posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 04:57 AM
I really like your interpretations of the symbolism found throughout "Christian" doctrines, which from what I am gathering you are mostly looking at
old testament symbolism while considering the Bible to be what "started" Christianity (or at least what the elite used the Bible to start). It may
be presumptuous of me to assume that this is what you believe, if it is untrue, could you elaborate on what you believe to be the start?
If I am right, if you are considering the Bible to be the tool which the elite used to "start" Christianity and you are exploring the symbolism they
out there, then hopefully I can help develop your "possibility". As for your interpretations of the symbolism, they are unique, I have read and
heard many people's interpretations but none have been this speculative. Not that I think anything is wrong with that, I actually love that you gave
me new perspective, and although I won't say I agree with all of them, I definitely don't disagree.
On to furthering your exploration, now if I was wrong to assume the before mentioned then this may not be pertinent, if that is the case hopefully you
find it at least interesting. Over the years my interests have been in interpreting the social mechanics of religion, rather than the symbolism. I
believe that most of mankind's "great religions" are all rooted in natural law, because natural law is one of the most difficult concepts to define
these religious ideals have been explained through symbolism. Some would even say it is an impossible concept to define, not as in a definition of
what "natural law" means, but define as in indoctrinate or to establish as a system of beliefs, practices, or rituals. Throughout the ages there
have lived men and women who, through their life experiences, are naturally gifted with a deep understanding of this extremely difficult to explain
concept. These individuals each played a very important role in the progress of humanity. Depending on the time and place in which they lived, they
would do their best to explain this concept through imagery, symbolism, and other methods. As the people and the problems of those societies varied,
each individual's message was designed to incite progress, and just as the people and problems varied depending on the time and place so would the
message designed during that time/place. These messages inevitably become powerful, in the sense that they have the potential to unite massive groups
of people, which can be very dangerous.
Before I explain why any of that applies to the possibility you are exploring, let us go back to the assumption I made in the beginning. We know, or
if you don't research will reveal, that the Bible is composed of two main parts. We have the Old Testament, which is believed to be the message of
Moses. **The historical facts can debate whether what is believed is true or not, but for the sake of making a point, I'm going to write as if this
common belief and others are true. ** Two thousand years before Christ, Moses authored the first books of the Old Testament and his experience with
God on Mt.Sinai was the "start" of the Jewish faith. Eventually others would add to the Old Testament teaching, the Torah would be introduced, and
the Jewish faith would develop into a religion. The important thing to note is that it began as a simple message, to God's "chosen people", which
contained practical methods of progress through unity. Two thousand years later a man, to some a god-man, rumored to have been named Jesus delivered a
new message. Unlike the message delivered by Moses, this message was designed to appeal to all people. Still like the message of Moses, Jesus
delivered a message that contained practical methods of progress through unity, of course it was never put that simply, but that is because the
concepts were difficult to explain in a way that the people of his time could comprehend. During his life he spread his message by word of mouth, when
he died a martyr to his cause, his movement exploded. From his death until 350 AD Christianity spread by its own will and the will of its devotees. By
350 AD the influence Christianity had attained began to draw concern from the Roman Empire. It was in 350 AD that the Roman emperor Constantine became
the first to embrace the teachings of Christ. Not long after this he called upon the "religious leaders" of the near-by regions, instructing them to
gather all of the documents they could find concerning the life and teachings of Christ. These so called religious leaders were the founders of the
Catholic Church, they were chosen by Constantine over other potential leaders because they were willing to make sacrifice in order to appeal to Roman
politics. After gathering an unknown, massive amount of writings, these chosen "religious leaders" sifted through the material deciding what was
right and what was heretical (the Catholic Church has the worlds largest secret library, access is limited to the clergy, and it contains the oldest
most authentic documentations on the life and message of Jesus). Eventually they would produce the "Holy Bible", the same Holy Bible we read today,
the same Holy Bible you seem to consider the "start" of Christianity.
Christianity began with Jesus Christ, a man with a message, and I imagine he would find what the Catholic Church has done in cahoots with the sleaze
ball Roman empire to be despicable. You are right to believe that the Bible is a tool used by the Elite, technically they did not create the Bible,
they took words out of context and wrote their own story with them. However, there is no way that the Elite would ever be capable of such a true
understanding of the nature of man and our ability to overcome all things through compassion, humility, respect, and love.