In fact, a tremendous portion of the Old Testament is a chronicle of genocide, human and animal sacrifice, and regicide - the sacrifice of the sacred king. Because of propaganda that the biblical peoples were "the chosen" and, therefore, everything they represented was "godly," the naive masses are not aware of the bloodiness of the Old Testament, or of the gospel story serving as a record of a human sacrifice ritual based on the ubiquitous solar/fertility cult.

Although many profess to be believers, relatively few people actually read the Bible and are thus ignorant of the blood and gore in the "Good Book," which contains endless accounts of genocide, including against the Canaanites, Hittites, Moabites and others. Indeed, the "chosen" were to kill everyone they could get their hands on, save the virgin girls, whom they then raped. Other Jewish texts such as some of the original Dead Sea scrolls called for the extermination of the "Kittim," i.e., "Japhethites" or Caucasians, and the author of the Jewish apocryphon "Fourth Esdras," written after the destruction of Palestine in 135 CE, wailed that Israel had not taken its "rightful" place as ruler of "the nations" (Gentiles), which are "but spittle" to "the Lord." The Talmud, of course, is notorious for its statements against Gentiles. It is odd that the despicable biblical chronicle of horror and other texts are overlooked whenever the atrocities of human history are broadcast.

One of the most famous biblical stories, that of Abraham and his son Isaac, concerns human/child sacrifice. It is obvious from this story that such sacrifice was common, as Abram/Abraham seems quite comfortable with the notion, and the story is written as if such behavior were implicitly understood. In addition, biblical king after king is murdered, after being anointed, just like the "king of kings," Jesus. This sacred king ritual is what is recorded in the New Testament - not as a "historical" occurrence, but as an ongoing human sacrifice ritual that transpired repeatedly around and in Palestine. In reality, the Judeans were the last in the Roman Empire to give up such practices.

The practice of human sacrifice, found worldwide, appears to have been a result of cataclysms that caused the survivors to believe that the earth, God or some other entity desired flesh and blood, such that he/she/it had caused the calamity to get his/her/its fill. The ancient practitioners evidently reasoned that periodic sacrifices would appease the entity/deity and prevent further cataclysm. Such human sacrifice is recorded abundantly in Frazer's Golden Bough. In Fires that Cry, Anthony Hargis discusses human sacrifice and the sacred king ritual:

Since the penalties of magic fall most heavily on the defenseless, namely children, people who practice magic invariably adopt rites that lead to their extinction. It appears that Polynesians routinely killed more than half of their children. The same was done in some parts of East Africa into the present time. The Jagas of Angola killed all their children, so that their march would not be slowed. They maintained their numbers by taking the boys and girls of whose parents they had killed and eaten. In South America, the Maya Indians murdered all their children except the last... The Carthaginian priests renewed their divine power by persuading the people to sacrifice their children to Moloch. 'The children were laid on the hands of a calf-headed image of bronze, from which they slid into a fiery oven, while the people danced to the music of flutes and timbrels to drown out the shrieks of the burning victims.'

Early in our history it became the custom for the monarch to be anointed by the priesthood. A method employed by the priests to demonstrate the submissiveness of the monarch to the priesthood was to require the king, in a time of national danger, to give his own son to die as a sacrifice for his people. Thus Philo of Byblos, in his own work on the Jews, says: It was an ancient custom in a crisis of great danger that the ruler of a city or nation should give his beloved son to die for the whole people, as a ransom offered to the avenging demons; and the children thus offered were slain with mystic rites. So Cronus, whom the Phoenicians call Israel, being king of the land and having an only-begotten son called Ieoud (for in the Phoenician tongue Jeoud signifies 'only-begotten'), dressed him in royal robes and sacrificed him upon an altar in time of war, when the country was in great danger from the enemy.' When the Israelites besieged Moab, its king took his eldest son and gave him as a burnt offering on the wall.

In the Bible the "wise king Solomon" is portrayed as "whoring after" the Tyrian fire and sun god Moloch/Molech. In reality, the ancient Israelites were not monotheists but worshipped many gods, including Moloch, to whom their children were immolated. In fact, the priesthood of Moloch is that of Melchizedek ("Righteous Moloch"), a mythical character who in the Bible is given authority over not only Abraham but Jesus. Hence, the cult of Moloch is to reign supreme behind the scenes. Thus, it would not at all be surprising if clandestinely these wretched sacrifices have taken place over the centuries, somewhere in the world. We all know very well the story of the Aztecs and their massive and bloody sacrifices. Such sacrifices were extremely similar to those of the Jews (Jer. 7:31), except that when we even recognize that this bloodlust constitutes a significant portion of the Bible and Judaism, we usually think of the Jews as only holding mass sacrifices of animals.

In fact, when the Aztecs/Toltecs and their bloody behavior were discovered, they were likened to the Jews because of the similarities in their sacrifices. Indeed, a number of aspects of Toltec/Aztec culture, including language, are similar to that of the Jews, which has led to speculation that the Mesoamerican natives were one of the "lost tribes" of Israel. However, according to the Samaritans, who claimed themselves to be the Israelites, those tribes were never lost, the biblical story serving as Judean propaganda.

The connection between the Semites and the Central American peoples (including the Maya) evidently goes back much further than the time alleged for the "lost tribes," as the Phoenicians, for one, were likely in South and Central America possibly 1,000 years before the Common Era. Much earlier contact is indicated by the "fingerprints of the gods," but that is the subject of another treatise.

In actuality, like that of the Aztecs, the Jewish priesthood was feared for its sacrifices and cannibalistic ritual practices. This fear was the result of frequent sacrifices of huge numbers of animals. Imagine the butchery! The priest/cohen drenched in blood, with his elbows in entrails, splattering the blood all over the "audience" or congregation, as it were. "Hey, if you don't listen to us," the priest says; in effect, "this is what we'll do to you."

While most people think of "baptism" as being either sprinkled with or immersed in water, it was also common to baptize people with the blood of a sacrificed animal or human, the former of which is overtly reflected in biblical texts. As Dujardin says in Ancient History of the God Jesus: "Often in the sacrifices of expiation the blood of the victim was sprinkled upon the heads of those present, according to the rite of Exodus xxiv. 8, where Moses took the blood, sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant which the Lord has made with you."

This endless need for the god to be propitiated by blood is also reflected in the New Testament Epistle to the Hebrews: "Indeed, under law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins." (Heb. 9:22) The Epistle to the Hebrews also relates to the sacred king sacrifice.

The Epistle of Barnabas, once canonical, is very similar to Hebrews and was originally Jewish. Although the text was subsequently heavily Christianized, it reflects in part the old Joshua scapegoat cult, as also found in Hebrews. The word "Jesus" in the Epistle of Barnabas actually refers to the Old Testament hero Joshua. In describing the passion and "sprinkling with blood," Barnabas is obviously referring to the recurring sacred king sacrifice, complete with "three boys" representing Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to do the "sprinkling" with twigs with scarlet- or blood-colored wool tied to them.

The Old Testament reflects the constant appeasement of Yahweh with blood-atonement sacrifice. This same barbaric concept of blood-atonement represents the very heart of Christianity, as the "scape-god" is sacrificed "for the sins of humankind." The blood of the god purifies, and the expiatory nature of Christ is evident, as is bludgeoned into the heads of millions around the clock by Christian propagandists. The New Testament line, "His blood be upon us and our children," is a stock phrase of the blood-atonement ritual and not an admission of murdering God: Christ's mythical appearance as a "scape-god" was designed to serve as a once-for-all event that would put an end to the periodic blood-atonement sacrifices that had occurred for millennia. As "history" it is insulting and absurd, as Dujardin says, "to imagine that the crowd would demand the death of an innocent man and would wish his blood to be on their heads and those of their children."
 

Design downloaded from FreeWebTemplates.com
Free web design, web templates, web layouts, and website resources!

Updated/Revised: Saturday, March 26, 2005 16:31:44 -0800