And Now for Some Real Heretics, Part 14

Continued from Part 13:

The “men’s club” Abendsen mentions is the true ruling form of patriarchal society and it can trace its roots much deeper into primate, male-dominance hierarchies:

... Which is, simply, that --rooted in human society as far back as prehistory and everywhere present in societies studied by anthropologists--the ultimate governing body for masculine identity, solidarity and authority in a society composed of women and children as well, is the "Men's Club.' As a trustee of tribally or culturally defined
masculinity, this institution is universally restricted to male membership, with women and children excluded by threat of violence, psychological ploys, and any number of deceptive techniques intended to mislead and intimidate outsiders. In few words, then, it is necessarily a secret society' attended by various "cover stories," all designed (among other things) to deny the nature of its existence, indeed that it exists at all. Its secrecy is so absolute that information leaking from its own members is punishable by death. Only in this manner can it guarantee itself the absolute safety it needs to function as trustee for whatever "secrets" revelation of which would overthrow the absolute power it otherwise possesses. (Control of information is absolute control.) This is a general statement of fact about a type of social structure which anthropologists have documented at great length in nearly every society
they have observed.

In a male-dominated patriarchal culture, imagine the even greater significance such "men's clubs" take on ...

'MEN'S CLUBS' TODAY

The Army, the Church, the State (all exclusively, until the present, "men only") are such institutions on a high level, while examples on lower levels are quite numerous. All have their official "secrets" with access restricted to smaller and smaller elites as
one nears the apex of the pyramid. These are obvious facts, but they need to
be re-evaluated in a different context, which I am attempting to provide here. There are also "men's clubs" on an international (even global) level, still obvious, composed of men with a consequently wider understanding of events on that scale, on a higher level than even some of the best minds can grasp. on that level, too, there are official "secrets," which one can only imagine, attended by even more stringent security measures for "international security."

On the highest level we as Westerners can visualize, the "men's club" must be composed of individuals --men-- who have the ultimate vision of the West as a cultural entity, hold in their grasp the ultimate decision-making power over its activities, and safeguard the ultimate "secrets” which maintain the identity of the West against vulnerabilities of which only they are aware. This is the apex of the
pyramid of knowledge and power. This is the hierarchy to which all lesser hierarchies, such as Church and State, inevitably lead -- and it must, therefore, subsume all "secrets" regarding religion as 'well as politics. Given the way things work, as empirically observable, whether or not one accepts the literal physical existence of the "Men's Club"(as a discrete institution), at least one can be certain that its members exist as a group or class and that, reasonably, they should know one another on intimate terms.

Interpreting the cruxifixion story in the patriarchally-approved New Testament, Abendsen comes to a startling conclusion about the real meaning of “men’s club” Christianity. Noting that blame for Jesus’s crucifixion is attributed directly to no one, with blame spread around fairly equally between the Jewish high priests, the people, Judas, and the Roman authorities, that the message that the negatively-polarized, secret ruling class, men’s club secret societies are imparting to those in the know by the New Testament is that it is the patriarchal God who killed Jesus:

THE INVISIBLE HALF OF THE EQUATION

Examining the single archetypal act which binds (or separates) Slayer and Slain, we will give our attention to the murderer rather than, as is customary, to Christ the willing victim.

Putting aside what will be (for many) the anxiety attendant upon breaking taboos, we shall attempt, just for a moment, to identify with the murderer of God, in order to understand his experience of the act, vicariously, and divine his motives in this, the most absolutely evil of all imaginable acts.

The sensitive reader may already feel an intimation of why this, above all, is a "secret" restricted to those few who have attained near-absolute power as literal fact, rather than (as it is for us) merely a concept.

Note well that the Gospel accounts of the crucifixion make every effort to prevent an identification with the slayer rather than slain. The "dead God" alone has the spotlight.

Immediate responsibility for his death is blurred and no single person is presented (instead, several are suggested) as its human agent.

Judas betrayed Christ, but under the latter's own instruction.

The Jewish authorities (Herod and his High Priests) brought charges of blasphemy against Jesus, but under law, the power to try and punish criminals was invested in the Roman governor of Judea, who abstained from making judgments relative to Jewish religious law.

Thus, the original charge was changed to treason against Rome. Jesus as King of the Jews (in a literal sense) and as Son of God (symbolically) challenged the authority of the Emperor, not only with respect to appointment of legitimate provincial rulers (e.g., Herod) but in the Emperor's own capacity as "Son of God," like other Caesars.

Pilate absolved himself of any personal responsibility and (in what appears to be an interpolated incident, pro- Roman and anti-Semitic) allowed the Jews to make the final choice. At any rate, it was under the laws of the Roman Empire that Jesus was sentenced to death.

At this point it is hastily concluded that, in the apparent conflict between Caesar and Christ, it was ultimately the Roman Emperor who murdered Christ.

Bad enough, and for many a kind of precedent, but not entirely true.

One could equally well decide that the true murderer was the Roman centurion who delivered the coup de grace, thrusting his spear into the side of Christ not yet dead upon the cross.

In fact, many would have us believe that there was, in Germany during WWII, a "Satanic" cult centered around possession of the surviving murder weapon, the 'Spear of Destiny," which granted near-absolute power -- as apparently it did (for awhile) to its last claimant, Adolf Hitler.

True or false, such beliefs lend credibility to our basic argument, but nevertheless fall short of the even more radical conclusion which one may draw, upon careful weighing of all the scriptural evidence ...


WHO KILLED THE SON OF GOD?

In accepting the role of Messiah as 'suffering servant," preordained to die by scriptural prophecies embodying the Word of God the Father --the patriarchal Jehovah, worshiped with ram-sacrifice-- Christ accepted his fate at the hands, ultimately, of God Himself.

It was to the will of God that Jesus submitted, as he himself often enough asserted and since the orthodox Jewish religion of his day held --like today's Fundamentalists-- that no man (anywhere) rules but under appointment by God (the one and only God, for all) , we have come full circle back to Caesar but with an altogether different perception of the "truth" of the matter ...

Yes, it was the Emperor who murdered the Christian God (the Son of the matriarchal God) -- but in blameless obedience to that same patriarchal God -- and indeed, in the Emperor's traditional capacity a s the (equal but opposite) "Son of God" in a more truly patriarchal sense!

Could there be any greater --theologically sound-justification for murder as a sacrament than this model of God as murderer of His own Son?

Or for the conviction that God granted His patriarchal 'Son," the Emperor, absolute power (based on violence) in this world, in preference to claims made by the matriarchal Son of God, who was obligated to obey the Emperor and submit meekly to his power no differently than any other human subject?

Absolute power indeed! Literally godlike.

The 'inferior' matriarchal God, or Son of God, murdered 'harmlessly" in this worship , was exiled to some 'otherworldly" Kingdom Of Heaven, to rule over a population of similarly exiled human souls, all martyrs and innocent victims, no longer of any concern to us here in the world of the living -- the real world in which the Emperor is the true and "preferred' ruler under God the Father.

The bottom line in this interpretation of Caesar vs Christ invalidates all challenges to --and renders impossible all rebellion against-- patriarchal' authority as manifest in worldly power, and does so through faultless theological argument, culminating in what amounts to a "revelation."

In this view, one may see that violence, and the resolution of conflict through violence, is not only inescapable but is actually "good", holy, indeed a glorious sacrament -- ultimately reaffirmed by the-central archetype of Western religion. Right under our noses.

Thus the claim, "God wills it," motto of the Knights Templar motto during the Crusades, the predecessor to our own "God is on our side." The violent are under the guidance of God.

This explains a lot about the devoutly religious President of the United States, doesn’t it?

As does this,

Let us pause to retrace our steps and note how we arrived at this startling realization (a high-order rationalization) through the simple process of identifying with the agent of ritual sacrifice, the "murderer of God," rather than his victim.

Note that this is something which is normally inconceivable, rarely occurring(consciously) to anyone other than the mentally deranged -- except for those in positions of the utmost power, such as commanding general of the army or the Emperor (or Pope) when persecuting heretics or leading armies against the infidel, or the Pope performing Mass in his (NB) literal role of sacrificial agent, only "symbolically" also the sacrifice. . .

In other words, the predisposition toward such an identification is found only among persons who have some experience of power as expressed through instruments of violence.

It is reasonable to assume that, the greater the degree of such power, the greater the likelihood of identifying with an all-powerful, supremely destructive God of Death, the murderer of all lesser Gods (including Christ) -- Jehovah to some, Satan to others. For the modern Emperor, invested with absolute power like the mad Caesars of old, this identification may indeed be inescapable.

Abendsen points out the interesting fact that the Indo-European or Aryan revolution in the Near East and eastern Mediterranean did not spare the ancient Hebrews. Laura Knight-Jadczyk in her book, The Secret Hisotry of the World and How to Get Out Alive raises some interesting questions about this in her work, that perhaps key elements of the early Hebrews were Indo-Europeans, pursuing an agenda contrary to the interests of the Semitic tribespeople in which they became embedded.

To be continued...