises from below
the eastern horizon. [Book of Matthew 14:1-12; Book of Mark 6:16] The Sun (Christ) walks on water [Book of Matthew
14:22-33] when the Sun crosses the "heavenly stream" known as the "Milky Way." At the Summer Solstice, the Transfiguration occurs during which Christ's face, "shone like the sun." [Book of Matthew
17:1-13] David Deley was not the first modern person to rediscover what every first-century convert to Christianity from the Mystery Religions knew, that is, elements of the Christ Story are an astrological allegory
of the apparent circuit of the sun along the Ecliptic and through the signs of the Zodiac. But his action-packed, computerized presentation far exceeds the quality of any other presentation of this data on the Internet or
through printed text. Finally, we have the Sun (Christ) entering Scorpio, the scorpion, which stings the Sun as Judas betrays Christ. And back through the "born again" cycle of Sun and Son we go.
David Deley disarms his opponents by citing Professor Strong, who, in case you do not know, is a well-known authority on the meaning of the Koine Greek Language in which the Christ Story was written and the Hebrew Language in which
the "Old Testament" was written. "Pontius" means "of the sea" according to Strong's Greek # 4194. {http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?search=4194&version=kjv&type=s
tr&submit=Find} "Pilate" means "armed with a spear" according to Strong's Greek #4091. {http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?search=4091&version=kjv&type=s tr&submit=Find} The "sea" of course is the sea of stars. The Zodiac sign "armed with a spear," or a bow and arrow, is Sagittarius. And "Galilee," as in the "Sea of Galilee," means "circuit" according to
Strong's Greek #1056. {http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?search=1056&version=kjv&type=s tr&submit=Find} The "circuit" of the Sea of Stars is the Ecliptic or Zodiac.
If you have accepted my opinion on anything in this essay, then you need to accept my opinion that you must set your browser to, or click on, David Deley's web site at:
{http://www.members.cox.net/deleyd/religion/index.htm#solarmyth/} Seminary and Bible college students study Hebrew and Koine Greek. How do they avoid understanding what the words of the Bible actually mean?
Or, do they know what the Bible means but rarely say so from their pulpits? Mel Gibson, look at what you stirred up! And thank you Dan Brown for causing people to think about their Christian faith!
SECTION TWELVE The remaining question we must answer if this essay is to have meaning in the lives of
present-day individuals is, "How shall we interpret the 1823 vision of Sister Anne Catherine Emmerich?" Readers of my book The Holy Grail, Cosmos of the Bible, Philosophical Library, New York, 1991, are
familiar with the following teaching parable, which presents for our consideration a conflict of cultures: A band of warriors who speak a Goidelic-Celtic language, and who reside in what now is "Germany," has invaded
what now is "Italy." They are standing before the gates of Rome. A Celtic warrior challenges a Roman warrior to single combat, according to the customs of the times. Organized warfare, as distinguished from a
series of individual combats, is an idea yet to come in Europe. The Celtic warrior stands over six feet tall. His red hair is platted into a pony-tail which extends all the way down to his
buttocks. He is naked, except for a golden torc worn around his neck, and a belt, in which he carries his swords and knives. The torc around his neck gives his enemy a line at which to aim the lateral swing of
his enemy's sword or battle axe in order to cut off his head, and the long braid of hair gives his enemy a easy way to tie his head to his enemy's belt as a trophy of battle. Sorry, Caucasian readers of this essay, if you did
not know that our not-so-distant ancestors were headhunters! Our Celtic warrior thereby challenges his enemy to kill him if he can! Our Celtic warrior is unafraid of death because upon death he believes he will
go as fast as a flash of light straight to Tir na Og, the "Land of the Ever Young," a paradise across the "Western Sea," by which he means the Sea of Stars in the sky. He is absolutely fearless, which explains
why he took off his clothing immediately before battle. Our Celt believes in what scholars call "Correspondence Theory," which holds that Heaven and Earth are reflections of each other, and what happens in the one
also happens in the other. As the Christian Nicaean Creed later will express that concept, "On Earth as it is in Heaven." Modern tour guides in Ireland confuse tourists by insisting that our Celt and his
ancestors had been Christians for many generations before Saint Paul's congregations at Antioch and Corinth first described themselves as "Christians." Modern students of government rarely learn that our Celt and his
tribe believed in individual liberty for thousands of years before the fledgling United States of America framed a written constitution. Our man elected his battle leader, who asked him, politely, please to join this
raid! Our man is free to go home anytime he chooses! Our man's tribal "wise woman" taught him that our cosmos is sun-centered, that Planet Earth rotates around the Ecliptic or Zodiac once yearly as it rotates
around itself once daily, and taught him how to calculate the time of night, and the day of the year, from the position of the stars. Our Celtic warrior believes in a single, "aniconic" (formless) Creative Power,
"Dia," pronounced "Jee-ah," sometimes referred to as "The Unmoved Mover," located at the geometrical Center of the Cosmos. The concept is geometrical instead of anthropomorphic. This power once appeared on Planet Earth
in a man (not a god-man or demi-god) named "Hesus," who was executed by hanging him on a tree. No kidding! Ask any honest person who is familiar with European mythology and who is not engaged in the rhetoric known these
days as "apologetics" in behalf of institutionalized Christianity. And please recall that the Roman Emperor Constantine, who, rightly or wrongly, is credited by most Christians with having made Christianity the State
Religion of Rome, at Nicaea, in 325 C.E., was raised as a child in what now is called "Great Britain," where his father was the Roman big-shot supposedly in charge of the place--although Boudica would not have agreed.
Our Celt's skin is painted with spirals and other abstract artwork using a dark-blue, non-permanent vegetable stain extracted from the wode plant. He wears a small, circular shield, known as a "targ," the root of our
English-language word "target," on his left arm, near his elbow, and he carries a iron-bladed short-sword in his left hand. He uses his targ to stop arrows and javelins, the weapons of cowards, with which he hunts animals,
but with which he never would do battle. He swings a two-edged and pointed steel-bladed (not iron-bladed!) sword of enormous length and weight with his right hand, although the sword's grip is large enough to be
held by both hands if additional strength is needed to effect a crushing blow during individual combat. Like the frozen man recently found in the Alps, his metallurgy is many years more advanced than the metallurgy of other
Europeans. Our Roman warrior is much shorter but is just as muscular. He, too, is fair of skin and hair because his people have not yet intermarried with the taller, darker-skinned, and darker-haired
Persians (now "Iranians") who, in later generations, will be hired as mercenaries by the Roman Army. He wears a helmet with a plume of feathers, which makes him appear taller than he really is; and bronze plate armor from his
neck to his waist, protecting both his chest and his back; a thick, quilted undershirt, to protect him from shock of the sword and axe blows of his enemies; a short skirt of bronze platelets, which hang down to his knees;
high-topped boots, also armored with bronze; and bronze cuffs around both of his lower arms. He carries a much larger, round, wickerwork shield on his left arm, instead of the more familiar (to Hollywood movie patrons) wider
and longer metal shield of later generations of Roman soldiers; and he carries a short, bronze-bladed sword in his right hand. The Roman screams at the Celt to inspire combat: "You are
ignorant. You cannot read or write." The Celt screams back: "You are ignorant. You cannot remember a damned thing unless you write it down then later read what you wrote." Thus, our conflict of
societies. The society in which the Celt lives honors an expansive memory. The society in which the Roman lives honors skills at reading and writing. Thus, the conflict of cultures: Those people who memorize data
versus those who record data. The Celtic warrior wins the physical conflict with the Roman. The Celtic men and Celtic women warriors march into Rome, where they remain for a few years. I am
sorry! I should not have given you "manly-men" a few moments to fantasize about naked, green-eyed and red-headed warrior-women! The Celtic women warriors carry the same enormous swords and pikes but they wear linen or
woolen clothing, according to the season, which looks much like modern overalls or "jump-suits" worn by modern-day airplane pilots, automobile mechanics, and male and female property-owners who are cutting their front-yard grass. Get it? The women wear the pants! And the Romans quickly learned the hard way that Celtic women wore a short dagger inside both of their boots. Try to rape one and you get two short daggers into your
kidneys! Who is the leader of the Celtic warriors? She
is named "Granuale," as will be her descendant who many years later will defeat the young Sir Frances Drake in the Battle of Clew Bay, sending him back to Queen Elizabeth I with warnings not to return to the west of Ireland!
Her
second name is "Boudica," as will be the name of her Brythonic Celtic relative who, but for Romans' having ignored the then-equivalent of our "Geneva Convention," that is, the "rules of civilized land warfare," would have run the Roman Army out of what later would become known as "England."
When your enemies always outnumber you, as has been the history of the Celts, you cannot afford to waste military talent because of an irrelevant consideration such as sexual equipment between the leader's legs!
Moreover, ours was, and to some extent still is, a society which is both matriarchal and matrilinear. House burglary is infrequent in modern Ireland because your typical housewife can do almost as much damage with the kitchen
broom as her ancestress could do with an eighteen-foot-long pike. During the time that the Germanic Celts ruled Rome, the Romans taught the Celts how to read and to write using the Roman alphabet and block
letters. The Celts already read and wrote in their Ogham alphabet. But the Celts never taught their memory system to the Romans. At least not to any large extent. By the time, a few years later, when
the Celts abandoned Rome, because they were rural people who never got accustomed to city living (Not because they got tired of eating pizza, as the old joke goes!) the Romans had adopted a simple version of Celtic Goidelic
grammar. Latin grammar is a simplified form of Goidelic grammar? Believe it or not! To the present time, it does the student of the Irish-Gaelic language no good to memorize lists of words because Irish grammar so
thoroughly abuses a vocabulary noun or verb that the student never again will see or hear any vocabulary words he might have memorized. One learns Irish-Gaelic in the manner that a child acquires his native tongue. Or
not at all. Usually, the latter because na Gaeilge is one of the world's most powerful, hence, more difficult to learn, of languages. Which brings us, finally, down to the lick
log. Please pardon my attempts at humor while we discuss Christianity. You will understand the relevance and power of humor, if you stick with me. To see and hear the following is to believe it: The "memory expert" fills a room with two dozen men and/or women. He asks each person his/her name, the name(s) of his/her spouse and children, their home and office telephone numbers, and their street addresses
and zip codes. Then the apparent magic commences. He tells each person present all of that data, flawlessly, and at random, instead of giving the data back in the order it was learned! A typical Christian
Fundamentalist among the amazed persons in attendance exclaims, "God has given that man an unbelievable memory." Actually not. As the "memory expert" explains, he learned the ancient memory system because he was born
with such a limited ability to remember! And he is not a learned professor of this, that, or the other. He is a professional basketball player by the name of Jerry Lucas! If you want to learn the ancient system,
read Lorayne, Harry, and Jerry Lucas. The Memory Book. Ballentine Books, New York, 1986. It is an inexpensive, paperback book which explains the system in detail. Does it work? It helped
me to be graduated from Georgia Institute of Technology! And the system for remembering people's names is more fun than you possibly can imagine! I never practiced the memory system thoroughly, but often have
wished that I had. As with many learned skills, practice makes perfect. Numbers are encoded into stories, which are decoded when the numbers are needed. Stories also encode all other data. Remember what
David Deley taught you about ancient astrology? The Christ Story is in part a memory jack for the yearly cycle of the sun through the signs of the Zodiac! The story helps you to recall the mathematical
astronomy. Like it or not. With the foregoing in mind, you are ready to consider how you will choose to interpret the written transcript of the 1823 vision of Sister Anne Catherine Emmerich. In my opinion, there are three possible interpretations of Sister Emmerich's vision: (1) As Mel Gibson did in his sadistic, gory, and anti-Semitic movie, The Passion
of the Christ, you can accept a literal
interpretation of Sister Emmerich's vision as a verbal description of God's sacrifice of Himself, while God was wearing the "mask" of His Son; or, if you insist, while God was in the "Person" of His Son; which Son of God was both God and Man; which self-sacrifice occurred on the Roman Army's cross on Mount Calvary, with the complicity of, and according to the directions of, the Roman and Hebrew civil and religious authorities, who were angry with God's Son because His simple formula for salvation, that is, ask God's forgiveness, then prove your contrition by taking a mikva or baptism in water, would have put the Hebrew Temple priests out of business and, hence, had disturbed the Roman Civil Peace; which sacrifice by God of His Son (and thus of Himself) God intended as the way to save humankind from the "original sin" of Adam and Eve, that is, their having children as a consequence of their sexual intercourse, after disobeying God by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, and thereby having learned that God had equipped them for procreation by pleasurable sexual intercourse, instead of waiting for God to use, again, the procreation system originally used by God, according to the second of the two Creation Stories of the Old Testament, which was for God to create a second female from a rib removed from the original male. How many ribs did "Adam" have? [Do you know that "Adam" comes from a word meaning "soil" or "dirt," and "Eve" is derived from a word meaning "moisture"? Is that "Second Story of Creation" another Biblical allegory?]
Yes, I know that no Christian clergy-person would state the first possibility for the interpretation of Sister Emmerich's vision in the words I used above. But I challenge you to tell me where I misstated
Pauline, Nicaean, Augustinian Christian dogma in the foregoing complex sentence! The word-formula used instead by Pauline, Nicaean, Augustinian Christian clergy avoids all of the complexities of the foregoing long but
correct sentence simply by saying, "Christ died for our sins." Well, not exactly. According to most Christian clergy, Christ did not die for our sin of murdering a relative or some stranger on the streets.
Instead, Christian clergy say that Christ died to save us from humanity's "original sin," without specifying that "sin" was Adam's and Eve's having made heterosexual "whoopee." Christian clergy insist that a person must seek
salvation from his/her "personal" sins, which salvation is granted only by the "grace" of God, by believing and by obeying his/her clergy-person, and by paying a sufficient sum into the Church's collection plate. Again, I
challenge you to explain to me in detail how I got those statements wrong! (2) You might, instead, interpret Sister Emmerich's vision as containing a grab-bag of disparate elements imported into Pauline, Nicaean,
Augustinian Christianity from the Mystery Religions and other religions to which converts to Christianity formerly belonged. Elements which Pauline, Nicaean, Augustinian Christianity could not wash from the minds of those
converts and which, accordingly, it had to adopt into Christianity and Christianize. For instance, elements of the Mithras Story, the Mithras "Cult" having been the principal religion of the Town of Tarsus, where Saint Paul,
the architect of Christianity, was "breaded and buttered," as we Irish say. And because astrology, the bastard step-child of mathematical astronomy, was thought to be powerful and scientifically correct by early converts to Christianity, and by
many of the early Christian clergy and hierarchy, you might want to interpret segments of Sister Emmerich's vision of elements of the Christ Story as being an astrological allegory for the annual course of the sun through the signs
of the Zodiac. That would be a use of the ancient memory system to encode astrological nonsense and astronomical
mathematics. For instance, when Sister Emmerich tells us that "John arose," (273), we might interpret that statement, and many other similar statements in her vision, as David Deley interpreted John the Baptist's having arisen from the dead, [
Book of Matthew 14:1-12; Book of Mark 6:16], that is, as an astrological allegory for Aquarius' having arisen from below the eastern horizon. (3) But I suggest that another
interpretation of Sister Emmerich's vision is possible, indeed is probable, based upon the actual words of her vision. This possibility or probability is the real "shocker." The ancient Goidelic Celts, the
ancestors of we modern Irish, thought of God in Heaven as being "aniconic" instead of "anthropomorphic." Big seminary or Bible-college words which mean that they thought of God as being "formless," instead of thinking of God
as being in human form. The concept of God's being "aniconic" did not mean that God did not have one or more "avatars" as, for instance, we have learned that the ancient Hebrews considered the sun to be an "avatar" of YHWH, that
is, a "symbol" for YHWH, but not as being YHWH. As the Shekinah sunburst was a symbol for YHWH but was not
YHWH. [Pages 17-18 of this essay.]. A person only will make of a fool of himself/herself by trying to argue that the ancient Hebrews were "sun-worshipers." My readers know that the Shekinah sunburst symbol was thought of as a feminine
symbol
for YHWH, who earlier had been considered, during the polytheistic and henotheistic phases of Judaism, as having both a wife and a mistress! Judaism is a "growth religion" whereas Christianity is a "static religion." Judaism never has tried to hide its previous beliefs, or claimed that its visions were actual events. Aliter, Christianity.
How do you think of God? As being a timeless but old-aged male with long, white hair and a long, white beard? Or, in the human form of His Son, Jesus the Christ, the other "mask" or "Person" of God?
Or, in the "aniconic" form of the Holy Ghost, by which Christian dogma-smiths meant the wind? An early Christian "father" said there must be, as there now are, only four Canonical Gospels because there are but four winds,
something which the residents of the Gulf Coast of the United States of America might dispute after the visits of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita! I already have offered you the excellent evidence of David Deley about the
astrological
aspects of the Christ Story, which modern Christian clergy teach as if those narratives were instead the real history of a real man-God (not demi-God) who did certain things in real time and real space. David Deley quoted the Bible as saying that Jesus was thirty-years-old at the start of his one-year ministry.
But other Christian writings, in and out of the Bible, insist that Jesus was thirty-three years of age at the time of His Crucifixion. Sister Emmerich's vision states that alternative age. (103). Surely, I
need not need do the arithmetic for you. Both claims cannot be literally true. Why thirty-three? Instead of thirty? Christian clergy skilled in the ancient skills of "rhetoric," which they nowadays
benignly call "apologetics," say that the difference of supposed ages of Jesus at the time of the Crucifixion is a consequence of the change of the calendars. They have an "apology," or "excuse," or "rhetorical response" for
every
conflict which any doubting pewsitter may point to in the Bible because they otherwise cannot contend with a "straight face" that the Bible is the "inerrant" Word of God, a contention which every seminary or Bible-college student knows is a "prevarication," that being a polite word for a "lie" or "falsehood." So, why 33 instead of 30?
Because 33 is the ancient number of the Solar Hero. Why? Because under the Hebrew and Islamic calendrical traditions, it takes 33 solar years to complete 34 lunar years of 12 lunations each. Heath,
Robin. Sun, Moon, & Earth. Walker Publishing Company, Inc., New York, 2001, pages 40-41. Everyone who knows the ancient legends of the Irish knows that 33 is the number of the Solar Hero. And we
have learned in this essay that Christ is the Solar Hero of both Gnostic and Orthodox Christianity. Pages 14-15. This concept of God's being at the Cosmic Center relates to the ancient mathematical astronomical
(not astrological!) problem of connecting the circle of the posited Dome of Heaven with the posited four-cornered square of Planet Earth. We already have touched upon how such architectural and
structural-engineering concepts were incorporated into the great cathedrals of Europe so that God hopefully would be happy with His House on Earth! So much to learn. So little time to learn it! OK, Perry,
you say, there is a possibility, even a probability, that you are correct about the astrological aspects of the Christ Story. But what does this contention of yours about the Celtic "aniconic" concept of God boil down
to? And how did Sister Emmerich express it? With sardonic wit. With parody and satire. With puns. With the most powerful force on the face of Planet Earth, if you remember Umberto Eco's
brilliant adventure novel entitled The Name of the Rose. English translation Copyright © 1983 by Harcourt Brace & Company and Martin Secker & Warburg Limited, at pages 470-479, and most especially pages
426-438, where we learn of the existence of a writing by Medieval monks entitled Coena Cypriani, "Cyprian's Dinner," a parody and satire on the Bible, in general, and the Christ Story, in particular, which openly was
read by young monks with much glee until the Church thought it had found and burned all copies! The version of the Coena Cypriani quoted in Eco, supra, pages 426-438, is sacrilegious from
start to finish, and also contains sexual and scatological "humor" of the sort found penned nowadays upon the walls and stalls of men's public restrooms. Some of the "milder" of the puns, satires, and parodies have Noah's
making an "triumphal entry [into the banquet] rowing the ark," (429), Jonah's boiling a whale, (430), and Jesus's "devouring a donkey." (430). Those who have read my 1991 opus
and this essay may find humor in Jesus's pouring over all of the dishes of the dinner some vinegar He had squeezed from a sponge He "had taken from the spear of one of the King of France's archers." (430). "Archers!" "King of France!" A insider's joke for those who know the Grail Mandala! But we must go back to the serious business about the realities of Pauline, Nicaean, Augustinian Christianity.
The villain-monk of Eco's marvelous story correctly posits that laughter destroys fear; that Christian faith depends upon fear; and, ergo, laughter destroys Christian faith! Which is why Protestant,
Fundamentalist preachers here on the "Buckle" of the "Bible Belt" preach Christianity's mythical "Hell" more often than Christ Risen! The "stick" is more powerful than the "carrot" to inspire unquestioning faith! Please
read Eco's novel if you have not already done so. And readers of my 1991 opus
should recall that several of the early "fathers" of Christianity were of the opinion that asking questions was the beginning point of heresy and apostasy. Like the teaching nuns always have told their pupils who ask questions, "It is a mystery. Do not ask!"
Sister Emmerich evidently knew, all too well for the good of institutionalized, modern Christianity, the Irish parody and satire upon the Christ Story known as The Destruction of Da Derga's Hostel.
Readers of my opus are familiar with translations of that tale found in Cross, Tom Peete, and Clark Harris Slover. Ancient Irish Tales. Henry Holt and Company, Inc., New York, 1936, and
Gantz, Jeffrey. Early Irish Myths And Sagas. Dorset Press, New York, 1985. The ancient Irish tale is a parody and satire upon all of the forms of Christianity which invaded
Ireland during the many years before and after the legendary "Saint Patrick," as well as a parody and satire upon the Christ Story. "Da Derga" means "two reds," and is a reference to the sun and the moon. The ancient
solar, lunar, and astral religion is being co-opted by the various forms of Christianity which have come to Ireland, which destroy as much of the ancient religion as possible and then incorporate the rest into their various and
sundry sorts of Christianity. Remember our doggerel (silly poetry) about Lion, Ox, Man, and Eagle? We sniff them out, just like a beagle? We are told that at the prow of the lead ship (of one of the
invading forms of Christianity) is "Ingcel," the one-eyed, whose single eye is as wide as an oxhide. [Irish-Gaelic: "Ing"=a peril or danger. "Ceal"=death or destruction. The mythsmith is telling us that
the character "Ingcel" poses a danger which portends death or destruction. Death or destruction of what? The old astronomical religion? Or, of the invading religion, that is, some version of Christianity? I
bet on the latter! When you have read what follows, you perhaps may agree!] We are told that "Ingcel" is "wrathful," a word which the ancient Irish applied to raptors, such as the eagle, and that "Ingcel"
is "lion hard." And, of course, "Ingcel" is a man. You have been prompted! Remember what you previously have learned in this essay? Lion. Ox. Man. Eagle.
We are reading a tale composed of line-form optical illusions divined from the Grail Mandala, the origin of the Christ Story, and this tale is a parody and satire upon the Christ Story! Oh, those awful Irish! Most
scholars believe a Roman Catholic priest or monk either wrote this tale or copied it from an earlier Church source. Think about it. The tale could not be from pre-Christian times because it is nothing but a "slam" at
institutionalized Christianity and its "inerrant" Bible. The tale has a heroine, of sorts. We are told that "A greyish, wooly mantle she wore," that "her lips were on one side of her head," and that "[h]er
lower hair reached as far as her knees." Perry, 1991, supra, page 281. Ready? There she is on the Grail Mandala in We are told that "a woman big-mouthed, huge, dark, ugly, hideous, was behind him. Though her snout were flung on a branch, the branch
would support it." You should recall that all Grail human forms are "big-mouthed." We see our new "friend" (or "fiend"?) on the Grail Mandala in Why would anyone make fun of the sadistic, gory, and anti-Semitic version of the Christ Story as told by Mel Gibson in his The Passion of the Christ?
Simple. Because they did not, or do not, believe that God, conceived of as an "aniconic" Creative Power, appears in human form; rather, that God, as an "aniconic" Creative Power, is formless! They are not making fun of
God. They are making fun of the human notion that God looks like a human being! Human folly, not God, is the brunt of the humor! But now you understand why Saint Paul repeatedly railed in the Books of the
New Testament against "Powers." And because you now are a Adept of the Grail Mandala, you know where the concept of an anthropomorphic god came from. And, further, because you know that the Celts knew about the Grail
Mandala, you also know why they rejected the concept of an anthropomorphic god in favor of the concept of an "aniconic" or formless Creative Power! Readers of my opus
most probably are recalling our lengthy discussions about who wrote the Grail literature, and why, and for whom. We concluded, in agreement with the vast majority of scholars, that the Grail literature was inspired by previous Celtic and Sarmatian tales about anthropomorphic gods, and were written by Meistersingers and Minnesingers to be presented as readings, chants, or even as songs, often with musical accompaniment on a stringed-instrument, to the rich and powerful of Europe and the British Isles. As entertainments! And why were these word-constructs so entertaining? Because they were parodies and satires upon the prevailing religion in Europe and the British Isles--Pauline, Nicaean, Augustinian Christianity. In short, the rich and powerful knew that Christianity was one of the devices which they used to govern (and to tax!) the uneducated peasants! The Church apparently tolerated this practice for about fifty years, then dropped the headsman's axe on such shenanigans! Thus, the Grail literature remained underground literature until it later was brought back to public consciousness by Richard Wagner and Lord Tennyson. With its original purpose long-forgotten. Dull reading, as in college literature classes, instead of fun stuff performed by minstrels during drinking parties of the rich and famous!
Perhaps, I can bring my point about parody and satire of the concept that God is anthropomorphic, home to you by telling you the story of the interrogation by Greek military officials of the Celtic commander Brennus,
who was captured by the Greeks during the Celtic attack upon the Oracle of Delphi in 279 B.C.E. A transcript of the interrogation exists. When the Greek officer conducting the interrogation told Brennus that the
gods of the Greeks were anthropomorphic, the transcript tells us that Brennus started laughing out loud! He then told his captors that his God (in the singular) was aniconic, that is, formless. (Note the date of the
interrogation!) Which explains something which readers of ancient Irish myths usually do not understand, that is, why those stories make fun of human-form gods! The transcript of the vision of Sister Emmerich
tries to convince us that she was a good Roman Catholic. See SECTION THREE of this essay. What better way to "con," "dupe," or "sucker" good Christians, like Mel Gibson, not only to read it but to spend millions of dollars to
emulate it on film! But when those of us who know the Grail Mandala read the transcript of "Sister Emmerich's" so-called "vision," we cannot avoid confronting the pointed nose of Christ on the Cross of Calvary, (273), and
Christ's hair standing on end in the Garden. (103). Those being elements of previous parody and satire upon the human notion of an anthropomorphic god. Now, what shall we believe about "Sister Emmerich's vision"?
I suggest that we must believe the following as a minimum: Pope Benedict XVI, the so-called "Panzer Pope," the former German Cardinal Ratzinger, who formerly was the "Prelate" of the "Congregation for the Protection of the Doctrine
of the Faith," which organization was known in Medieval times as "The Inquisition," and which officeholder then was known as the "Grand Inquisitioner," cannot be happy with the fact that Mel Gibson has put the "vision of Sister
Emmerich" before the people of the world once again, regardless of whether or not there really was a Catholic sister known as Anne Catherine Emmerich. Because someone, perhaps me, just might put that "vision" into its proper
context, proving, once more, that elements of the Christ Story are accurate reports of visionary experiences inspired by divinations of line-form optical illusions seen within Grail Mandala, a/k/a Pargod, a/k/a Bar Goda, a/k/a
Katapetasma, a/k/a Greille, a/k/a Heavenly Veil instead of being "inerrant" history of real events which transpired between real people in real time and real space--as preached by the Christian clergy! And what would happen to
institutionalized Pauline, Nicaean, Augustinian Christianity if that were to happen? Nothing, unless the print and electronic news media, or the news bloggers, lose their economic fear of telling the truth about the Greatest
Story Never Told! Instead of continuing all of their prattle about the Greatest Story Ever Sold. Since publication of my opus
in 1991, I have been writing the big-named men and women of the American print and electronic news media about my work. They know. They just are afraid to write or to say. Like most clergy are afraid to say, with the exception of brave men like J. David Davis, the former preacher of the former Emmanuel Baptist Church of Athens, Tennessee, who preached Christian reality from his pulpit, and later converted the former church building into a religious studies center. Most Christian clergy who are confronted with my writings invariably say that Christianity is necessary for human civilization even if it is not historically true. Please note in that statement what we lawyers refer to as an "admission against interest."
Perhaps, the print or electronic news media in the British Isles will break ranks with the print and electronic news media in the United States. Let's wait and see. In the meanwhile, there is this Internet
site, which is sorta like the fabled mouse that roared!