Re: MISC: Santa Claus, winner of the Feynman Grand Prize?

Michael Lorrey (
Fri, 04 Dec 1998 13:21:16 -0500

Scott Badger wrote:

> Michael Lorrey wrote:
> >As a person who was raised Roman Catholic, was an altar boy and actually
> read
> >the bible, I have to say you are stupendously wrong. An Immaculate
> Conception
> >takes place when a virgin becomes pregnant and her hymen remains intact,
> thus
> >proving that the child has no earthly father. Its 'immaculate' because it
> is
> >prefectly clean, with no blood from the breaking of the hymen... get it?
> >
> >I have felt the the policy of the Immaculate Conception, which was not a
> part
> >of catholic theology til several hundred years after the supposedly blessed
> >event, was merely a smokescreen by the Church to obfuscate the evidence
> that
> >Jesus was actually a political figure by the fact that his parents were the
> >culmination of a breeding program to reunite the royal houses of Isreal.
> Michael (or anyone),
> I would really like to hear more coherent arguments like this exposing
> religious myths and agendas. Can you recommend a couple of good
> books?

I would have recommended _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_, which does go rather deeply into a lot of esoteric knowledge about early christianity which the church has suppressed, but a recent book by the same authors, which as I recall is called _The Search for God_, which is supposed to be a sequel to the first is rather circular in its logic. Based on the first, which supposes that christ was buried in a tomb in the south of France either by early gnostic christians led by Mary Magdalene and John of Aramathea who migrated to the Marseilles area, or by the Templars after their return from the Crusades, where they found his corpse. The second book goes through some rather convoluted analysis of gravestones, maps and old paintings to triangulate on a site in a mountain where they claim the corpse is buried.

I'm not that up on religious dissident opinions as others may be. However several facts suport my earlier assertion about the political status of Jesus:

  1. different gospels trace Jesus' lineage to both houses of David through both parents, and other esoteric texts trace the lineage of Mary Magdalene as being that of the House of Saul.
  2. That Jesus was often referred to as 'rabbi' indicates that he was married, as a rabbi must be married, at least in that day and age.
  3. That Jesus was referred to by servants at the Wedding at Canae (about the lack of wine) indicates that he was the groom. Who did he marry?
  4. During the time he and the disciples lived with Lazarus, Mary Magdalene, and Martha, we see the incident where Martha, a spinster, complains to Jesus about Mary not doing any chores. Spinster women in jewish families lived in the homes of their married siblings or parents at the time and were expected to do the housework.
  5. The adultress incident: a 'woman' is brought to Jesus for commiting adultery, for him to judge. When a woman commited adultery, the woman's husband was the person who judged.

I'd recommend the Nag Hammadi to anyone. With the gospels of Mary and Thomas, the only two gospels actually written by actual disciples, it seems to me to be more credible than the gospels of the bible.

Mike Lorrey