Official website


"That which is known as the Christian religion existed among the ancients, and never did not exist; from the beginning of the human race until the time when Christ came in the flesh, at which time the true religion, which already existed, began to be called Christianity"

St. Augustine
Retractt.I, xiii

With other words: Christianity isn't a unique beginning, but is part of the pre-existing True Religion, the latter which was there from the begining of the human race. We call this all-inclusive True Religion The Original Tradition....




It started with Mary. She apparently lived in a circle of other women. Of her parents only Anne is emphasized. Later the latter became St. Anne, symbol for the Great Mother, with Mary as the Goddess. The whole picture strongly suggests, that these women lived outside the Jewish social structure. Right, you already guess it, they were Canaanites....

In the "Spieghel Historiael" (Jacob of Maerlant, 13th C) it is mentioned "When Mary was three years old she was brought to the temple and stayed there (for several years) with other virgins". In the context of Jewish culture this doesn't make sense (at all). A girl would never live in the temple. The only explanation is, that Mary was part of Canaanite culture

Then, one day, she was visited by an angel, "Gabriel". "He" brought her God's message, saying that she had been chosen to become pregnant by the "Holy Ghost" in order to be the mother of God. This can be interpreted as follows. In Canaanite Tradition the Cosmic Mother regularly gives birth to dying and resurrecting Gods, who take care of the wellbeing of the people. Ordinary women were chosen to continue that Tradition

The Cosmic Mother (Asherah, Astarte, Anath) who - in Her Original Being, included destruction, creation and permanence - was suppressed by the Jewish priesthood (Levites), though, but had re-emerged as the Cherubim, angel-like figurines on the Ark of the Covenant. "Gabriel" was nothing but one of them, bringing Mary a message from......the Cosmic Mother. Moreover, the Holy Ghost had been a symbol of the MotherGoddess for a long time already, again emphasizing the Mother as the One Who was behind it all.

Mary conceived through the Mother? Yes, the symbolism is quite strong, because it expresses the parthenogenesis of the latter. That's why Mary is called the "Virgin". It means " a women who is no man's property". Spiritually, it is the Great Mother Who is giving birth out of Her Own Depth, without interference by a male principle. Then Joseph appeared. He had neither part in the procreation, thus emphasizing the parthenogenesis-idea, nor was he a patriarchal Jewish head of the familiy. Instead he was the loyal servant to his wife i.e. the Goddess, thus confirming his role as a matriarchal man*.

There is a tradition that talks about Jesus as "the son of a prostitute". Father "unknown". It underlines his matrilinear Canaanite descent.

* Later, the Parcival legend had the same theme, and also Teresa of Avila's veneration to Joseph was based on the same myth. Today's situation with so many fatherless children could also reconnect to it.....

Jesus was born in a stable, which stands for a Cave, again symbol of the Cosmic Womb. (NB. Caves don't play a role in Jewish worship). Shortly after the three "Magi" from the East arrived led by a star. They had come to pay respect to the newborn, bringing Gold, Myrrh and Incense. Why was this visit important? Well, the East is Mesopotamia, the cradle of ancient Mother Worship. They were led by the Star, symbolizing the Goddess, a.o. Ishtar, Astarte and Isis from Egypt (Later, Mary took over the former's title: "Star of the Sea"). And the gifts were typically offerings from the time of the Mother. The Magi thus confirmed the birth of a new matriarchal God/King

As a boy of around 12 Jesus once "disappeared" and was subsequently found at the temple, teaching the priesthood. They were all amazed about his wisdom. Wisdom comes from the Depth, never from dogma's or "the law". It shows that Jesus spoke from a different level, a level the priesthood had long forgotten. From where he got that wisdom? Because it is nowhere said that he had a Jewish teacher..... it must have been his own domestic environment - that circle of women - who taught the boy THEIR (Canaanite!) wisdom.

After that he really disappeared from public life. Why? If he had been a follower of Jewish Tradition, he would certainly have been in one of the Rabbi schools. No any report about that. Neither is there any indication, that he has been a member of the Essene Sect, as some suggest. His later "women, love and family friendly teachings" had very little to do with the ascetic attitude of the Jewish "desert monks". The explanation is simple. After his 12th his education became more serious. A training for future Canaanite God/King would never be tolerated by the Levites, though, hence, it had to take place in total secrecy. Although the time that Solomon worshipped the Holiest of Holiest as the "Womb of Astarte" was suppressed a long time ago, it was still necessary to have a cover-up: as a carpenter.

Upon entry in society he let himself baptized by John the Baptist. During it a Dove - ancient symbol of the Mother - appeared above his head, again indicating that She guarded and approved the whole procedure. The Gospel of the Ebionites says: "Today I have given birth to you". It reflects the ancient notion of being "twice-mothered" - the rebirth through the Cosmic Mother* (One of the titles of the God Dionysos). The core is very traditional. John the Baptist is the old  Son/Lover of the Mother, who's "ministry" had come to its close. Therefore, he proclaimed Jesus to be the (next) Messiah. It symbolized the death of the Old God (and the "birth" of the New), in this case brought about by Salome, the granddaughter of king Herod Antipas, the former demanding his head. She is the destructive aspect of the Goddess. Like Osiris, John the Baptist subsequently descended to the Underworld, telling people the Good News of the succession by Jesus.... (NB. The Templer supported this interpretation of the event, one of the reasons for their later persecution)

* In the Gospel of the Nazoraens the "Holy Ghost" (the Mother) says: "My Son, in all prophets I waited for you. You are my first-born Son"

With the wedding at Cana, two historical places are possible, both in Canaanite land. During that event a woman (his mother?) said to him: "They have no more wine". Jesus' answer: "dear woman, why do you involve me, my time has not yet come". Clearly, he was reluctant to enter public life, a well known phenomena with people "who have been at the Other Shore". Nothing is more difficult, for the world seems so rude, compared to the subtleties one experiences within. F.i. Maitreya Buddha is said to "hesitate descending to the people". Nietzsches Zarathustra had the same problem. In Jesus' case it is HIS MOTHER who pushes him. "She then said to the servants: "do whatever he tells you". Women throw their (matriarchal) hero into the cold water! It was Jesus' first act of SEVEN miraculous signs. SEVEN is the secret number of the Mother, representing SEVEN initiations (NB. See below in the Mary Magdalene section)

My mother gave birth to me in order to die, while my True Mother has granted me Life"
Jesus (Gospel of Thomas)

From this moment on there was no way back. The key question: how was he to combine his Canaanite background and teaching on the one hand against the background of everyday Jewish dominated life on the other? Some special skills were required. Precisely in his encounter with a Canaanite woman he experienced his next test. Because of insecurity about his role, he first rejected the woman (Jewish pattern), in order to suddenly find the courage to let his heart (Canaanite) speak. It is a moving event, in which the straight-forward attitude of the women - very recognizable to a man who had been raised and trained by Canaanite women - certainly helped him to come forward.

"Mother Loves You"

Why he had a preference for meeting non-Jewish women? Why he emphasized "feminine values? Why he always supported them, while critisizing Jewish men, together with their institutions? Why he taught them to be servants (like Joseph, his "step"father!), rather than rulers?  Knowing his Canaanite background, this will not surprise you anymore. He had simply come to restore the Old Tradition, the Tradition of the Original Mother with Her "dying and resurrecting Son/Lovers" of whom he was the next. That was his mission. So, he was very well aware of the purpose of his teaching. And step by step he became more open about it. This is proven by the fact, that he time and again despised Jewish law, while furiously removing Jewish traders from the Temple....

Jesus was also called a "sorcerer". Some accused him of being an instrument of the "devil". It may indicate his "foreign" (Canaanite) background.....

One thing transcended his mind and that was his Enlightenment on Mount Tabor. This mountain lies in the North and - not surprisingly - is a holy mountain of the Canaanites. In that event he got insight into his Divine Nature. That explains why he started preaching about the "Kingdom of God".  C. Mulack, a feminist writer, claims that the "Kingdom of God" is "feminine". "Men know nothing about this", she writes. Well, with all respect and agreement on most issues, this time she didn't grasp the significance of the Tabor event (or didn't want to take it seriously). doesn't fit in her biased feminist position? It would mean that Echnaton, Lao Tze, the Buddha, Kabir, Sri Ramakrishna, Ruusbroeck, Meister Eckhart, John of the Cross and innumerable other Mystics were ignorant. Which is grotesque. The reality is: Enlightenment is beyond any "worldly experience". It goes beyond gender distinctions. It is neither male nor female. So in Jesus' case Love, Inclusiveness, Light, Tolerance, Justice, Connectedness......came directly from the Divine Source. However, Jesus is unique in the sense that his Enlightenment came out of Darkness - his Cosmic Mother - as stated by the Gospel of the Hebrews: "Even so did my Mother (the Holy Ghost....), take me by one of my hairs and carry me away unto the Great Mountain, Tabor".....

However, in order to emphasize the proximity of God to people, a feminine concept could have been used by Jesus, as well. What we would call the Divine Immanence in the world. Since Talmudic times this was called Shekinah or Malkhut. Both have indeed a feminine connotation. The advantage of using it was, that they were part of Jewish religion, thus easily understood by the people. In Christianity she became Sophia. The problem with her - despite all sympathy for her in defending her position in the Bible f.i. is, that she is still a "consort of God", an instrument of "His will" , a mediator between "Him" and the world (just like "Shakti in Hinduism). She is NOT the Original Mother. The latter gives birth to God and not vice versa! Jesus surely knew this. What Jesus did - and that was probably the most he could do in his situation - is to weaken the concept of the "Father" by calling God "Abba" or "Daddy". Moreover, his actual actions to denounce patriarchy were clear enough. In order to make it understandable to common people, he regularly compares the "Kingdom of God" with female values, like baking bread, scenes around childbirth, growth of vegetation....It is everyday life with its multiple relationships, that Jesus is propagating. In opposition to patriarchal power, dominance, accumulation of wealth, oppression.

Everybody wants to claim...... C.Mulack states that "from early boyhood on Jesus had learnt to despise the female gender". Therefore, in order to become a female-friendly teacher he had to (re)learn everything from women. A little exaggerated it sounds like this: women are far more humane than men", thus "in order to become humane, men have to learn from women". In order to make this point C.Mulack assumes, that Jesus' early boyhood was patriarchal. Which isn't the case, AT ALL. Now, I don't think that anybody who reads my treatise would think that I denounce women. To the contrary. I protest against manipulation (or ignorance) of any kind, in this case, that Jesus has been biased from the very start and that only a re-education by women has saved him. Stronger even, my point is much more in favor of women, than C.Mulack's. Namely, that Jesus was raised by (Canaanite) women, right from the start. He had his good Heart at the right place, through early education by his mother and her women-friends. Only his surface was (necessarily) conditioned by Jewish society. So, in the beginning  he still felt ill at ease. Something that rapidly improved. Later on he received his Enlightenment, an event not facilitated by anybody. Does that mean he didn't learn from women later on. O, a great deal. But he was more than just "their product"......Thus to omit, that he was a spiritual teacher in his own right, something that made him a Truly Enlightened One, independent and with a direct link to the Divine, his Cosmic Mother, is a serious aberration from the Truth.

Ich persönlich habe das Patriarchat nicht gewählt, sondern wurde gezwungen davon Teil auszumachen. Deswegen kann man besser die Klassifizierung in "männlich" (schlecht) und "weiblich" (gut) ganz vermeiden und nur noch von "patriarchal" und "matriarchal" sprechen. Patriarchal sind alle Menschen die sich mit Herrschaft identifizieren. Paradoxalerweise gehören darunter heutzutage viele Frauen. Denn ihre innerliche Prozesse gehen in Richtung von "Animusverwirklichung", also die Entwicklung des Männlichen in sichselber. Leider verstehen die Frauen das als Karrieremacherei im Rahmen des Kapitalismus. Sie sind deswegen "oft schlimmer" als die Männer. Während letztere sich von ihren Anima - das Weibliche in sichselber - angesprochen fühlen. Also hilft die Genderbezeichnung allein uns nicht weiter. Was schon Klarheit verschafft ist mit welcher Weltsicht wir uns identifzieren. "Matriarchal" (ich meine das nicht buchstäblich bzw hat es nichts mit "Herrschaft der Frauen" zu tun) sind all diejenigen die Verbundenheit zentral stellen. Und viele Männer gehören dazu. Ohne Männer kein "Matriarchat"*. Denn die neue Welt kann nur von beiden Geschlechtern getragen werden. Etwas was manche Feministinnen bis zum heutigen Tag leider noch nicht verstanden haben....

* Übrigens bedeutet "Matriarchat" "Herr"schaft der Mütter" und nicht "der Frauen". Ich werde bestimmt noch auf dieses Thema zurückkommen!

Light is born out of Darkness. It is the deepest possible spiritual insight. That's why Jesus' birth is celebrated at midwinter, when the sun is at its lowest level. Therefore, Jesus is the Light to the world, born out of Darkness, out of the Cosmic Womb. This is confirmed by the Gospel of the Hebrews (Ebionites), where it is said that Jesus "was sent by the Mother". It confirms that "the Light" doesn't stand on its own, but is Her (first) emanation. This insight sheds a totally new light on the Trinity. The Origin is the Dark Mother*, God is Her Son - the Eternal Light penetrating the Whole of existence - while Jesus is a Realized One, an Enlightened person, teaching people their inherent Divine Nature. It puts an end to patriarchal usurpations in which Darkness and Light are portrayed as two arch-enemies i.e. the "forces of good and evil". Jesus is inclusive, because he knows from within, where he is coming from: from the Mother. It is the deepest cause of Jesus' reconciliatory attitude. On the other hand, isn't dividing the world into "good (us) and evil (they)" the curse of Western society, culminating in the sickening apokalypse of the fundamentalists?

* This is why the Black Madonna's are so fascinating. People intuitively feel the Truth behind them: the embodiment of Ultimate Reality.

This made Jesus a Teacher of global importance. He started teaching people "the Light within", through which everybody would become "like Him". Because of this, Paul had an easy job - being part of the Hellenistic World with its Mystery Religions, thus knowing about the Tradition of "dying and resurrecting Gods! - to connect his Christianity to Christ, without the need for paying attention to the details of Jesus' life. Moreover, as the only one he could confirm Jesus' Divine Nature - Christ - from his own Experience, his Enlightenment on the road to Damascus. Indeed, compared to THAT, everything else becomes irrelevant. That's why he made Jesus "God himself". His Realization wasn't complete, though, because it didn't include the world around him*. So he made IT a personal thing only, making Christ his "role model". However, as St.Augustine did later, he projected all his unprocessed and unintegrated emotional complexes into it. "Dying to the old", in fact referring to the death of the ego, became the "death of the flesh".  In its turn, the worst of all "carnal desires" were sexual. So, he abused a spiritual principle - death and rebirth - as a tool to fight (worldly) life. It was he, who gave the ancient dualism more food: God and world, spirit and the flesh, light and dark, good and evil, man and woman. The concept of "original sin" was a logic consequence of it. Being born into the world is equal to become alienated from God...... Amazing, because through his own Enlightenment he should have known better. His ambitions being stronger than his love for the Truth..... It is likely that he copied a lot from dualistic Gnostics (sic) and even from Buddhism. Especially women were considered the "gate to hell". Hence, it was Paul who laid the foundation to the misogyny of the Church.

* About the various qualities of Enligihtenment, see "Ultimate Teaching"

Paul's manipulations were not so much due to the fact, that he made Jesus a Divine Son (because in a way this can be said of every truly Enlightened One!), rather than the Son of Man, but that he removed the matriarchal context, the latter being VERY crucial to Jesus. He made Jesus appearence - the "Only Begotten Son" - an absolute unique historical event, rather than a chain in coming and going Saviors. He wanted a unique religion, starting with Christ, with himself as the actual creator. It had to conquer the world, hence it needed masculine power. Therefore, Paul replaced the Mother by the Father, going against the most essential principles of Jesus' teachings.

How did he do that? In the Mother Tradition "death and rebirth" are "simply" natural phenomena, which can be observed on every level of existence. By resonating with this Cosmic Law life will be optimal. Paul made something totally different out of it. He created the most ingenious religious coercion program the world has ever seen.  First he postulates the "original sin", which means that every human being is doomed from the moment of conception. Effect: fear and depression. You are a sinner and you yourself can do nothing about it. And then he comes with the "solution". God has sent his "Only Begotten Son" to earth in order to save you. For that he suffered a terrible death on the cross. And he did that for you personally. It proves how much "God (Jesus) loves you". Effect: you feel totally obliged to "God" for the rest of your life. Your whole life consists of "paying him back" with your loyalty, submission and obedience. You are forced to love God......Hence "God's love" was never freely given - like a Mother does......The "Father" wants something in return. Because you can never pay back God for what he has done for you, the underlying mechanism is guilt. This intimidation and blackmail scheme is the "driving force" behind Christian belief. Believers have internalized it, they truly believe in God's love, not being aware of what really make them tick: fear, depression, intimidation and guilt. Their love - just like the love of "their Father"-  is never free. It explains their moralism towards others, yes, their aggression towards non-believers. "If I have to suffer, he or she also has to". It is the source of all Christian missionary activities. Something that is totally incompatible with the Real Jesus

After having elaborated on the pathological origins of the Christian Church - which was necessary to understand the latter's fundamental contradictions - let's go back to Jesus. Through his Enlightenment his Teachings got a surplus value. Through which his commitment to his Original Calling even became stronger. However, he didn't do it all all by himself. He grew further into his role as Son/Lover of the Cosmic Mother. Of course, he couldn't be too open about this, risking Levite persecution. But he increasingly showed the people in who's name he was acting. The Goddess to Whom he was committed was represented by a group of dedicated women. The latter provided him housing, food and other kinds of support. One of the most outspoken ones was Mary Magdalene. In fact, she was the High Priestess of the Old Mother Tradition. A rich women, probably a Haetare, a woman who served in a (secret) Temple, initiating men into the secrets of the Goddess though sacred love and sex.....and therefore not married.....

It was she who led the whole operation of Jesus' public life. He was her follower, instead of the other way round. That's why she was so dangerous to the "apostles". She was called the "Apostle of the Apostles, the woman who knew the All". Moreover, as part of the Canaanite context, both Mary Magdalene and Jesus had to "play" the role of the Goddess on the one hand and the Son/Lover on the other. Their love was divine-inspired. It was all determined "from above". That's why the question, whether they were married to each other, is irrelevant. Probably not. Because as husband and wife their public kisses wouldn't have aroused so much criticism.  Increasingly, she became the target of vicious attacks. Eventually, the Church destroyed her reputation by calling her a ("repenting") prostitute (because of being a Haetare) and "the women with the SEVEN sins", which in reality were her SEVEN initiations into the mystery of the Mother

Contradictions grew. Which caused a more radical attitude from Jesus. He extended his personal approach to man's religious and cultural prejudices. "Turn On" he said, leave your home (the place of bad habits) and follow me. Followed by remarks about the rich man, who has less chance to enter the "Kingdom of Heaven" than a camel trying to go through the hole of a needle. He critized Phariseans for not serving life, but only scriptures. He rejects revenge, while emphasizing making peace with the enemy. He openly critizes practices in which men can divorce their wife (throwing her out on the basis of adultery), but not vice versa. He despised patriarchal power structures, so abundantly present in Jewish life. Instead he promoted "feminine values" like compassion, patience, respect, life-centered inclusivity, love to your neighbor. Values that were still self-evident to women of those times. Not surprisingly thus, that especially women considered Jesus to be their liberator, with great hopes for restoring the Mother-oriented society. The moving passage at Jeremiah 44:15-18 about their longing for and dedication to the "Queen of Heaven" speaks volumes

- and the people said to Jeremiah:

"We will NOT listen to the message you have spoken to us in the name of the "Lord"! We will certainly do everything we said we would: We will burn incense to the Queen of Heaven and will pour out drink offerings to Her just as we and our fathers, our kings and our officials did in the towns of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem. At that time we had plenty of food and were well off and suffered no harm. But ever since we stopped burning incense to the Queen of Heaven and pouring out drink offerings to Her, we have lacked everything and have been perishing by sword and famine"

Jeremiah: 44, 15-18

In between, several other details confirm the true nature of Jesus' mission. What to say about a simple remark in the Bible that Jesus retired to the region of Sidon and Tyrus, to find peace? This region is Canaanite heartland (nowadays' Libanon). You don't retire to a land that is hostile to you. If you want to find peace you go to a place you feel at home, in his case the famous regions of Astarte and later Aphrodite, regions where the MotherGoddess was still alive.

First summary: Jesus has neither founded a church nor wanted to do so, but only wanted to restore the Old Tradition. What he meant by that, well, he couldn't be open about it under the Levite oppression. However, in reality he had little to do with the Jewish tradition, f.i. in Judaism the teaching of (selfless) love doesnt exist, nor do the resurrecting Gods. So he neither belonged to Judaism nor Christianity (nor certainly to Buddhism as a Bodhisattva as the Dalai Lama claims) but he could well have been a Canaanite, just as LINK: Mary Magdalene. Though it is true that the Canaanites had mostly mingled with their conquerors (Jews), there had always been groups which wanted to restore the Old Tradition of the MotherGoddess. "Old Tradition", this can only be the tradition, which had been existing for centuries alongside the Jewish monotheism and turned out to be extraordinarily strong.

F.i. Elijah could destroy the priests of Baal, but not the priestesses. Solomon, the famous Jewish king, publicly venerated Asherah, the MotherGoddess (Cosmic Womb) of the Canaanites and so on and so forth. Jesus as a non-Jew, this is an "outrageous" idea of which the (positive!) consequences cannot yet be predicted. In any case he is part of a thousands-of-years-old tradition of "dying and resurrecting Gods" just as Yahweh had once been (as Son/Lover of Asherah, the Canaanite! MotherGoddess before monotheism was established). What I call The Original Tradition. With its first representatives: Osiris, Tammuz, Baal, Attis, Adonis, Dionysos and....Jesus. This is the true tradition of the "Occident".

By recognizing Jesus as a Canaanite, rather than a Jew, the 2000 years of extremely difficult "relationship" between Judaism and Christianity can come to a close. Because Jesus as interpreted by the Church, is the object of controversy. The latter claims Christ to be the Messiah, after all, something the Jews "refused to accept". This "superiority" of Christianity over Judaism, the former's proselytizing activities, still the denouncing of the Jews as "the munderers of the Son of God", despite the horrible pogroms of the past, the dubious use of the Old Testament for Christian purposes, in short, all ugly interference in the business of the other stops through "Jesus Canaanite". Only if Jesus - as seen by the Church - is not in between anymore, projections can be withdrawn. Then Christianity and Judaism can start seeing each other as equals. Christianity should take the lead here, by giving back the Old Testament to where it belongs: to the Jewish faith. It cannot give Jesus back (to the Original Tradition), because the Church never really represented him.... Only the Truth could do that. Joy, gratitude!

The key event, through which it becomes utterly clear about the ins and outs is Jesus' anointing to (matriarchal) God/King by Mary Magdalene. Let me refresh your memory. In the house of one of his benefitors (obviously a woman), Mary Magdalene broke a vase containing the most precious of oils, and anointed Jesus' feet (and head) with it. While doing this she burst into tears, spilling them on Jesus' body. She then dried it with her own (long) hair. The male disciples immediately got irritated about this "show" and exclaimed "why this waste of money, why not giving it to the poor? Proving that they didn't grasp the meaning of the ritual, AT ALL. Ergo: the ritual didn't belong to Jewish, but to Canaanite Tradition, the latter only understood by the female initiates. (NB. The anointments of Jewish kings were all inspired by pre-patriarchal times). It was the ancient Tradition of anointing the matriarchal Savior. Jesus understood it perfectly, because he replied to them: "they - the women - are already preparing the coming event of my death". Of course he understood, because it was part of his mission as "dying and resurrecting God/King".  For sure, his death was meant to be a symbolic act, only. Just like Lazaruses' - who spent three days and nights in a dark cave, reflecting the three days of the New Moon - in order to subsequently resurrect, a common practice in Canaanite (and Hellenistic) circles. That did not prevent Mary Magdalene to sob, because lamenting (women) were part of the "game" as well.

The last supper is another proof of Jesus as Canaanite Savior. Of course Mary Magdalene as the one who had been with him day and night for several years, was at his right side. Moreover, she was to take over his mission, once he had fulfilled his. The core of the ceremony - sharing bread and wine in his memory - has nothing "Christian" about it. It was common practice in the entire Middle East, long before Jesus. He only confirmed this Tradition!, again proving that he considered himself part of it, rather than being "a new beginning". as the Church always has put it. Later, in the Gethsemany Garden, he again showed that he performed a pre-destined ritual. However, his actual arrest still came as a surprise. Despite his initial fear he accepted his fate, while his male disciples got mad, trying to prevent the course of events. The betrayal of Judas - despite the findings of the Gospel of Judas, where Judas was the facilitator, a typical example of "Gnostic positive thinking" - has to be seen in that light. Its logic is attractive. For it emphasises Jesus' pre-determined mission as Savior, which complies fully to his role as "Son/Lover of the Mother". However attractive, I personally don't believe the idea of the Gospel of Judas.The reason for this is, that none of the (male) (Jewish) disciples ever showed any understanding of Jesus' (Canaanite) true calling. The cultural difference between them and Jesus was too big. Moreover, it was never the purpose for Jesus to actually physically die! So, Jesus didn't need a person who "handed him over" to the authorities. So my conclusion is, that Gnostics simply put their own version forward, one of countless other versions that were around. In fact, Jesus' Jewish followers - including Judas - were desperate about his future death, because they had no insight into Canaanite Logic.

Jesus' actual (physical) death wasn't reckoned with. Although......Partly it was the consequence of coming to the open as the new God/King, through his entry into Jerusalem. Didn't he manage to resist the temptation of worldly power? Because he always emphasized that "his Kingdom wasn't of this world.... Did he also want to become "King of the Jews", extending his mandate as a Canaanite? Or, on the other hand, was it precisely the consequence of the King-aspect of his mission? In the Canaanite Tradition the Gods were earthly rulers as well. Did Pilate grasp this? As a Roman he must have been familiar with the Hellenistic Mysteries, after all. By asking "are you the King of the Jews?" he checked Jesus' awareness as a "dying and resurrecting Savior". If the answer would be "yes", then Pilate could say, that Jesus understood the consequences of his own behavior. Therefore...... Pilate's hands were clean!

A King who fails always causes sudden break in appreciation by the crowds. Therefore he was hoot at. He was considered a failure. With regard to his outer mission, this was certainly true. To his inner it didn't make any difference. He had shown people the essence of spiritual Renewal: Death and Rebirth. Did he also complied with the Canaanite expectations? Certainly not. To the latter a God/King is indeed a worldly Savoir, as well. However, it had not been their aim to let him die a physical death. They had wanted him to die a symbolical death, in order to resurrect, once again. Like Attis in the Hilaria of Cybele, the "Great Mother" and "Mother of the Gods". It had gone all terribly wrong. Therefore the women didn't blame Jesus for it. Instead, they stayed loyal to him, especially in his most difficult hour. Apart from John, there were only women at his cross. Well, cross.....It is very questionable, if Jesus died at a cross (or at all!). In the Templar! church of - LINK: Torres del Rio (Northern Spain) - I have seen images of Christ being tied on an Asherah, the Canaanite sacred pillar. Some helpers are busy with taking him off. On the opposite side "three Mary's" are watching......It suggests that the Templars - familiar with Canaanite Tradition - had a totally different view on Jesus "last moments". "Dying on the Asherah" means confirminhg his status as Son/Lover of the Mother - the Triple Goddess (three "Mary's) approving the procedure - indeed, a ritual death, with the aim of subsequent resurrection. On the other hand, his physical death - as propagated by the Church - caused him to exclaim "God, why have you deserted me", showing that this was a mistake.......

Above mentioned is even confirmed by the Bible (Galatians 3:13 Acts 5:30, 10.39) saying that Jesus was "hanged on a tree". It is corresponding with previous dying and resurrecting "pagan" Gods, like Tammuz-Osiris and Attis, the latter who was said to have died "on a tree", buried in a cave and being raised on the third day!  The cross as a "Logo" was only adopted in the 4th century, after Constantine used it as a sign of victory......

According to the Gospels, before his death, Jesus said to John, the apostle: "Son, this is your m(M)other, and to his mother, mother this is your son". Amazing how, even in the canonized texts the Canaanite Tradition got through. Unmistakably, Jesus is transferring his mission as the Son/Lover of the Mother to the next, just as John the Baptist did that for him, thus guaranteeing the continuation of the Old Tradition. This, despite of the fact, that the Church had distorted the whole story! In order to be a unique beginning they took everything out of context. Contrary to a symbolic death - so familiar to everybody at that time - only a physical death would be truly spectacular. So they insist on Jesus' death on the cross. But even here, more details belong to ancient tradition, rather than to actual events. Apparently, the Church did not dispose of any real fact, therefore it had to incorporate elements from existing stories. First, the Veil that teared immediately after Jesus* death is linking to the Veil of Isis. Secondly, the women - first of all Mary Magdalene - as the first witnesses to his resurrection. In this first meeting Christ gave the women the incentive to tell about his resurrection. The meaning? Well, like in all similar cases (Osiris, Attis) the resurrection is the key event. It had to be told to the people, for only then they were assured of a new and prosperous new year. However, in all those cases physical death was never an issue. At the same time the women were not allowed to touch him. It means that Jesus considered his "death and resurrection" as being spiritual.

Even after his death there was a certain urge to get rid of any past event that could compete with the "Glory of Jesus". One of them was a key issue: the "Descent into the Underworld". It is beautifully described by the Sumerian "Descent into the Underworld" by Inanna, the MotherGoddess. She went there to rescue Her Lover Tammuz from his captivity in Hell by Erishkalla, Inanna's Sister and Goddess of Darkness. In order to reach Her aim Inanna had to strip off Her clothes, SEVEN layers, symbolizing the SEVEN stages of initiation. Eventually, She liberated Tammuz, on the condition that he would spent three months every year down under. Which symbolizes the infertile wintertime. This story was later repeated by the Hellenistic Mysteries, and were considered to be the core-experience of inner Renewal. So, the Church invented the "Gospel of Nicodemus", a very popular medieval treatise, describing the "Harrowing of Hell" by Jesus. He descended into Hell in order to save souls, but not all of them. Those who were already eternally damned were left behind.....In this way the Church hoped that all the links with pre-Christian heroism would be extinguished, once and for all. 

For the first time there is a (serious) dissonant in the Jesus story. Most people know about the revengeful, blood-thirsty and war-mongering God of the Old Testament, Yahweh. "Destroying his enemies" was his favorite activity. Only at last, when there were no enemies left, he became "peaceful". Jesus is considered to have started a totally New Era, characterized by Love and Peace. The New Testament is said to be a document of tolerance and reconciliation. However, Jesus' descending to the Underworld, making distinction between those who are damned and others who still can be saved doesn't correspond with the picture we had of him. Professor F.Buggle (University of Freiburg) has done some research about it and his conclusions are far from favorable. The New Testament too contains countless passages in which the believers are threatened with severe punishment and damnation. It is even worse, the professor says. Because time and again people are threatened by "eternal damnation", by "being thrown into Hell", a "Sea of Fire", for ever. Even Jesus himself speaks regularly about it. The transgressions vary between very minor to severe. In fact, things like to "only think" of seducing another woman, was enough to put you into Eternal Fire. (NB. I remember my mother telling exactly the same things, how she had been terrorized at school when she was only eight or so). What was particularly grave was disloyalty to the bishops.... The purpose was spreading fear and guilt, the instruments with which the Church oppressed "their" souls.

For people like F.Buggle this was the drop that makes the cup run over. He recommends everybody to leave the Church. Although we would in no way hinder his efforts, some marginal notes have to be made. First of all, the passages in question almost all appear in Matthew, the Gospel, that was written last. Why this is important? Well, because it has been proven, that especially Matthew had been subject to the most severe falsifications. With other words: the more recent the Gospel, the more it was streamlined by Church interests. And the Church was in a constant battle with "heresies", self-defined "deviations" to the doctrine. So, to the former, the picture of Jesus was much too soft. It gave too much margin for "errors". So, it introduced the approved method of the Old Testament - threats and intimidations - while putting them in Jesus' mouth. Poor Jesus, it wasn't the first time the Church abused him. And not only him. During the ages the Church has proven to be a MF, a Master of Falsifications. It did so with God, making Him (IT) "the God of the Bible" which has nothing to do with God As He (IT) Really Is. The Mother of God was the next victim. Mary, Jesus' mother has nothing to do with the real Mother of the Gods. The Bible has nothing to do with God's Word etc. etc. Is it therefore amazing that they also distorted the True Jesus? To me, Jesus has never intended nor said the ugly words written about him in the New Testament. We can therefore still fully trust him. What cannot be said of the institution that pretends to be his "ministry on earth".

Not only because of lies is the Bible a highly controversial book. It is because there are a lot of good things in the book too.....That is misleading people to think that the entire book is of high moral value. Well, it is not. The book is dangerous, because, apart from the humanity that is preached, an equal amount of life contemptuous passages can be found. It propagates exclusivity, hatred and violence in a very barbaric way. The result is that all kinds of people refer to it. From peaceful mystics, emphasizing the goodness of Jesus to fanatic fundamentalists who want to destroy their (many) enemies and everything in between. The book as the whole has thus NO ETHICAL IMPERATIVE, because everybody can pick out, whatever he or she wants. The inquisition finds its justification in the Bible. Oppressors and victims alike claim the book as their source of inspiration. Especially those, who claim the Bible as being "God's Word" pose the greatest threat. Their claims are most absolute. Therefore, it is important to emphasize the Bible as a literary product (as many! theologians indeed do) rather than a historic one. It is a narrative written by people who wanted to send a certain message into the world. It implies that everyone (indeed) can feel free to create his or her own version. For decades I had no interest to join those efforts. But now that I have realized that the interpretation of the Bible depends entirely on us (rather than on "God"), while having these wonderful spiritual insights about the Cosmic Mother, and thus about Jesus, and thus about new values, I saw it as my responsibility to create a truly humane document, a text that can really help us in making a new leap in evolution.

See also: "The churches are dying (out), long live The Original Tradition"

The crucial question, however, is, what the meaning of "Jesus Canaanite" is for the future. Is there something like a "Second Coming of Christ" like Christians claim? To answer this we have to go to early beginnings of The Original Tradition. With the coming and going of seasons various Vegetation Gods "died and resurrected". Their purpose was to resonate with the Cosmic Cycle, thus guaranteeing harvest, health and prosperity of the community. Later, it was the same God - Osiris, Tammuz, Attis, Baal - who every year "went to the Underworld" and raised from it. Eventually, this turned into a "God" who "died on the cross", enough to redeem the whole of mankind in one act only. In order to be sure of the loyalty of its "sheep" the Church postulated a "Second Coming" of Christ , though - in fact a late echo of former times - in which he will "judge" every human being, sending people to heaven or to hell. The ultimate blackmail! Even the Pope expresses "his longing for Christ's Second Coming". However, it is rather unlikely that his "hope" is sincere. For, if Christ would indeed come again, what he would say about the Church and its 2000 years abuse of his message? The Pope has no reason to be happy about this prospect, AT ALL: Therefore, he is not REALLY expecting "Christ", but only pretending. Moreover, how to recognize him if he would walk around? What "Christ" has to do in order to be credible? Should he say "I am the Christ", should he descend from a mountain or perform miracles? Truth is, that only those who are Enlightened themselves can recognize another Enlightened One. It is matter of resonance of (very) subtle energies. To the Church God Experience is taboo, so, no one will be qualified to confirm a "Second Coming".

No, it won't happen like that. The first reason is spiritual. After death the Spirit of every human  being is reunited with its Origin, becoming One with IT. The Divine - Light Body of the Cosmic Womb, Her First Emanation - is continuously giving birth to countless new manifestations, though. Future lives will therefore contain "material" from old ones, but are NEVER exact copies. Thus, nobody "comes back" as the same person. The "Second Coming of Christ" is thus based on ignorance. What does correspond to Reality, though, is the ongoing Revelation of the Ultimate in countless "successor" men and women.  This is in accordance with the ancient notion of coming and going "Saviors". Every New Teacher - provided he or she has truly gone to the Depth of existence - embodies the Wisdom of the Origin, always adding some new elements to it. This is the core of human evolution. So, how to recoginize New Teachers? First of all, he or she will bring a totally new insight about the Ultimate Reality. In our most critical of times this is the Revelation of the Cosmic Mother. In Her fathomless Depth everything old, sick, ugly, evil is dying, while giving birth to the new, whole, healthy and good. Because of his own Great Experience, such a Teacher will emphasize surrender to the Mother e.g. death of the ego and birth of the New Self. Subsequently, the New Self has to become part of the Whole - incarnate once again - in "Heaven, earth and the (new) community....."

The "apostle John" was a disturbed man. He suffered from "imagorrhoea", the uncontrolled and chaotic release of images from the unconscious mind, usually provoked by deep fear, to be compared with the effects of hallucinatory drugs (like LSD). The religious i.e. spiritual value is very limited. However, because of its importance with large groups of believers, I will elaborate its (relative) relevance. Surprisingly, in the Apocalypse, the primordial (and pre-christian) archetype of the Great Mother plays a key role. The ultimate renewal - the Saving of the World - is initiated by the appearence of the Lady! She is both giving birth as well as destructive. The unity of both indicates that John (the writer of the Book of Revelation) meant the Original Great Mother. On the one hand She is seen in Heaven, decorated with the sun, the moon under Her feet, with a garland of twelve stars, giving birth to a Son. On the other hand She is the "Whore of Babylon", dressed in a purple-red garment, in Her hand a golden Chalice, filled with horrors, "drinking the blood of the saints and of the witnesses of Jesus". (The whole scene refers to the worship of Cybele, the Mother of the Gods C.G.Jung). It means two things. If mankind learns its lesson i.e. drop the ego, then the Return of the Cosmic Mother - the Darkness that is giving birth to the Light - is the beginning of a new era. The Coming of the Birthgiver and Her Son - a spiritual event that is repeated in countless "chosen" people - marks the beginning of a new era, in which "successors to Jesus" - women and men - are fulfilling the Mission of the Lady. Something that was understood by the Templars*. If the lesson is not learned i.e. the ego will remain dominating our lives, then the Mother has no choice but destroy it, together with all its achievements.....It is simply about destroying accumulation while restoring Cosmic Balance, indeed a (impersonal) Cosmic Law. Out of ignorance and patriarchal distortion John interpreted it as the dualist "Light fighting Darkness", through the intervention of a "personal deity" (Jesus).

* See "Reborn Order" with the Templar's "Prayer to the Lady".

Rejoice, because I by writing these words and you by reading them....have truly liberated Jesus from his many torturers i.e. the Church. I feel my joy running over to all of you. The question is: if Jesus doesn't belong to Judaism, nor to Christianity, to where he really belongs? Right, to the Original Tradition of the Great (Cosmic) Mother and Her "dying and resurrecting" Son/Lovers (and Her celestial Daughters, the Goddesses). It is the oldest Tradition on earth, with Canaan as a shining highlight. It was Mother-centered, therefore was a beacon of (relative) peace, wellbeing and joy of life. The text (Jeremiah, 44; 15-18) about the "Queen of Heaven" confirms this. The "Song of Songs!", miraculously preserved in the Jewish Old Testament* is definitely Canaanite, as well. This Tradition has re-emerged against the background of our global crisis and started with Her Revelation (in 1977). After 2000 years of alienation we can embrace the Truth (because the Truth is embracing us!), once again. It is the Breakthrough where everybody is waiting for. Jesus, the Canaanite, has finally found His True Home. Liberated, he can "rest in peace", giving way and inspiration to various successors: the new Son/Lovers and Daughters of the Original Mother. The Tradition appears to be dynamic, giving birth to new Revelations i.e. Hopefuls all the time. You could be one of them. We call these Leaders "Green Men" and "Wise Women". Jesus - and many other Realized forerunners -  will always support, guide and protect you. The Mother and Her Son are blessing you all!

* See also: "Lament"

Summarizing: we act in total accordance with the True Jesus and the True Religion, as stated by St. Augustine, the most important "Father of the Church". Because which religion was there "from the beginning?" Right, tens of thousands of years before glimpses of patriarchy appeared at the horizon mankind worshipped the Cosmic Womb or Great Mother and Her Divine Daughters (Goddesses) together with Her dying and resurrecting Sons (Gods). It originated in Africa, moved to Europe deep into Asia. Asian migrants took it with them to Australia and the Americas. All "great" religions somehow preserve memories of Her. LINK: Mother & Sons. Think of the Tao (Maternal Valley), Aditi in India (pre-Hindu), Emptiness beyond Emptiness (Buddhism), Asherah, Shekina and Matronit (Judaism), Black Madonna's and the Mother of God (Christianity) and yes, in some way the Ka'aba (Islam), as well. Through patriarchal dominance She was pushed to the corner, though. The result is a "wasteland", spiritually, culturally, socially, environmentally....  Through the Revelation of the Mother (1977) the Original Tradition was restored as the most ancient and all-inclusive Tradition on Earth. Its hopefuls are thus called Green Men and Wise Women*. Only through restoring Wholeness - first on the deepest level, subsequently including all others - mankind has a chance of getting healed. We have taken the initiative. Are you going to follow?

* See also: "Green Men" and "Wise Women"

In this treatise we started with the answer, while ending with the question. Its purpose is to give you the chance to fully, openly and freely study this story, once again. In order to come to your own conclusions. 



Can we still be saved?

Culture Renewal Manifesto for the 21st Century

EVERY picture of Jesus is a constructed one, reflecting our own experiences and ideals. In two essays I have emphasized the positive aspects of him, hoping that it can become a bridge to the future. However, after careful reading some other less flattering aspects cannot be overlooked, anymore. In the New Testament time and again he himself (not God!) is claiming to be the exclusive way to salvation in a very intolerant way, threatening those who don't believe in him e.g. follow him with the most abhorrent and cruel punishments, like being forever thrown in ETERNAL fire e.g. Hell. There are at least 32 places* in the New Testament filled with this kind of uncompromising harshness. This extreme intolerance combined with uncompromising violence  reveal a  deformed character trait, both cannot in any way be considered as aspects of  a truly go(o)d(ly) person.. The conclusion must be, that the crimes the Church has committed during the ages are NOT due to misinterpretation of the "original" "Good News", but are in full accordance with the teachings of Jesus himself: no mercy for those who think differently..... The latter - I am very sorry to say - fully disqualifying himself as a teacher of humanity. 

Mk.9, 43-48, Mt.5; 21,22,27-29,30, Mt.25; 31,32,41,46, Mt.12;36,37, Mk.16;16, Lk.12;5, Lk.10;12,15, Lk.12;46,47, Mt.10;15;Mt.23;33,Mt.13;24-30,36-42, Mt.13; 47-50, Mt,25;14-16,18-21,24-30, Mt.22;1-3,8-14 and many more

There is only one way out of this situation. Many of the texts mentioned above are in Luke, Mattheus and John. These are the later Gospels. Science has confirmed that the later the Gospels the greater the chance that they have been falsified by the Church. This in order to streamline the texts according to the Churches' aim of conquering the world. It could thus be that it was the Church who introduced the ugly sayings of Jesus.  With the aim to "win" souls through intimidating e.g. frightening them. This attitude: we are having the truth, while all others live in ignorance, is unbearable. It has been the cause of centuries of atrocities. Now the West abuses it for forcing its lifestyle on other cultures. Until today the Church stubbornly maintains this attitude. One thing is certain: the texts come either from Jesus or from the Church. In the latter case there is only one solution: to radically reject these texts, including many parables, as being spoken by Jesus. And to blame the Church for having done this. For many this deceit will be unbearable. It is up to everyone's own judgement what kind of conclusion will be drawn out of it.



We are not responsible for the content of external links

1997-2012 © Copyright Han Marie Stiekema. All rights reserved.
Everyone may use this website as a source of inspiration. However, since it
is freely given, no-one can claim, copy or derive any text, rights,
position or status from this website.

Last revising: 08/09/12