The blood of a lamb

Introductory notes

Throughout history the politics of imperialism has always coexisted with the religion of imperialism, and in the case of Western civilization, the role of the imperialist ideologue was held for millennia by Christianity. For this reason if imperialism is to be destroyed it is required that the unconscious pillar of support of imperialism, the Christian doctrine, must be completely annihilated, for if this task is left undone, then imperialism will always have a solid base within the population.

It is a fact that Adolph Hitler was only able to garner about 30 per cent of the vote in Germany, being opposed by the majority of the German population (he was undemocratically appointed chancellor via means of a presidential decree). Hitler's popular base was the religious right of Germany, and it was only in the Protestant German ‘Bible Belt' that Hitler was able to garner massive majorities at the polls, through religious demagoguery (such as promising to crack down on the homosexuals of Berlin - they were among the first to go the concentration camps, years before the Jews - and also by appealing to ‘family values' and opposing female rights - his campaign slogan describing his program for the rights of women was ‘children, church, kitchen', and when the Nazis achieved domination, women were fired from their jobs which were then given to men.) Having firmly established this political base through religious demagoguery, fascist imperialism was eventually able to overrun German society, despite its electoral unpopularity. It is easy to imagine that the popular support for the illegal imperialist aggression in Iraq could completely collapse, with the religious element in American society being left as the only solid base of support for further colonial attacks, since the Christian doctrine creates patriotic imperialist colonialists, as the history of conquest and robbery of Christian imperialist colonialism demonstrates so clearly, and this remains true today, and will remain true until Christian theology is subjected to a thorough demolition.

For this reason, after having taken some time to think about what this current situation requires as concerns a propaganda offensive, I have come to the firm conclusion that for the immediate future my attention will be focused on exposing and destroying the Christian doctrine.

The Son of God

It is possible to identify the correct strategy to be used in destroying Christian theology by making note of what is held to be the greatest ‘heresies' of that system of thought, for things are only taboo and proclaimed to be heresy, and thus beyond question, when a certain doctrine is the central support upon which the entire imperialist superstructure of Christian doctrine is situated. The supposed ‘greatest of all heresies' is to deny the ‘divinity of Christ', which makes this doctrine a prime target for a good demolition job.

All such ‘heresy' is an indication of where to launch an effective attack. To summarize a previous example of this sort of thing, It is also said to be a great heresy to deny that the Bible is ‘God's Word' or to deny that the Bible is ‘infallible and inerrant'. This doctrine is found to be a Big Lie, but nevertheless Christian apologetics continues on with the torturous struggle to ‘harmonize' the Bible because this doctrine is also crucial to imperialism (it is required if the cross is to be redefined and given a new meaning based on the animal sacrifice, as I mentioned in a previous piece, and as well it is also crucial to the maintenance of systems of hierarchy and authoritarianism, since the ‘authority of scripture' then becomes the ‘authority of the preacher' who then grants the same authority to the imperialist state - in its essence then the doctrine of ‘Biblical infallibility' lends itself well to fascism, which explains the appeal of Hitler to the religious Germans).

The doctrine of the ‘Son of God' functions in a similar way, in that, being a god like being who was sent to earth, the Christ figure then becomes the ultimate authoritarian (‘the way, the truth, and the life' with exclusive claims to ultimate authority and the right to control others via demands for unquestioned obedience). This authoritarian argument once again transfers to the priest who then transfers the same absolute authority to the imperialist state (as evidenced by such doctrines as Paul's insistence on ‘the divine right of Kings'). As in heaven, so on earth. As fundamentalist preachers have been heard to say, ‘Heaven is not a democracy'. Heaven is organized as a totalitarian state, once again demonstrating the intolerance of religion for freedom or democracy, and explaining the strong preference of such religion for forms of fascism, thus bringing earth into proper alignment with the divine system up in heaven.

This authoritarian argument is required if imperialism is to prosper, since it turns out that imperialism is found to be in an impossible spot, given that imperialist aggression is a monstrous crime involving blood shed and robbery. This understanding of the true nature of imperialism has been codified in the International War Crimes laws intended to forever banish such murderous theft from the face of the planet. (However simply banishing the practice is not sufficient while the ideology continues to exist, as is proved by the criminal breech of all the International War Crimes laws in Iraq, which has happened despite the fact that the legal code prohibits such conduct, and this has occurred because ideology still permits such conduct and thus is found in conflict with the system of law). If imperialism is to engage in criminal conduct and break the law, then it is required that the ideology pave the road ahead with asphalt, and this is what the doctrine of ‘the Son of God' accomplishes.

Do as I say, not as I do. This is how one could summarize the ‘morality' of the Christ of theology. That apostle of Roman imperialism known as Paul gave Caesar and his minions in the imperialist state an exemption from the law, and as is the custom for priests, this exemption came from heaven itself. For the law stated ‘Thou Shalt not Kill', but since imperialists must kill, for how else can imperialism conquer and enslave, and therefore since God ordained imperialism, according to Paul, and since God understood the unique needs of the imperialist elite God also made an exemption for the rich and powerful, stating explicitly, ‘Thou shalt kill'.. As Paul points out, God gave Caesar the right to use the sword on all those who rebelled against the imperialist state, since according to Paul's argument, the imperialist state was ordained by God, so to rebel against imperialism was to rebel against God. In Paul's theology rebellion against God is an offense punished by infinite torture, which makes Caesar's death squads seem quite reasonable in comparison, which explains the ideological function of intolerance in Christian theology.

Therefore, since God destroys by the sword, and since Caesar works for God and has been officially ordained for office by God to rule over an authoritarian system which was initially created by God, it would come as no surprise then that Caesar would receive an exemption from the law, and more than that would be ordered to kill on the direct command of God, who did not want the imperialist system to come under threat by the disobedient or by rebel forces.

It turns out that the Son of God was also unique in this way, and therefore, based on the authoritarian principle which finds exclusive expression in the form of ‘God's Only Son', who therefore has the exclusive claim on not only ‘salvation' but also ‘Lordship', we find that the Christ figure of theology also has an exclusive exemption from the law. In his conduct he resembles a right wing despot, like Caesar, and provides a role model for the formation of a totalitarian dictatorship, where the law is for the ordinary people, while the powerful are always found to exist above all law.

Do as I say, not as I do. This formula summarizes neatly the much celebrated ‘morality' of the Christ figure of theology, and thus this formula also prepares the population for life under fascism or life under any form of authoritarian imperialism, since it conditions the individual to accept the fact that their leaders are law breaking criminals. They do not see the lawlessness of Caesar, because they have been brainwashed into accepting the fact that their leaders are murderers and thieves, but in their case an exemption is granted since it is required that they behave like this, since God ordained the system, and God also ordained the imperialist military complex that both creates and then defends the divine imperialist order on earth.

In this way then the Christ figure forms the perfect figure head for imperialism, which explains why Caesar eventually choose that Christianity doctrine as the official religion of imperial Rome. It was a perfect fit. Similarly we see imperialist America once again doing the Caesar thing by choosing that Christian dogma and promoting it and handing out cash, because it still remains true that Christianity is a perfect fit for imperialist aggression, just as it was during Caesar's time, and as it remained throughout the ages, up to the time of the extermination of the native populations and the expropriation of their land and the conquest and domination of the third world by Christian imperialists, leaving us with the plundered and totally ruined people of the third world today. Which is worth considering, if there might be someone who feels that imperialistic forms of government are good (having been brainwashed into thinking such thoughts, no doubt by attending church or worst of all, by watching ‘Christian television'.).

The sources for this doctrine of ‘The Son of God' are found to be two of the most right wing hawks voted into the Bible by those church fathers, ‘Matthew' and the psuedo-apostle Paul. Given how Paul wrote decades prior to ‘Matthew' it seems most likely that just as Paul invented the doctrine of ‘original sin' in order to alter the meaning of the execution of the Jesus figure, it was also Paul who originated the doctrine of the ‘the Son of God'. ‘Matthew' then picked up on this theme and expanded upon it.

In the gospel the church fathers named ‘Matthew' (in an attempt to suggest that it was an eye witness account written by an apostle named ‘Matthew') we are presented with the Christ figure as an oriental despot. Because the Christ figure was a divine god, he was above the law, so while he might sermonize on morals to other people, and command them not to ‘take an eye for an eye' but rather to ‘turn the other cheek', we find that these rules do not apply to his majesty. His majesty is portrayed as running the torture dungeons of a despotic state, where those who rebel against the orders of his Highness are sent to be ‘tortured until they pay the last cent.' Like all right wing dictatorships, the totalitarian regime of the Christ figure also employs death squads, who will drag forward those who dissent and ‘slaughter them in my presence.' The Christ figure is also portrayed as a vulgar racist who refers to the lesser races as ‘dogs' as compared to the ‘Jewish master race'. In short then the morality of the Christ despot described in the ‘Matthew' gospel is a role model for the principle that the powerful are above the law, and despite the praise heaped upon the moral sermon known as the sermon on the Mount, the morality of the Christ despot is best described as ‘Do as I say, not as I do.' In the same way Paul gives Caesar an exemption from the law to indulge in the torture and the death squads required of any imperialist ruler if imperialism is to conquer and then sustain its rule.

So then the principle of authoritarianism and the exemption of the powerful from the requirements of morality and the law is the first function of the doctrine of ‘the Son of God', this principle being graphically illustrated by the hypocritical morality of the right wing gospel known as ‘Matthew'. This explains in part why denying the so called ‘divinity' of Christ is probably considered the greatest of all ‘heresies' by Imperialist Christians. There remains a second reason for the stubborn insistence on the maintenance of this mythological creation, and it has to do with the sacredness of the blood of a god like being, and the supposed magical powers of this blood, which then sets this god blood apart from ordinary sinful human blood, or, as the author of that nonsense known as ‘the Letter to the Hebrews' bluntly states, the blood of a god like being is much more powerful than the blood of some cow used to ‘wash away sinfulness', as described in Leviticus, simply because it is the blood of a god like being. Thus we assume that as a cleansing detergent it contains powerful bleaching agents not found in cows blood, thus making it more effective at washing off sin.

This doctrine of the ‘power of the blood of a god' is vital to the functioning of imperialism, because as both Paul and ‘Matthew' point out so clearly, imperialist dictators must spill blood in order to maintain the system of exploitation and prevent revolutions from below, and therefore any suggestion that blood of the Christ figure was human blood, would then suggest that spilling human blood must be wrong, thus making the crucifixion a state crime involving the torture to death of a dissident. If however god blood is a special kind of blood, the kind you could only spill from the veins of a divine god born of a virgin for the specific purpose of bleeding all over humanity, and if this was all prefigured by the dead cows of Leviticus, then we can see how people could talk about ‘the blood of a lamb' and being ‘washed by the blood of a lamb' without threatening the survival of imperialism, since imperialism requires crucifixion if it is to survive and avoid an overthrow of the system through revolution.

Christianity is an imperialist religion, and therefore it must become the greatest of all heresies to state that the Jesus figure was a human being, and not a god like being. To state that he had a human father would be to undermine the doctrine of sin as an explanation for what he might have been doing hanging from some cross, and then that would leave us with someone hanging from an instrument of state torture, which every imperialist wanted to avoid, which explains the rise of Christian theology. For then it would the case that we could ‘wash in the blood a lamb', and just about any lamb would do for that purpose. The church would lose its claim to totalitarian dominance with an exclusive hammer lock on the absolute truth since without the doctrine of sin it would be impossible to hide the true meaning of being tortured to death by the state, and without the accompanying doctrine of ‘the Son of God' to suggest that god blood has special bleaching powers for the washing of sin, it would be clear that torturing anyone to death is wrong, since all human blood is the same. This would cause the collapse of imperialist colonialism, and since this collapse is the real heresy, those fictional doctrines which have been invented to prevent this collapse of the system of global domination and exploitation must also become the very greatest of heresies, since it is only these doctrines which allow Christianity to hide the truth and thus to become a prop and support for imperialism, rather than its destroyer.

So then if we destroy these fictional doctrines of the church, we find ourselves living in a world where there is no shortage of lamb's blood to be used in the washing of humanity, since the world is awash in the blood of slaughtered lambs, who are starved and hunted and butchered by imperialism, who are crucified then we could say on a daily basis, and there is no shortage of that particular brand of bleach. Since the ‘blood of Jesus' has been transformed into a tool of imperialism it is of no use for washing, and for this reason if we wish to wash we must wash in the blood of some other lamb, and given that all human blood is the same, this sort of washing has always proved to work just fine (which explains why blinding propaganda exists, to prevent just this sort of washing, which proves my point)..

Notes

For polemical reasons I have been oversimplifying matters in my discussion of the books of the Bible.

It should be noted here that the Matthew gospel consists of an original source document that was then altered by at least two later redactions (redaction being a form of editing whereby different source materials are combined into a new composite source - the final document then consists of the product of the three different sources, which an investigation reveals are ideologically opposed). The same is true of the letters attributed to ‘Paul' which were not written by a single individual. The letters named Corinthians are so ideologically inconsistent, that it is obvious that these documents are themselves composed of smaller scraps of material which were then woven into a crazy quilt. The end result of all this editing and redaction is the production of a dog's breakfast in the Bible, but it is still possible to disentangle all these conflicting sources, despite the fact that they have been tossed together in a bowl like a tossed salad, simply because they are ideologically in conflict, which makes identification of sources possible.

Discussion of the complexities of the ‘Matthew' gospel can be found on the following pages :

The origins of the Virgin Birth story
The Christ myth


The political contradictions found in that dog's breakfast known as the letters of Paul are extensive (for example, we are told that women are to shut their mouths, are forbidden to preach or even to speak at a church, but instead should do house work at home, and then again we are told about the highly esteemed women who were apostles, the highest office in the church at that time, and whom Paul stated outranked him, since they were elders in the church movement at that time...there are so many other examples of the same sort of thing).

One of the more interesting examples of this dog's breakfast approach, so characteristic of that collection of letters, is that Paul is a right wing Hawk and an imperialist, who endorses death squads and oppression and pushes the doctrine of the ‘divine right of Kings' with the King above the law and the requirements of ordinary morality (the book of Romans, the classic source for all imperialist religious right theology throughout history). At the same time Paul is a revolutionary, condemning the imperialists for their blindness and stupidity exhibited in their practice of crucifixion...

We find the following scrap, supposedly written by Paul, in that it is included in that dog's breakfast of his letters, which insults Caesar and the fragment describes the membership of the audience (they were lower class) and then calls on them to launch revolution so as to overthrow the Roman empire.

The foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength. My friends, think about what kind of people you are. Few of you are considered wise by the usual standards, few of you are powerful, few of you come from the noble families. Yet to shame the wise God has chosen those whom the world considers foolish, and to shame the strong God has chosen those the world considers weak. God has chosen those without rank and with no standing in society, mere nothings, to overthrow the established order... I came to you without pretensions of eloquence or wisdom when speaking to you about God. I resolved to know nothing but Jesus Christ - Christ nailed to the cross. I came in fear and weakness. The message I preached to you did not sway you with clever arguments but rather carried with it the conviction of spiritual power, so that your faith would not be dependant on the cleverness of people but rather upon the power of God. Among the mature I do speak words of wisdom, though not a wisdom belonging to this present age or to its governments already in decline. I speak words of hidden wisdom of God's secret purpose framed from the start to bring us to our glory. None of the powers that rule this world have ever understood this wisdom. If they would have understood it then they never would have crucified the Lord of Glory.

For more information on the diverse nature of the early church, in particular as concerns the gnostics see the pages on the Gnostics, and their doctrine of enlightenment (they believed that the problem was ignorance, rather than original sin, and thus they were destroyed as ‘heretics' since the political implications of this doctrine are egalitarianism, which is the anti-thesis of imperial ism). Gnostic Enlightenment

A Unified Field Theory

The Unified Field Theory
is also available as a zip file -> unified.zip

Introduction :The Pioneer Effect and the New Physics. A brief description of the new physics required to explain the 'Pioneer Effect', which is the constant deceleration of space craft as they fly through space.

Principles of Evolution: A Study in the Evolution of Bedbugs