In-group Social Identity and Cultural Divisions, A Treatise on the two Divisions.
The Fox in the Hen House or Toward a Generic Culture of Gray everywhere.
The political right cannot understand the political left. It seems to be a puzzle almost as if the left is in a fog but that is not so. The mist is lifted when one understands the goal of the left is a Gray Society. A Gray Society is seen as the logical extension of Liberalism and the solution to all human problems. The dilution of all cultural and ethnic identity to the point of grayness is the goal. This is why “Whiteness” has been identified as the new oppressor of the “oppressed” and is new regarded as the supreme enemy.
All of this seems quite shocking to anyone on the right reading this treatise for the first time, perhaps they have never heard the term “Whiteness”. This is because the rightwing is also dominated by the same theory of liberalism that the left has long bought into. The right however has yet to see the ultimate extension of this philosophy. The ultimate extension of this philosophy (Liberalism) is the leveling of all the playing fields of human existence.
The premise of this treatise is that social identity theory is used to promote many causes most of which are radical and harmful to society but for the first time we will show how a knowledge of group identify and cultural divisions can show us the fox in the hen house. And we will show that religion for all its brutality is evolving to the good especially Christianity. Christianity is nothing more or less than the divine template of mankind. We will also show that the traditional explanation for the fall of nations with its emphasis on economic cycles, economics and political power is in error. The fall of great Empires including the United States of America is the problem of In Group Identity. The story of Western Civilization is the story of the three Abrahamic faiths. The rocky road toward a western tradition is the story that unfolds in the Biblical Old Testament. One could say that it is a story of Good Better and Best.
Contrary to what social science teaches, monolithic cultures are extremely durable. The Chinese culture for instance would not have failed were it not for Western in groups infecting its society with opium. The land of the Rising Sun also has existed since about 650 BC. And if we understand the Roman Empire has simply evolved in several incarnations using the same human culture stock then it too it has been quite resilient.
When an otherwise healthy culture allows a parasitic in group identity into its borders and if that parasitic in group has a very strong tribal instinct for the invading tribe will be reluctant to take on any of the dominant culture’s norms and morays. Instead it will feign affection and acceptance for the dominant culture while maintaining its traditional hedges which are designed to corral its adherents. Pharisaic Judaism is a prime example.
Since the French revolution the idea of egalitarian Liberalism has given the west the false notion that all can feast under the big tent. Cultural norms aside, the idea set forth is that one’s culture and in group is a secondary consideration after the big tent of the Empire. Such is the view of the average American. In the case of the American experiment all seemed to work well for a time. Before WWII there were three in group subcultures in American Society: Jews, Protestants and Catholics. The Asians seem to have willingly relegated themselves to a back seat without objection. Their own native cultures continue to be monolithic in their homelands so they can always go home if necessary. They are an example of an in group without the need to overtly parasite off the host culture. The host culture is appreciated and no need to attack and drain the host of its life blood is seen as beneficial. Also they are probably aware to a large extent that there is a more virulent in group which is sucking at the wealth of the Liberal Democracy and does not see any advantage in rocking the boat knowing that doing so would spoil everything for everyone.
What follows are some examples how that factoring in in group theory can demystify otherwise historical confusion.
The advent of the Jesus religion was a deliberate introduction into the dominant host culture of Rome. Its purpose was to suffocate the virulent in group identity which had been exposed as dangerous to the host known as Pharisaism . Pharisaism is admitted by its own to be a reinvention of second temple Judaism inherited from the Hasmoneans. Oddly enough this word is listed in the dictionaries as a colloquial euphemism for bigotry , casuistry, deceit, deception, dishonesty, display, double-dealing, duplicity, falsity, fraud, imposture, insincerity, irreverence, lie, mockery, phoniness, pietism, quackery. We are not convinced that they are the same people in all respect however. There is ample reason to believe a cult identity switch was performed in order to confuse the host empire (Rome in this case).
Getting back to the infusion of the Jesus religion the purpose is much the same as in controlling insects. Rome felt that it was of no use to use direct methods such as war and genocide of various means. The Pharisaic cult seemed invincible witness the battle at Masada. To control mosquitoes for instance sterile males can be inserted to breed with the female flies breaking the reproductive cycle. Although mostly put into subjection and control with the use of force it was not until about 137 AD that substantial peace had finally returned to the region. But further inoculation was found imperative and this was found in the Jesus religion. The formation of this religion is well understood by students of the discipline of Patristics to have begun in earnest around 160 AD well after the first revolts and not completed until the final edict at the council of Nicaea in 325 AD. Soon after this time Saint Cyril began making the holy day, Saturday of the Pharisaic cult illegal. He put to death those who would attempt to worship on this day in preference to the new prescribed Sunday. This and the purposeful prohibition of Pharisaic cult members in positions of authority guaranteed a modicum of peace and tranquility.
This sterile inoculation was relatively successful allowing for the growth of Christianity in two basic forms, eastern and Western until about 1520 AD. An unfortunate problem which had long been forestalled caused by the illiterate nature of the peasants was upset when they began reading for the first time the sacred Holy books. Early on during the “Crusades” any spurious texts where gathered up and became almost non-existent until the modern era when they were found again at Naghammadi. These are the notorious “Gnostic texts” which had been banned by the new religion of Christianity.
When Martin Luther in 1520 began translating the Latin and Greek manuscripts into his native German he began noticing several odd things. The seven sacraments which he had been trained to deliver as a practicing cleric were not all in the texts. He only found two of the seven even mentioned. This was a major disruption in his service to God and served to set him off on a quest for reconciliation of the things he thought he believed about his faith in Jesus. No person in history probably was so confounded as Martin Luther and no person should be given more license than Martin Luther. Facing excommunication, possible torture he was held in Wittenberg castle by his benefactor so that he could sort through his belief system. Upon stumbling upon the in group of Jews who claimed to have a more ancient and historical birth right he, was forced to deal with their presence for they existed in the various ghettos of Europe and were a source of scholarship. Were he to give any credence to their claims of birthright and inheritance he would be invalidating his own faith. Therefore Martin Luther wrote many tracts one of which survives to this day called “The Jews and their Lies”. Upon discovery that the Jews were not appreciative of the grace offered through the faith of believing in Jesus he was forced for a time to denounce the book of James claiming it to be a Jewish trick attempting to nullify the grace and forgiveness offered through the atoning work of Jesus. Later we are told he moderated his views.
The observations of Martin Luther and others known as the “Reformers” made it clear at least to themselves that the mainstay of Christianity contained in the Roman system was essentially a facade of corruption to maintain the control of established by the ruling Elite families since the time of Julius Caesar. Thus the Roman system became a cloak which the Roman Church wore with the addition of ecclesiastical robes for a shield against criticism.
We can safely say that his cloak of what would pass for respectability could no longer be left unguarded for soon its real reason for being would be exposed to all the masses would find that inside it all was another in group identity masquerading in a new set of clothing but in reality it was simply a reincarnation of the old in group which had been the ancient nemesis of the original Republic.
The Inquisition and the Spanish inquisition had already begun as a counter to the discovery that the emperor had no clothes. In desperation fear intimidation and torture are the first lines of defense against discovery. A new Christian Church was being born out of the turmoil. This is called the Protestant Church. It consists of various denominations but the main thrust and uniting principle was that the Roman Church was a false Church and in fact its Pope was the prophesied Anti-Christ. Indeed the first Eastern Pope claiming Godhood was in AD 741. Before this there was no need for dictatorship only consolidation of the various doctrines defining the new sterile faith.
So then you may guess at this point that this group too has to be infiltrated by the spurious in group identity to continue the struggle. The new infection makes its way into the host by denying the foundation which the original Christian Church its identity and substituting a new foundational set of doctrines unknown to previous Christians. Those two doctrines are in Latin Sola fidea and Sola Scriptura, that is “faith alone without works” and the sacred scriptures were the sole basis for dogma thus excluding the need for appeal to the original seven ecumenical councils. These councils stood in place of sacred Scripture and in essence defined the boundaries of the faith. Faith alone and Scripture alone were unheard of constants before the advent of the Protestant Reformation.
Now again with the advent of British interest in Bible prophesy many arm chair aristocrats of the United Kingdom in the last century began investigating their faith. Many Dukes and technocrates with idle time began speculating that perhaps the ancestry of the Anglo-Saxon people and in particularly the British people may be related to the ancient Hebrews who we are led to believe disappeared from Northern Palestine in about 723 AD. If this be so then the Church of England could be reclaimed as a valid birth right along side of the other Protestant faiths in the mainland. This adaptation and the whims of King Henry the VIII made the Church of England unique in the world and a beach head for a new Rome apart from the discredited one under Catholicism and its heretical Pope.
Again this set the stage for another inoculation by the outsider in group known as “Jews”. Exactly who these people are is a tale of its own but suffice it to say they were able to not only assist in creating this new identity for Christianity they also participated in it. A son of Judah Benjamin Disraeli in 1868 was officially the first Prime minister to claim the title “Prime Minister. And since the time of Queen Victoria who herself is a German from the house of saxe-Colberg-Gothe all the British Monarchs claim to be descendents of the dynasty of “King David”. But just to make it all that sure for themselves as the dominant in group they marry from without on each generation into the house of Judah. Princes Kate being an example. She is from a fourth generation rabbinic family of Jews.
Now at this juncture we must insist that we do not know for sure who these “Jews” are. There are many speculations but one thing is for certain. Among educated secular Jews there is not consensus as to any affiliation with anything Biblical. Most of what passes for public adherence to the Bible as a book of literal history mapping out their bloodline back to the time of the Old Testament is considered complete fiction. That a “race” of people in this late stages of egalitarian Liberalism could claim any ethic heritage let alone religious or racial privilege is absurd. Even if one used the religion as a claim upon heritage there is the problem of intermarriage over many generation nullifying any claim. Of course they may claim that they have maintained their purity this is only an assertion and cannot be proven by any objective criteria. Instead of valid claims we are constantly treated with varioius forms of virtue signalling from some vary dubious individuals claiming to be “Jews”. Some of these are comedians such as Sarah Silverman and Amy Shumer both of which think we should be swayed by the victim card they continually put forward.
The victim card is of course that Jews have always been oppressed and that the Anglo-Saxon races are the perennial oppressors.
Now their latest trump card (no pun intended) card is to use the vain imagination of Zionist Christians to fund their new stolen paradise in Zion called Israel. Zionism is neither Christian and neither is it Jewish. Fundamentally it can be found to be another invention of our same in group seeking to infiltrate and inoculate its host.
The truth be known the main evangelists of this new secular Zionism are homosexual Atheists with a background of Jewish heritage. Their experience with their own narcissistic false religion has them so jaded that they are in a mode to denigrate and bring down all that has stood as Western Civilization for 2000 years. Religious Jews are caught in the middle not knowing what to do since to do anything would expose them as part of the problem. They often have very large families and contribute to the population of Jews in dense urban areas such as Crown Heights New York.
For these self-hating Jews to turn on their own you would think would be a good thing were it not for Zionist Christians protecting them with such strange doctrines as the “Two House Theory” and the rebirth of Israel in 1948.
Why would we support Christianity in light of all this in group degeneracy? Se support it because in the basic elements of Christianity are contained the essence of what it means to be Human. What it means to be human is more than biological existence in a material universe with no creator. As brutal as the journey has been it can always get a lot worse. As demonstrated in the brief survey of history given it is clear that the miracle of the human is not in a single person but in the regeneration of multiple families of humans with children being born and growing to adulthood demonstrating by this process a unique process. By this process we ourselves are living proof of God in our very nature and behavior.
The universal replacement for the Christian model which is the family is a unisex society. In such a world artificial reproduction is considered the ultimate goal and the engineering of the species within reach. Most Christians consider this idea ludicrous and for that reason put it out of their mind. They want to believe that all this is a grand experiment in which they are only spectators and not participants. This is a grave error because the ultimate in group experience is staging itself to be unleashed in the modern world. Artificial body parts are a large part of the medical business and growing. No one is sure if a human being has at this juncture been cloned or not. Dogs have been cloned and can be ordered as such.
Nothing is impossible in the mind of an Atheist. The idea that man is his own master is critiqued rather well in the tower of Babel story in the Bible . It says God looked down and saw that the heart of man was set on mapping his own destiny and that nothing he could imagine would be far from his reach. It may be mythology from a human standpoint but that someone had the foresight to see the end result of human nature embodied in the philosophy of Atheists such as Yuval Noah Harari is quite remarkable.
That same sacred scripture of the Christians, Jews and Muslims also suggests that male homosexuals would be the great corrupters in the final days when mankind would develop these biological technologies.
With all that said we must ask, if science is so great what is the advantage of using the anus for the purpose intended for the vagina? Is not the difference life in one and death in the other? So then let us consider the acceptance of the principle of a creator and the religion of Atheism.
In 1976 a man named Richard Dawkins suggested in The God Delusion that God was a worn out primitive concept worthy to be set on the scrap heap of history. Along in about 2017 a man named Jordan Peterson began reclaiming the desert of Atheism left behind by what is called the “Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse”. By teaching that the Bible is the foundation of the Western mind he set them reeling. They were prepared for the assault by the clerics. They were not prepared for the sting of a rival faculty member of a prestigious university preaching the psychological and sociological merits of Bible narratives in the sense of Carl Jung and others interested in the subconscious mechanisms of the human mind. Peterson seems to be saying that the patterns of behavior which have been ingrained by countless experiences in the culture of the west can to be set aside for replacement by some generic scientific equivalent which has yet to be defined.
If the demonstrations by the social justice progressive left are to be taken seriously, violence and incoherent nonsense with little rational understanding will soon be the norm not only on college campus but on the public square.
Oddly enough if one listens long and hard enough the truth is bound to spring forth. We live in an age of Atheism. Atheism is spelled with an capital “A” because it is a popular religion. Atheism does not mean a belief that God does not exist. It just means that certain people have a difficult time finding Him! In truth most atheists are really agnostics. When it comes down to it most atheists have an axe to grind against religion and Christianity in particular. They have little interest what a creator is necessary. In fact the idea of a creator escapes them. More specifically Atheism is a religion that is committed to proving a negative. Someone thought they had made a cleaver observation that the sacred writings sounded much like children’s bedtime stories and pretty spooky at that. We are asked cordially to not take any of them seriously because it said that they are the work of primitives who had no introduction to Science and Reason. To make their point they cite references to the “God” of the sacred texts and make the point that he sounds angry and upset.
However if we consider that all of this is a fair observation and quite reasonable does that make their case? Does any of this prove God does not exist? No it is just emotional push back. They are often unwilling to admit that modern attempts to define such things as cosmology and human origins continue to be ambiguous at best and devoid of substantive theory such as Steven Hawking’s “Big Bang Theory” that he had to back off of when he realized he was in the territory of metaphysics and not real physics. Where certain “missing links” were thought to have been found, fraud and controversy has taken front seat to any kind of “science”. So Darwin’s theory of evolution via gradualism is almost as foundational and factual as the talking snake story. So what are we to think? Is it possible that a kind of evolution is indeed is taking place on this planet? Maybe it is an evolution in metaphysics with little to do with brain chemistry and DNA. While religious fundamentalism has gotten further adrift from First Causes and classical epistemology, the same ratio of interest in religion vs the secular has remained constant especially in the United States. In times of financial uncertainty and other forms of social chaos humans have always gravitated to the perceived safety of the sacred with its icons and rituals and comforting promises of an afterlife.
What if what is ordinary makes sense from another point of view? Classical literature for instance was once considered an art form where illustration and metaphor artfully constructed pictures for the imagination. Have television and motion pictures removed us from this way of perception? Simply put what if homo-sapiens are nothing more than the actors on a stage telling a story which has yet to conclude? As such is it necessary that the actors themselves be constrained to always tell the TRUTH and conform to a predefined way of behavior? Is it necessary to conclude that all people in all cultures always make the same choices and constrain themselves to the same patterns of behavior when confronted with similar situations and predicaments? When Margret Mead and Franz Boaz set to work establishing the data points for what would become the field of Sociology we can imagine that they had this assumption. It is as if humans were as billiard balls on a billiard table or drops of water falling off the leaves of a tree. Gravity and other forces of nature dictate a predetermined outcome.
Anyone who teaches young children or in truth teaches anyone anything will tell you that the way any one student will perceive the information he is presented is highly variable and often completely unpredictable. In fact one of the most important abilities of a teacher is the ability to invent and present otherwise factual information in a way to capture the interest of the student. He must be presented the material in ways unique and variable so that the student is challenged and made to find the subject matter particularly suited to him and to him alone. In other words a teacher who teaches the “wrote” method of presenting the same material over and over the same way is soon seen as robotic and less than professional. Often the best teachers were the ones who taught in the old country school house where they would see the same student from year to year and see the result of this personal creativity. Looking back students are quick to remember special times and places that marked turning points for the student making a profound impact which would have lifelong impact. So what is the spark of uniqueness that is seen in the teaching profession that we are saying also applies to our way of perceiving God?
At this juncture it should be obvious that just as metaphors are used for exaggeration to make a point so to sacred Scripture also uses exaggeration to make a point. That God is painted as a stomping mad ogre may only to be to draw ones attention to a specific human need and consideration. What other way would the teacher use that would emphasis the point? This is only the first of many subtle ways in which the way humans have been made to exist and interact with their environment. A very special cause and effect relationship demands there be a personal God to interact with. Some have said there is God gene. Well what if the God gene needs a God to work with? Maybe the human heart is bound to be tied to the heart of a personal God for relationship and meaning.
In fact it can be said now at this point in our thesis that without this construct almost nothing makes any sense.
When we are born we are born because of the fertilization of an egg from a male and a female. Right away we have cause and effect relationship. A very definitive demonstration of the man – God relationship. Without the male, without the female there is no child. The sacred text may speak of a “child of God” using this same metaphor. Is it a valid metaphor? Assuming our Atheist religion is correct we have what? We have a one but we have no reproduction and no child. We have what in metaphysics is called a monad. Can another come from a one? In modern science they say they can “clone” the genome and create a duplicate. However in nature the dualistic creation method imitating the God-man in the parent-child metaphor is filled with diversity. What diversity is found in the science of cloning? None. In fact what is known about Clones is that their viability seems to be fragile at best and not well suited for anything other than the shear novelty of entertaining the public, not to mention the expense and waste.
Now let us look more in detail at the Abrahamic faith model. The sacred text of the Abrahamic faiths states categorically he made them “male and female” but made the male FIRST. While he made the male from the dust of the ground he made the female from the male. Odd. Why not find some female clay and make the human female? For the first time we are seeing that nothing is here is a science lesson. It is a lesson in philology. In fact if you are not cringing with guilt at your guffaw about the Abrahamic religionists and their God then by now you have no conscience. Reading further into this treatise is pointless. It should be obvioius at this point that a workable science was never the intent. In fact what we are learning is that the human cognitive ability to extrapolate and interpolate the world has, if anything been diminished over time not improved and that many generations of humankind rather than evolved in intellect are now experiencing rapid deconstruction of all that was ever human.
What we are setting forth here and attempting to indicate in stages may not set well with the fundamentalists of the three Abrahamic faiths. Perhaps deconstruction is necessary befor reconstruction can begin. However it is these three faiths in their one Bible that embody the special evolutionary aspects of true humanness. That is not to say that the eastern faiths do not have their place. It will be demonstrated that such faiths as Buddhism Hinduism and Shinto are actually restatements and postulates of Atheism. As such some specific benefits from these religions are minor such as the ability to clear the mind and regulate the body. Let us say that regulating the body and having a clear mind were considered essential by our first teachers the Hebrews and the Classical Greek philosophers. It is to these two (which I believe were actually one) that we owe our antecedent knowledge.
It is with the classical Greek philosophers Pythagoras, Socrates, Aristotle and finally Plato that the case for first cause was settled and established. There is a God. Plato set forth the importance of the Logos or language and the nature of the absolute.
When we speak of the color blue what makes the color blue blue? Is a light blue or a blue that is slightly purple still blue (has some red)? Is there a perfect blue? As a child in art class you may have been taught the three primary colors. You were also taught the secondary colors which were combinations of each of two of three primary colors. The teacher held up a color wheel and you were probably amazed and impressed. Then she would ask what color made black? As a child you were dumb founded when she said it was no color. Do you remember that? So then real science is profoundly philosophical in nature and demonstrates metaphysical principles. Nominalism is the philosophical construct that says that blue is arbitrary and constructed in the mind of the viewer. Plato however held that blueness was and is an absolute and demonstrates that blueness exists independent of observation. Later the existentialists revived the philosophy of Nominalism but it is a false notion and a demonstrate able fallacy.
We will not dispute with the Atheists that stories with talking snakes donkeys and fish that swallow men whole are not somewhat incredulous. But what do you say to the idea that black is not white and white is not black? How many times did you have to decide if doing something in your normal everyday routine and manner was “right” or “wrong”? What made your choice right or wrong? Was it just the whim of the culture of our society? Some would say so and they might be right in some regard but can this culture of ours have come into existence without the concepts of “right” and “wrong”. How did this happen?
The idea of right and wrong, light and dark, negative and positive are not principles of the religion of Atheism or Scientism. They are principles of the Abrahamic philosophy and are presented on the basis of sound Reason not materialism and speculation. So then the loud horn of the Atheists, in particular the New Atheists is that the world is easily understood by observation of the physical and its material nature. That is you have a piece of meat between your shoulders and that thing called a “brain” is making a smart decision once in a while when it is not thinking about lunch or the relative attractiveness of someone of the opposite sex in the next cubicle. They should know that brain is called the reptilian brain because it is the one they seem to be most familiar. It is the one that can see food, eat food and poop food. When it is not doing that it is not moving it is resting. It is no wonder that the social world they want to advise in economic and political theory is approached in this same way – eating and pooping. Are we missing anything here?
Coming back to our theory of moral choices is it at all clear what is the best choices for society? In the final analysis is there really that much difference between a Joseph Stalin, an Adolf Hitler or a Winston Churchill? Considering the magnitude of the problems that legislative bodies have to deal with is it any wonder that important men such as Ted Turner have suggested that the best thing that could happen is that a virus simply take the human element off the planet and leave it alone. Or consider the time when the Colorado governor saw a day in which he felt the elderly had a “duty to die”. No wonder Ted Turner made his suggestion. At least it was a suggestion that did not involve politicians. Then there are the Georgia Guide stones. This is a modern megalithic structure built near the Georgia marble quarries that states that the population of earth should be reduced to 500 million persons. I wonder what sick bastard came up with this idea?
The truth is that history is replete with sick psychopaths most of whom have been in positions of power from ancient times. This includes may “Christian” monarchs and religious figures.
With that in mind can we find reason to excuse the progress or lack thereof of our religious institutions. I am referring primarily to the Christian institution. Later we will work out the relationships of the three faiths and their relative merits and explain why the resulting philosophy points to the Christian religion in preference over the other two. However the ingredients of all three seem to have been necessary to make the cake. We shall explain why and how this evolutionary pattern is important and necessary.
What we are asking the reader to consider is that history is not just a wrecking yard of miscellaneous pile ups on the freeway of life. There is a purpose and a trajectory and it is being guided by an invisible force. That invisible force is God.
When the history of the Church is examined in sharp focus an event called the Crusades come to the fore front especially in the mind of the Atheist. This pogrom of the Church against the poor Muslims is cited as evidence of the natural hypocrisy of the Christians and their ridiculous religion. However on closer inspection we can hardly find any reason to call these “poor” knights Christians. They were in fact soldiers of fortune and members in particular of a shadowy cult known to history as the Knights Templar. Their “God” more accurately is the goat headed figure called “Baphomet” and more likely a specter of Luciferian energy to protect the wealth of the elite Black Nobility of Venice. Such books as “Holy blood, Holy Grail” by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln need to be consulted before assaulting the Church fathers.
The there is the real purpose of the Crusades. It is the opinion of this writer that the “Hebrew” text of the Old Testament needed fortification and therefore the “holy land” was salted with forgeries to be found by moderns when the truth of the “scriptures” would become widely known through printing and literacy of the peasants of Europe.
The truth is the “Old Testament” was put together by the LXX (seventy) in Alexandria Egypt in the mid third century to create the myth that is Moses and the exile. This is not a bad thing. This does not mean that it was not necessary for the “Jews” of Alexandria to create a new mythos. It set forth the simple idea that we now know as the Golden Rule and enshrined it in a “religion” that would have far reaching consequences for mankind.
Positive and negative affects resulted in the creation of the Hasomonian dynasty. This culture is the culture created by the work of the LXX. The five Macabee brothers resisted the debauchery and moral offence of the Hellenists and attempted to create a new empire. This empire however was high jacked by a tribal in group and was deconstructed by the Romans in a devastation circ AD 70 that lasted seven years. Flavian Vespacian Caesar of Rome commissioned his general Titus to dismantle the false pretense set up by the tribal in group that had erected a lavish affront called Herod’s Temple.
It is taught by the free masons and Jews that a temple preceded this one called “Solomon’s Temple” but now known archeological evidence or historical proof exists of the what is called the Davidic and Solomon empires.
The additional knowledge of the tribal in group that usurped the Hasmonean culture and dynasty is key in understanding this period and is virtually unknown to Christians and Jews not to mention Muslims.
In the 66 books of the Scottish free Masonic book of the Bible called the King James Bible there are 400 silent years created by the omission of some books called the Pseudepigrapha, Apocrypha and Sacred Writings. This was done deliberately to eliminate discussion of these 400 years of history which correspond to the Hasmonean culture and rule of the Maccabeus. Why was this done? The reason this was done is because the Bible of the protestant reformation was to be a new work which would permanently separate the things Jewish from the things Christian. By eliminating these books a clear separation between the Old Testament and New Testament could be made. Many independent Baptist ministers will insist that it is not the original texts in the Greek manuscripts that are infallible but it is the 1611 version of the King James Bible which is infallible some 1600 years after Jesus lived. This is very convenient but very wrong. The truth is that the books of the apocrypha were translated by the King James translators and are available as a separate bound book and can be obtained in any book store. The Hasmonean culture was a factual historical culture not mythology. The dead sea Scroll controversy proves this is a contentious period in history.
It is like any murder mystery. Go snooping enough and you find the rotting stinking corpse.
So what happens when the history of the 400 silent years is put back into the Bible. What happens is that with Josephus chapter 15 of Antiquities of the Jews one finds out that there was this in group identity crisis that had formed. The Jesus story and his raucous dealings with this group relates those strong feelings and differences. The real differences are not clear from the gospel writings. The truth is that that there were as always deep ethnic differences and culture clash. Josephus the historian tells us that when the John Hyrcanus the II came into the land in 137 bc there were ethnics living there that were hostle to the way of circumcision and were made to bow to the way of the Hasmoneans. We may never know the exact makeup of either group but we know that the group known as the sons of Esau or Idumeans were the usurpers and eventually gained the top positions in governments and became what is known in Scripture as the Sadducees. The Pharisees it can be concluded were remnants of the original Hasmoneans and were resentful wanting to restore the rightful doctrines to the Hebrew faith.
But the real truth is probably that the Greek speaking “Jews” were probably of another ethnic heritage we would identify as Caucasians and not Jews.
rev3 4/13/2019 7/31/2019