After a week of hate and endless vacuous platitudes, otherwise called the 2016 Republican Convention,
now would seem like a good time for a reality check on ones spiritual integrity. Simply calling oneself a Christian, does not make you a Christian. The simple logic of that statement runs parallel with the notion that simply calling yourself Great does not make you Great. There is just a tad more to a meaningful existence, to a relevant religion, than just making stuff up on the fly and lying and harming humanity at will. By definition a Christian should at least make an effort to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. History has judged Jesus Christ, Martin Luther King, Thomas Jefferson etc as great men—but they never claimed to be great men. Now if you prefer to follow the teachings and values of Trump, you really should be self aware enough to simply reject Jesus Christ. If you really must align yourself to a Biblical prophet—Mohammed is far closer to being your man—his values are far more in tune with America circa 1776. I do not mean to suggest that America 1776 or Mohammad’s values were inappropriate in 1776—they both just simply need to evolve. They need to evolve both forward to reflect the needs of humanity in 2016 and evolve back to the year 32 A.D, to reflect what Jesus actually stood for.
What did Jesus actually stand for? Why are people like Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Mike Pence, Ben Carson, Mitt Romney, The Bush family, and other idols of the now totally unchristian GOP often pretty much the polar opposite of Jesus Christ. How are their values the polar opposite of Jesus Christ? How can we best illustrate that this anti Christ(ian) parallel universe that Trumpeteers have created and now wallow in, is in fact the opposite of Christian?
Oh, I have an idea—let us reacquaint ourselves with the real Jesus Christ—no, not he mythical Christ soiled by two thousand years of male power politics, but the real Jesus Christ of the year around 32 A.D.
This disparity also triggers another question—why is it that virtually all Religions are built upon Misogyny?
It was while I was mulling this over that I realized that not only is Jesus a far better individual than might be deduced from the actions of his most devout yet misinformed followers, but in fact he was likely to have been an even more interesting and enlightened person than suggested by the content of the New Testament. The big tell—The Catholic Church remains highly Misogynist, but there is zero evidence that Jesus was. How can we explain this disconnect?
By way of example—let us look at Attis from 125 BC:
Attis was born on December 25th of the Virgin Nana.
He was a shepherd, as Christ was called the “Good Shepherd.”
He was considered the “only begotten son,” the Logos/Word and the savior slain for the salvation of mankind.
His cult had a sacrificial meal, at which, it is contended, his body as bread was eaten by his worshippers.
His priests were “eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven” (Mt 19:12).
Attis served as both the Divine Son and the Father.
On “Black Friday,” he was “crucified” on a tree, from which his holy blood ran down to redeem the earth.
He descended into the underworld.
After three days, Attis was resurrected on March 25th (as tradition held of Jesus) as the “Most High God.”
So what is going on? Was Jesus not good enough? Does he need a makeover? Well it turns out that Jesus was not good enough if you happen to have a political agenda (sound familiar?)
To understand why Jesus was not good enough for people with an agenda—it is worth taking a moment to look at the alternative explanation of who Jesus really was. Most scholars seem to accept that Jesus was a Gnostic. There are different interpretations of what this means. But this seems to sum it up best:
Gnosticism is the study of mythology, natural science, biology, anatomy, astronomy, astrology, numerology, herbology, alchemy, reason, logic and mysticism —the study of human consciousness and self-realization (God consciousness) through ritual, symbolism, affirmation, visualization and meditation. Gnostics did not separate science from spirit—they were studied in tandem, because they exist in tandem and can only fully manifest in tandem.”
So what was so special about Jesus? Well Jesus was effectively condemning the Old Testament God. He changed the eye for an eye—to turn the other cheek. He did this because as a researcher for truth, as a critical thinker, he recognized that meeting violence with violence simply lead to more and unending violence. This was the Instinctive Male need to dominate and to wage wars. So what he was preaching was that God is Love, is with in each human and that such love valued all living things, removed fear. At the time of Jesus’s death and as a result of his teachings, mankind was on the cusp of gaining enlightenment.
Theodosius: In 392 he became sole Emperor (the last one to claim sole and effective rule over an Empire including the Western provinces). From this moment till the end of his reign in 395, while non-Christians continued to request toleration,he ordered, authorized, or at least failed to punish, the closure or destruction of many temples, holy sites, images and objects of piety throughout the Empire.
In 393 he issued a comprehensive law that prohibited any public non-Christian religious customs, and was particularly oppressive to Manicheans. He is likely to have disbanded the ancient Olympic Games, whose last record of celebration was in 393, though archaeological evidence indicates that some games were still held after this date.
The following passage explains what the new Catholic Church found so repellent:
(Cathars—being a form of Gnosticism)
Little is known about Cathars. Most of the information about them has been destroyed, and what we do know has mostly been aduced from Catholic records. This is rather like reconstructing Jewish theology from Nazi records of the holocaust. Records are biased and incomplete. What we do know is that the Cathars were ascetics. Their ministers and teachers, called parfaits or perfected ones, were vegetarians. They generally adopted a life of extreme devotion and simplicity. Both men and women could become parfaits. They lived in poverty, the men travelling and preaching. They earned their livings by cloth making, shepherding, and other trades. Followers were not expected to adhere to the same ascetic standards as the parfaits, and were permitted to eat meat and engage in sex. They had a low opinion of the institution of marriage and are thought to have practiced birth control and abortion. They disagreed with the Roman Church on many points. They took the view that if sex was agreeable to both partners then it could not be disagreeable to God. They declined to take oathes. They denied the validity of clerical hierarchies and of ordained intercessors between man and God. They believed in reincarnation. They had no problems with the practice of charging interest on loans. They did not build churches. They criticized the accumulation of land, and the forcible extraction of tithes, by the Roman clergy. One of the things that most outraged the Catholic authorities was that they read the bible. Another was that women could be regarded as men’s equals. A third was their sincere conviction that the Roman Church was inspired by Satan.
Emperor Constantine and his successors, having cherry picked the narrative best suited for coercion, figured competing notions must be extinguished—by acts that would appear to be the polar opposite of the teachings of Jesus:
With the adoption of Christianity by Constantine I (after Battle of Milvian Bridge, 312), heresy had become a political issue in the late Roman empire. Adherents of unconventional Christian beliefs not covered by the Nicene Creed like Novatianism and Gnosticism were banned from holding meetings, but the Roman emperor intervened especially in the conflict between orthodox and Arian Christianity, which resulted in the burning of Arian books.
In contrast to the late antiquity, the execution of heretics was much more easily approved in the late Middle Ages, after the Christianization of Europe was largely completed. The first known case is the burning of fourteen people at Orléans in 1022. In the following centuries groups like the Bogomils, Waldensians, Cathars and Lollards were persecuted throughout Europe. The Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215) codified the theory and practise of persecution. In its third canon, the council declared: “Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, .. to take an oath that they will strive .. to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church.”
“Most interestingly, in Deuteronomy Moses goes so far as to stress that the law must not be waved aside out of compassion. “Show no pity,” the text says, “ life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (Deut 19:21). Yet, Jesus not only commands people to “show pity,” he replaces the Old Testament quid pro quo ethic with his radical ethic of unconditional love.
For example, while the Old Testament allowed Israelites to hate their enemies and sometimes command them to slaughter them, Jesus forbid his disciples from ever hating or doing any harm to an enemy. Instead, he commanded people to “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Mt 5:43-45). Luke includes the command to “do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you” and “pray for those who mistreat you” (Lk 6:27-28).
Most surprising of all, Jesus emphatically makes loving enemies rather than hating them the precondition to being a child of God. We’re to love, bless, pray for and do good to our enemies “that you may be children of your Father in heaven” (Mt 5:45, emphasis added). Only if we love indiscriminately can we “be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked” (Lk 6:35). Small wonder, therefore, that when Peter drew his sword in self-defense—acting in accordance with Old Testament norms—Jesus rebuked him”
The Gnostic Gospels generally preceded the traditional Gospels—and it seems quite obvious that the Catholic Church did an excellent job of extinguishing these Gnostic texts. Most have only resurfaced in the last few Centuries:
The Gnostic Gospels are a collection of about 52 ancient texts based upon the teachings of several spiritual leaders, written from the 2nd to the 4th century AD. The sayings of the Gospel of Thomas, compiled circa 140, may include some traditions even older than some of the gospels of the New Testament, possibly as early as the second half of the first century.
The Gospel of Mary—and most people believe this to be Mary Magdalene, is also revealing, even though the recovered text is missing key passages. It would appear from various accounts that Mary was Jesus’s preferred disciple—and this may have led to some “anxiety” amongst the other disciples, and may also explain why she magically morphed into a prostitute in some of the later Gospel transcripts. Peter seemed to have been particularly peeved.
Karen King was Winn Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Harvard Divinity School, from 1998 – 2008; in October 2009, she succeeded Harvey Cox to become the first woman appointed to the Hollis Chair, the oldest endowed chair in the United States:
Karen King claims that the (Mary) Gospel’s main purpose is to encourage fearful disciples to go out and preach the gospel, and this historian goes on to explain:
“an intriguing glimpse into a kind of Christianity lost for almost fifteen hundred years…[it] presents a radical interpretation of Jesus’ teachings as a path to inner spiritual knowledge; it rejects His suffering and death as the path to eternal life; it exposes the erroneous view that Mary of Magdala was a prostitute for what it is—a piece of theological fiction; it presents the most straightforward and convincing argument in any early Christian writing for the legitimacy of women’s leadership; it offers a sharp critique of illegitimate power and a utopian vision of spiritual perfection; it challenges our rather romantic views about the harmony and unanimity of the first Christians; and it asks us to rethink the basis for church authority.”
By the 4th Century AD we have a faith divided by two differing interpretations. Should one “worship” the message or the messenger? I would hope that the answer to that is obvious. The problem with the message (Jesus’s actual message) was that this message could not be used by Emperors, Kings, Oligarchs, assorted Tyrants, and Autocratic Religious Hierarchies to control, to subdue to dominate. Back in 300 AD or so, the Roman Empire was facing an existential threat. The actual message—which we all surely know to be the better path, has an Achilles heel. To show the other cheek will tend to have a short term risk—that the guy holding the “Gun” will shoot you. It also goes against the male psyche, which is problematic, especially back then when the connecting women with equality was a very threatening notion to Males, who quite liked getting to dictate the rules. Males were not about to share the remote control—it would only impinge of their ability to watch action movies.
Saint Thomas Aquinas summed up the standard medieval position, when he declared that that obstinate heretics deserved “not only to be separated from the Church, but also to be eliminated from the world by death” 
The Old Testament has been the main source for Christian theologians advocating religious persecution. An example of this would be John Jewel. In defending the demand for religious uniformity by Elizabeth I of England, he declared: “Queen Elizabeth doth as did Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon, Josias, Jehoshaphat, ..
How Misogyny became Institutionalized with in the Christian Church
It should be noted in the early days of Christianity Mary Magdalene would not have trashed, female Christians outnumbered men, as the religion was more accepting of women than Judaism, there have been many female Saints, women have risen to great power as nuns etc—so the Catholic Church was not a total loss by any means. It just seems to get worse as we get further away from the life and times of Jesus. Priestly celibacy was not important to Jesus and his disciples (Peter and possibly others being married) but the Church’s backward notions grew slowly and awkwardly after 300 AD and still through 1200 and after.
The supposed rational for priestly celibacy being that being celibate helped priests focus on their duties, but perhaps a more practical explanation being it “enabled the Church to control the wealth amassed by the clerics through their various religious activities hence contributing to the growing power of the institution.”
The further removed we get from the time of Jesus, the more Jesus gets opportunistically remodeled.
Today, more so than ever, the lack of relative enlightenment is more glaring. The Catholic Bishops making outmoded dogmatic statements, typical of Men, especially typical of aging entitled authoritarian White Men. With out any knowledge of Sex, Marriage, Children or Women—they remain insistent on their right to pontificate. It has been the nuns, who have been working on the front lines of poverty, who fully recognize that dogma interferes with doing good—that sitting in uninformed judgement, making silly pronouncements—creates poverty, costs lives. As time passes, the real Jesus takes more of a back seat—and men so seek to exert power over women.
“Tertullian, “the father of Latin Christianity” (c160-225) And do you not know that you are Eve? God’s sentence hangs still over all your sex and His punishment weighs down upon you. You are the devil’s gateway; you are she who first violated the forbidden tree and broke the law of God. It was you who coaxed your way around him whom the devil had not the force to attack. With what ease you shattered that image of God: Man! Because of the death you merited, even the Son of God had to die… Woman, you are the gate to hell. – Tertullian, “the father of Latin Christianity” (c160-225)
Woman is a temple built over a sewer. – Tertullian, “the father of Latin Christianity” (c160-225)
Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo Regius (354-430)
Woman was merely man’s helpmate, a function which pertains to her alone. She is not the image of God but as far as man is concerned, he is by himself the image of God.
Woman does not possess the image of God in herself but only when taken together with the male who is her head, so that the whole substance is one image. But when she is assigned the role as helpmate, a function that pertains to her alone, then she is not the image of God. But as far as the man is concerned, he is by himself alone the image of God just as fully and completely as when he and the woman are joined together into one.
Saint Albertus Magnus, Dominican theologian, 13th century
Woman is a misbegotten man and has a faulty and defective nature in comparison to his. Therefore she is unsure in herself. What she cannot get, she seeks to obtain through lying and diabolical deceptions. And so, to put it briefly, one must be on one’s guard with every woman, as if she were a poisonous snake and the horned devil. … Thus in evil and perverse doings woman is cleverer, that is, slyer, than man. Her feelings drive woman toward every evil, just as reason impels man toward all good.
Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church, 13th century
As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active force in the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of woman comes from a defect in the active force or from some material indisposition, or even from some external influence.
Joseph Smith, founder of LDS movement (1805-1844) Clear cut charlatan, Parish Bull and serial Polygamist: The root of masculine is stronger, and of feminine weaker. The sun is a governing planet to certain planets, while the moon borrows her light from the sun, and is less or weaker.
–Official statement of Southern Baptist Convention, Summer 1998, (15.7 million members)
A wife is to submit graciously to the servant leadership of her husband, even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ.
Pat Robertson, Southern Baptist leader (1930–)
The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.”
The Catholic Church, until the present Pope at least, had been stupid enough to actually align itself with the Stupidparty and by doing it becomes a partner in crimes against humanity committed by Stupidparty. Even Jesus the man would find it difficult not to lose his temper with the governing money men navigating Stupidparty, all the way to mankind’s oblivion.
The evolution all the way to that ridiculous Pat Robertson and the rest of the Stupidparty leaders and disciples. We can now begin to understand how the Stupidparty comes to represent the polar opposite to Jesus Christ, and a God who apparently only speaks through Stupidparty Icons. The President literally has school congress, and effectively treat them like mental midgets that they are.
I have already detailed Mitt Romney’s misogyny and his “manly” agenda which was rapturously supported by all the pillars of the Stupidparty. The Stupidparty is fully behind worshiping the concocted messenger, and they have totally forgotten the message. The Stupidparty is steeped in all that accompanies two thousand year Misogyny, the lack of the female balance, the love of War, the woman slaving away at home, control over her body, the countless rationalizations for rape, refusal to codify equal pay, deference and obedience to the husband. Studies show that more the woman is diminished the more poverty there is, the more the Woman is muted the more Religious dogma can flourish. How can a Christian movement devoid of Christianity to lecture Islam. Yes Islam needs an intervention, but this task can not be undertaken by idiots.
She replied Nine.
Therefore the answer to my original question—how has the Stupidparty, with its rotten ideals rooted in a polluted version of Christianity, become so Misogynistic, so bigoted, so blind the Facts, to Math to Science?
This has happened because they are worshiping an invented Jesus and in so doing they have forgotten the original message as actually preached by Jesus.
The Message every one should be able to live with:
Jesus was a student, then a teacher of knowledge. Stupidparty promotes and then thrives on Ignorance. It does not matter what your actual religion is, it does not matter whether you believe Jesus is the son of God, it does not matter if you are an atheist—but what we should all do, is to Please Stand up on Behalf of Jesus, not for him as a person—but for his message to mankind:
God is Love, is with in each human and that such love valued all living things, removed fear.