Jehovah’s authority over Earth usurped by his own wacko granddaughter
Returning to the Esagil, Marduk’s temple-residence, Marduk took his visiting brother Nergal straight to a “sacred” chamber called the Shuanna. Shuanna means “A Celestially Supreme Place”. It was a high-tech chamber Marduk and his priests had set up to study and observe the cosmic scene.
When dusk came, Marduk sat down Nergal in the Shuanna and using both computer simulations and viewing instruments demonstrated to him that the Age of the Ram “is upon us” and therefore his time to replace Enlil as Earth’s sovereign had arrived. “The heavens my supremacy bespeak,” Marduk said. “The coming Age of the Ram, my sign, my rule proclaims.” As such, he would no longer depart Babylon but would await his coronation there. He was not imposing himself on the Earthly perch: it all was in keeping with the sequence of Enlilship as agreed between the Enkites and Enlilites just after the Deluge courtesy of the enigmatic Galzu’s decree.
Nergal immediately countered Marduk’s assertion that his time had fallen due: he put it to him that his instruments were inaccurate. At the Eanna, Inanna’s palace at Uruk, he and Inanna had sat in the Ehalanki, the equivalent of the Shuanna, and using its equally sophisticated instruments had ascertained that the Age of the Ram was nowhere near, that Taurus was still in progress. “The backdrop of the evening sky is still dominated by the constellation of Taurus,” Nergal insisted to Marduk. “Whilst you are entitled to succeed after Enlil, you cannot do so way ahead of schedule. Taurus has to completely vanish from the night sky before you exercise your right.”
Marduk thought that was nonsensical. He argued that an astrological Age lasted 2160 years and if they were to go by that reckoning, his accession was only about 75 years down the road given that the present year was 2295 BC and Aries was mathematically scheduled for 2220 BC. True, Taurus, being one of the largest constellations (it occupies more than 30 degrees of the celestial arc) was always visible for an extra 200 years (which meant it physically hovered for 2360 years) but it unjustly stole into Aries’ time. It was time that anomaly was righted by adhering strictly to celestial time (the mathematical 2160-year maximum) and not to zodiacal time (the actual time a constellation lingered in the skies).
NERGAL CONVINCES HIS BROTHER TO EXIT BABYLON
It was a stalemate. Nergal said he was the one who was right and Marduk was adamant it was he who was right. In a situation like this, it was Marduk who had the advantage in that he was already ensconced in Babylon and had so fortified and equipped it it was virtually impossible to dislodge him short of bombarding him into submission. But at this stage, the Anunnaki were tired of warring against each other and warfare was out of the question.
Nergal thought quickly and came up with an idea that could wheedle Marduk out of Babylon. “Okay, my brother you win,” he said. “But if you have to become the new Enlil, you need the relevant insignias and instruments of authority. You need the Holy Sceptre. You need the Oracle of the Gods, the mechanism with which to decree fates. Finally, you need the Radiating Stone which disintegrates everything (what we today call the nuclear button that is vested in the head of state). These have been entrusted to my custody.
I therefore urge that you travel to the Abzu (in southern Africa where Nergal reigned) and collect them yourself as no one else can do so in your stead. That done, you can return to Babylon just at the precise time when the Age of the Ram mathematically commences. Then you will have nobody opposing you, not Enlil, not Inanna.” Clearly, Nergal was spinning a yarn here. Enlil simply wouldn’t have deposited such vital instruments of Earthly authority to Nergal: no ruler in his right mind would do such a thing for as long as he was on the throne. But Marduk naively trusted his brother, who had given him the impression he looked forward to an Enkite rising to supremacy. And when Marduk contacted Enlil for confirmation, Enlil indeed affirmed Nergal’s claim.
It was game, set and match: Marduk prepared to set off for Africa. Since Marduk would be gone for 75 years and as always he would be accompanied by his heir Nabu, whose gift of the gab and incisive thinking he valued greatly, who would rule Babylon in his stead whilst he was away? Who would ensure the exhaustive hydrological infrastructure he had laid down and “other works of wonder” operated in good nick?
“If anything goes amiss,” Marduk warned his brother, “the day shall be turned into darkness, the flow of river waters shall be disarrayed, the lands shall be laid to waste, the people will be made to perish.” In order to forestall such an eventuality, Marduk needed somebody with his industry and round-the-clock vigilance to rule in his absence.
Nergal was quick to offer his services. He said he would proficiently hold fort, seeing to it that everything was spick and span. Nergal’s assurance was convincing and after consultations with Enki and Nabu, Marduk accepted Nergal’s offer. “He’s family,” Enki said to Marduk. “You have had differences with him in the past for sure but this is not about Marduk or Nergal: it’s about our legacy as Enkites. Trust me, Nergal will make good on his undertaking.”
Before Marduk departed, he called a ceasefire in his hostilities with Inanna. Then after a lull of about a month, he ordered his engineers to restore water to all the lands of Sumer with immediate effect. Shortly thereafter, he and Nabu and a retinue of aides and security men numbering in the hundreds set course for the “Land of Mines” as Africa was referred to. The year was circa 2295 BC.
NERGAL OCCASIONS DISASTER IN SUMER
For a few months, all was well in Babylon and the wider Sumer. Water was aplenty and irrigated agriculture was on a roll. Then all hell broke loose. It seemed Nergal had fooled everybody and was simply biding his time. At exactly the precise time he and his equally diabolical ally Inanna appointed, Nergal went into the Babylon control room in an underground chamber and ordered his men to wreck the intuitive, high-tech device that regulated the water reticulation system as well as the power supply (to the homes and facilities of the Anunnaki gods only) throughout Sumeria. “Nergal tore the luminescent radiating stone that gave the system energy from its socket and from its machine links.”
It was a disaster. “Marduk’s devices stopped humming. Lights went out.” Exactly as Marduk had warned, “the day turned into darkness (metaphorically speaking), the fields and canals dried out: parts of Sumer flooded," and soon "the lands were laid to waste, the people were made to perish." Nergal had in his rage paralysed the fiefs of the very council of Enlilite gods who had sent him to oust Marduk. It was like he had scored an own goal but did he care?
Nergal had calculated that all that would be sabotaged was Babylon only, so that the people would think they had been booby-trapped by Marduk when he left the city and as such rise against him once and for all. But all the cities of Sumer were affected. “The people made sacrifices to Anu and Ishtar but to no avail: the water sources went dry." Soon all the gods other than Ishtar had subjected Nergal to angry tirades and Enki was implored to travel to Babylon and ram sense into his second-born son. The Babylonians were up in arms and were baying for Nergal’s blood, calling for the urgent return of Marduk, whose present whereabouts were not known.
When Enki turned up at the Esagil, he was spitting fire. “What on Earth have you done?” he demanded of Nergal. “What a letdown you have been! To think I spoke so glowingly about you to Prince Marduk!” With Nergal unable to give an intelligible account of what had transpired, Enki gave him the marching orders straightaway. “Go away! Take off to where no gods ever go!" Enki also ordered that the golden statue that had been sculpted to Nergal’s honour not be set up at all in the Esagil as he had turned out to be such a disgrace.
With his powerful father quivering with rage, Nergal had no option but to depart Babylon but not without a spectacular parting shot: he destroyed all of Marduk’s personal effects and set fire to the Esagil. Nergal also ensured a sizeable number of his followers, the Gutians/Kutheans, remained stationed in Babylon and Agade, the former to see to it that Babylon remained subdued and the latter to bolster Inanna. Then he trekked back to Kutha, his Sumerian base, which was not very far from Babylon.
INANNA EXALTS HERSELF ABOVE ANU AND ENLIL
About four years after Nergal was driven away from Babylon by Enki, a virtual leadership void ensued in the major regions of the world. Enlil travelled to Mars. Ninurta went to do business in “the lands beyond the ocean”, today’s South America. Marduk, after discovering that Nergal had sent him on a wild goose chase, decided to go to the Antarctica, where he was to remain for years, once again living up to his epithet of Amon, meaning “The Obscure One”. Ishkur-Adad was his typically aloof and indifferent self; Nannar-Sin his usual calm, collected, and withdrawn self. Utu-Shamash was busy running the space-related facilities.
Inanna thought this state of affairs presented an opportunity for her to step into the breach and assume supremacy over all Earth. First, she sat down to consider a new Earthling king who would do her bidding and assist her crusade to seize all the principal lands of the world. This person had to come from the Sargon bloodline naturally. After Sargon had died, she had replaced him with his eldest son Rimush on the throne of Agade. He ruled for only 9 years, having been killed by “his servants”. His younger brother Manishtushu took over as regent but he too lasted for only 15 years: he was killed in a “palace revolt”. Inanna then installed Manishtushu’s son in office.
The new King of Agade was called Naram-Sin. His name meant “Beloved of Sin”, Inanna’s father Nannar-Sin. Indeed, Naram-Sin’s daughter Enmenanna would in future succeed Sargon’s daughter Enheduanna as high-priestess of Nannar-Sin. But Naram-Sin should ideally have been called “Beloved of Ishtar” in that Inanna had doted on him since he was a little kid as he showed the potential to be as great as his grandfather Sargon, whereas Rimush and Manishtushu were largely inclined toward peaceful co-existence with other nations, the reason they had been reluctant to wage war.
Inanna’s brief to Naram-Sin was that he should “seek grandeur and greatness by ceaseless conquest and destruction of my enemies” with a view to expanding her empire. This time around, Inanna was not going to do pinpricks in her quest for world domination: she was going for the jugular. And in Naram-Sin, she had a most loyal and dutiful servant.
In his heyday, Sargon had his share of conquests under the aegis of Inanna, but he was wary that he did not encroach on the territories of either the Enkites or the most powerful Enlilites. For instance, he did not seize the Sinai Peninsula. He did not march into African lands. And in Sumer itself, he steered clear of Lagash, Ninurta’s cult city, and Babylon, Marduk’s domain. The only sensitive area he captured was Baalbek.
Not so with Naram-Sin. His first target prize was Canaan. He captured Jerusalem, the Mission Control Centre; Jericho, the city of “Moon God” Nannar-Sin; and at long last the entire Sinai Peninsula, where Tilmun, the spaceport, was located. Having registered this triumph, Naram-Sin was so euphoric he depicted himself on a stella standing by a rocketship, as if to say he had now attained godly status. Thereafter, he ran rampage through the lands along the Mediterranean Sea to eventually annex Baalbek. “As a Flying Goddess, Inanna was quite familiar with the place,” say the Sumerian records. “She burnt down the great gates of the mountain and, after a brief siege, obtained the surrender of the troops guarding it: they disbanded themselves willingly."
Naram-Sin mixed seizing supremacy with suppression of rebellions. The two Syrian cities of Arman (Aleppo) and Ebla (Tell Mardikh) were particularly stubborn. Naram-Sin set them ablaze and went on to boast that he was the first king to destroy these two great cities. “Never since the time of the creation of mankind did any king whatever set Arman and Ebla to sword and fire,” he wrote in his annals. In fact, he so poisoned the lands of Lebanon by way of chemical warfare that future invading eastern kings scrupulously avoided it for the next one thousand years!
Having overrun the whole of Canaan, Lebanon, and Syria, Naram-Sin now set his sights on the lands of Marduk – Magan (Egypt) and Meluhha (Sudan and Ethiopia). Marduk was still away in the Antarctica and Nergal was the one flexing muscles over these lands. Since Nergal and Inanna were at once political allies and bedfellows, Naram-Sin did not break a sweat at all. At the say-so of Inanna, Naram-Sin had gone out of his way to lionise Nergal with a view to a smooth landing in Egypt.
Writes Zechariah Sitchin: “The long text known as The Kuthean Legend of Naram-Sin (or, as it is sometimes called, The King of Kutha Text) attests that Naram-Sin went to Kutha, Nergal's cult centre, and erected there a stela to which he affixed an ivory tablet inscribed with the tale of this unusual visit, all to pay homage to Nergal. The recognition by Naram-Sin of Nergal's power and influence well beyond Africa is attested by the fact that in treaties made between Naram-Sin and provincial rulers in Elam (west and southwest Iran), Nergal is invoked among the witness gods.
And in an inscription dealing with Naram-Sin's march to the Cedar Mountain in Lebanon, the king credited Nergal (rather than Ishkur-Adad) with making the achievement possible.” But Naram-Sin’s main trump card was Inanna, who guided, urged on, and armed him with her ''awesome weapons”. Naram-Sin marched against three major kings of Marduk’s African regions and captured them in person, making a show of them as he thrust further into Marduk territory.
INANNA IS THE NEW ENLIL!
Inanna was on a roll. She was literally spitting fire. Such was her military might that she was virtually untouchable, with fellow gods in dread of her. Said a hymn that eulogised her. “The great Anunnaki gods fled before you like fluttering bats. They could not stand before your fearsome face, could not soothe your angry heart." Whereas before she launched her worldwide campaign she was called “Beloved of Enlil" and “One who carries out the instructions of Anu”, and portrayed in imagery as an enticing Goddess of Love, in the annexed territories she was now depicted as a ruthless and savage conqueror, as a Goddess of War bristling with weapons, on rock engravings.
For donkeys’ years now, she had been based in Agade since the days of Sargon the Great. Her erstwhile temple-abode in Uruk, the Eanna, she had vacated and re-commissioned as a sacred monument to King Anu of Nibiru. Now she targeted this “house of irresistible charm” for dismantling so as to bring to an end its standing as a symbol of Anu’s authority. She set about knocking it down brick by brick whilst she assaulted its staff and threw them behind bars where they defied her.
But she was not yet done. She wanted to be the Goddess of Earth and therefore she needed to send a strong message to her grandfather Enlil, the reigning God of Earth, that she was now the Mistress of the Realm. Accordingly, she ordered Naram-Sin to storm the Ekur in Nippur. This was Enlil’s temple-residence. Descending on the unguarded city, Naram-Sin crushed all who had served Enlil and “like a bandit he plundered it”.
Then arriving at the Ekur, he “erected large ladders against the House, smashed his way in, entered its Holy of Holies.” Extracting the Holy Vessels of an absent Enlil, Naram-Sin cast them into a blazing bonfire. Then he “forged great axes, sharpened double-edged axes of destruction, levelled the Ekur down to the foundation of the land.” That done, he “docked large boats at the quay by the House of Enlil, and carried off the possessions of the city." The sacrilege, the coup against the all-powerful Enlil, was complete.
With the job done, Inanna declared herself the “Supreme Queen” and also assumed a new name, Anat, meaning “(Ruler) of the Cosmos”. In other words, not even King Anu had authority over her anymore. She would be, so she boasted in earnest, “greater than the mother who gave birth to me, even greater than Anu.” She even countermanded all rules, regulations, laws, and ordinances Enlil had promulgated for the planet and announced a new World Order in which her word would hold sway. “The heavenly Kingship was seized by a female!" says a Sumerian text. "lnanna changed the rules of Holy Anu!"
Naram-Sin too did not shrink from lapping up his moment of glory. He declared himself “King of the Four Regions”. These were Sumer (the First Region); Egypt (the Second Region); the Indus Valley (The Third Region); and the Sinai Peninsula (The Fourth Region), all of which together constituted the nerve centre of the planet. He proceeded to proclaim himself a god and appropriated all the trappings of godship (Anunnakiship), donning a horned headdress in mimicry of the gods.
He called himself Dingir.Naram-Sin, meaning “Divine Naram-Sin”. This title was reserved for the Anunnaki but it was also conferred as a honorary title on a demigod subject to the approval of Enlil. In Naram-Sin’s case, it was bestowed by Inanna, the new Enlil! Would Enlil and King Anu take all this lying down?
A case can be made, General Atiku, that history’s most infamous Roman is Pontius Pilate. It was Pilate who condemned Jesus, the “Son of God”, to the most cruel, most barbaric, and most excruciating of deaths – crucifixion – and cowardly at that as the gospels attest for us.
Yet the exact circumstances under which the crucifixion took place and what followed thereafter far from jells with what is familiarly known. The fact of the matter was that there was a lot of political wheeling and dealing and boldfaced corruption on the part both of the Jewish authorities and the Roman establishment in the person of Pontius Pilate. In this piece, we attempt, General, to present a fuller photo of Pilate as the centre of the whole machination.
Pilate’s historicity, General, is not in doubt. In 1961, an Italian archeologist unearthed a limestone block at Caesarea Maritima on the Mediterranean coast of Israel, which as of 6 AD was the Roman seat of government as well as the military headquarters. The block bore the inscription, “Pontius Pilate, the Prefect of Judea, has dedicated this Temple to the divine Augusti” (that is, then Roman Emperor Tiberius Caesar and his wife Livia).
Pilate also gets varying degrees of mention in the works of Roman senator and historian Cornelius Tacitus (56-117 AD); the Hellenistic Jewish philosopher and chronicler Philo of Alexandria (25 BC to 50 AD); and the legendary Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (37-100 AD).
Although his year of death (37 AD) is documented, his year of birth is a matter of conjecture, General. He came from the Pontii tribe (hence the name Pontius), a tough, warlike people. The Pontii tribe was of the equestrian class, the second-tier in the Roman caste system. Originally, the equestrians were those Romans with ample pocket power to bribe their way to knightly ranks in the Roman army. Pilate was born to Marcus Pontius, who had distinguished himself as a general in Rome’s military campaigns.
Following one of his particularly sterling military exploits, Marcus was awarded with the Pilum (javelin), a Roman decoration of honour for heroic military service. To commemorate this medal of valour, the family took the name Pilati, rendered Pilate in English and Pilatus in Latin.
The son, Lucius Pontius Pilate, also distinguished himself as a soldier in the German campaigns of Germanicus, a prominent general of the early Roman Empire. Thanks to his scintillating military profile coupled with strategic connections in the hierarchies of the Roman government, Pilate was able to wend his way into the heart of Claudia, the granddaughter of Caesar Augustus, the founder of the Roman Empire and ruler from 27 BC to 14 AD.
Claudia’s mother was Julia the Elder, who was also the biological mother of the apostles John and James. When Claudia was about 13 years of age, Julia sent her to Rome to be reared in the courts of Emperor Tiberius Caesar, to whom Julia was once married from 11 BC to 6 BC.
Although Tiberius was not the biological father of Claudius, General, he gladly acquiesced to being her foster father in deference to the memory of her late grandfather Caesar Augustus. Pilate arrived in Rome when Claudia was sixteen years of age. In AD 26, the two tied the knot. Needless to say, it was a marriage based not on love as such but on political opportunism.
The high-placed connection who facilitated Pontius Pilate’s smooth landing into the inner sanctums of Rome’s royalty and put him on a pedestal that saw him take pride of place in the cosmic gallery of rogues was Aelius Sejanus. Like Pilate, Sejanus came from the subordinate equestrian class, who would never be eligible for a seat in the Senate, the legislative council of ancient Rome.
Sejanus, however, had over time become Emperor Tiberius’ most trusted lieutenant and to the point where he was the de facto prime minister. He had been commander of the Praetorian Guard, the elite Special Forces unit created by Augustus Caesar as a personal security force, which developed under Sejanus’ command into the most significant presence in Rome.
In AD 26, the emperor was not even based in Rome: he had confined himself to the 10.4 km2 island of Capri, about 264 km from Rome, and left control of Rome and the government of the Roman Empire to Sejanus. It was Sejanus who recommended the appointment of Pilate as prefect, or governor/procurator of Judea. The appointment was pronounced right on the occasion of Pilate’s nuptials with Claudius.
Philo records that when the bridal party emerged from the temple where the marriage ceremony was celebrated and Pilate started to follow the bride into the imperial litter, Tiberius, who was one of the twelve witnesses required to attend the ceremony, held him back and handed him a document. It was the wedding present – the governorship of far-flung Judea – with orders to proceed at once to Caesarea Maritima to take over the office made vacant by the recall of Valerius Gratus.
Pilate was notified by Sejanus that a ship was in fact waiting upon him to transport him to Palestine right away. The only disadvantageous aspect about the assignment was that Pilate was to leave the shores of Rome alone, without the pleasure of spending a first night in the arms of his newly wedded wife: by imperial decree, the wives of governors were not allowed to accompany them in their jurisdictions. Pilate, however, was a royal by marriage and so this prohibition was waived. By special permission granted by His Imperial Majesty Tiberius Caesar, Claudia soon joined her husband in Judea. The wily Pilate had calculated well when he married into royalty.
A SADISTIC ADMINISTRATOR
The Judean perch was not prestigious though, General. The prefects of Judea were not of high social status. At least one – Felix, referenced by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles – was an ex-slave, which says a great deal on the low regard in which the province was held by Rome.
Pilate was only secondarily sent to Judea on account of having married into royalty: his posting to the volatile province stemmed, primarily, from his being of a inferior social pedigree. Be that as it may, Pilate relished the posting in that it gave him the chance to exercise power, absolute power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely and in Pilate was the archetypal example, General.
Pilate’s brief was simple: to collect taxes, maintain law and order, maintain infrastructure, and keep the population subdued. Although he was born lowly, he positively had the power of life and death over his Jewish subjects. Let us, General, listen to Josephus in his allusion to Coponius, Judea’s first Roman governor and who like Pilate was from the same subservient social class: “And now Archelaus’ part of Judea was reduced into a province and Coponius, one of the equestrian order among the Romans, was sent as procurator, having the power of life and death put into his hands by Caesar.”
Pilate, General, was callous to a point of being sadistic. He was scarcely the scrupling judge with the rare soft spot that we encounter in the gospels. Philo charges him with “corruptibility, violence, robberies, ill-treatment of the people, grievances, continuous executions without even the form of a trial, endless and intolerable cruelties”.
He further declares him to be a “savage, inflexible, and arbitrary ruler” who was of a “stubborn and harsh quality” and “could not bring himself to do anything that might cause pleasure to the Jews”. The essentially humane character of the Pilate who presided over the trial of Jesus as portrayed in the gospels may not be wholly fictitious but is highly embellished, General.
Why did Pilate have such a pathological hatred of the Jews, General? Sejanus had more to do with it than the spontaneous leanings of his own nature. According to Philo, Sejanus hated the Jews like the plague and wished “to do away with the nation” – to exterminate it. In AD 19, for instance, he forced the Jews in Rome to burn their religious vestments and expelled them from the city without much ado.
For as long as Sejanus was in power, General, Pilate could do pretty much as he pleased. He didn’t have to worry about compromising reportage reaching the emperor as everything went through the implacably anti-Jewish Sejanus. Sejanus was unrivalled in power: golden statues of the general were being put up in Rome, the Senate had voted his birthday a public holiday, public prayers were offered on behalf of Tiberius and Sejanus, and in AD 31 Sejanus was named as Consul jointly with Tiberius.
The Judea posting also gave Pilate a golden opportunity to make money – lots of it. The governors of the Roman provinces were invariably rapacious, greedy, and incompetent: this we learn not only from Jewish historians of the day but from contemporary Roman writers as well such as Tacitus and Juvenal.
As long as the money skimmed from the provinces was not overly excessive, governors were allowed a free hand. It is said of Emperor Tiberius that, “Once he ordered a governor to reverse a steep rise in taxes saying, ‘I want my sheep shorn, not skinned’!” For those governors, such as Pilate, who had support from the very acmes of Roman power, General, they were practically a law unto themselves.
PILATE’S WINGS ARE CLIPPED
Pontius Pilate, General, was untrained in political office. Furthermore, he was a sycophant to the core who was prepared to go to any length in a bid to curry favour with and prove his loyalty to the powers that be in Rome. Both these attributes gave rise to a series of blunders that brought him the intense hatred of the Jews.
The first abomination he committed in the eyes of the Jews, General, was to set up a temple dedicated to Emperor Tiberius, which he called the Tiberieum, making him the only known Roman official to have built a temple to a living emperor. True, Roman emperors were worshipped, but Tiberius was the one exception. According to the Roman scholar and historian Suetonius, Tiberius did not allow the consecration of temples to himself. Pilate’s act therefore, General, was an overkill: it was not appreciated at all.
Throughout his tenure, General, Pilate had a series of run-ins with the Jews, some of which entailed a lot of bloodshed and one of which sparked an insurrection that paved the way to Calvary. Then it all began to unravel, General. On October 18 AD 31, his patron Sejanus was summoned to the office of Emperor Tiberius and an angry denunciation was read out to him. It is not clear, General, what caused Sejanus’ fall from the emperor’s good graces but circumstantial evidence points to the perceived threat to the emperor’s power.
As the ancient historian Cassius Dio puts it, “Sejanus was so great a person by reason both of his excessive haughtiness and of his vast power that to put it briefly, he himself seemed to be the emperor and Tiberius a kind of island potentate, inasmuch as the latter spent his time on the island of Capri.” Sejanus, hitherto the most powerful man in Rome, General, was thrown into a dungeon.
That same evening, he was summarily condemned to death, extracted from his cell, hung, and had his body given over to a crowd that tore it to pieces in a frenzy of manic excitement. His three children were all executed over the following months and his wife, Tiberius’ own daughter, committed suicide. The people further celebrated his downfall by pulling his statues over. Meanwhile, General, Tiberius began pursuing all those who could have been involved in the “plots” of Sejanus.
In Judea, Pilate, a Sejanus appointee, must have been badly shaken, General. Were his friends and family under suspicion? Would he be purged like others? Imperial attitudes to the Jewish race seemed to have changed now with the riddance of Sejanus. Tiberius made sure this was the case by appointing a new governor for Syria (who went by the title Legate and to whom Pilate was obligated to report).
The governor, Lucius Pomponius Flaccus, arrived in Rome in AD 32. Philo records that Tiberius now “charged his procurators in every place to which they were appointed to speak comfortably to the members of our nation in the different cities, assuring them that the penal measures did not extend to all but only to the guilty who were few, and to disturb none of the established customs but even to regard them as a trust committed to their care, the people as naturally peaceable and the institution as an influence promoting orderly conduct.”
So Pilate, General, had lost his supporters at the top, his new boss was on his doorstep, and there had been a change of policy regarding the very people he was in charge of. Surely, he would have to watch his step. The fact of the matter, however, General, was that he hardly did so. In November 32 AD, for instance, he provoked a mini-uprising by the Zealots led by Judas Iscariot, Theudas Barabbas, and Simon Zelotes. It was this revolt, General, that culminated in those three “crosses” of Calvary that are indelibly etched on the mind of every Christian.
Until as recently as the 1980s a career often meant a job for life within a single company or organisation. Phrases such as ‘climbing the corporate ladder’, ‘the glass ceiling’, ‘wage slave’ & ‘the rat race’ were thrown about, the analogies making clear that a career path was a toxic mix of a war of attrition, indentured drudgery and a Sisyphean treadmill.
In all cases you fought, grafted or plodded on till you reached retirement age, at which point you could expect a small leaving party, the promise of a pension and, oddly, a gift of either a clock or watch. The irony of being rewarded with a timepiece on the very day you could expect to no longer be a workday prisoner was apparently lost on management – the hands of time were destined to follow you to the grave!
Retirement was the goal at the end of the long, corporate journey, time on your hands – verifiable by your gifted time keeping device – to spend time working in the garden, playing with the grandchildren, enjoying a holiday or two and generally killing time till time killed you.
For some, retirement could be literally short-lived. The retirement age, and accompanying pension, was predicated on the old adage of three scores years and ten being the average life expectancy of man. As the twentieth century progressed and healthcare became more sophisticated, that former mean average was extended but that in itself then brought with it the double-edged sword of dementia. The longer people lived, the more widespread dementia became – one more life lottery which some won, some lost and doctors were seemingly unable to predict who would succumb and who would survive.
However, much research has been carried out on the causes of this crippling and cruel disease and the latest findings indicate that one of its root causes may lie in the former workplace – what your job entailed and how stimulating or otherwise it was. It transpires that having an interesting job in your forties could lessen the risk of getting dementia in old age, the mental stimulation possibly staving off the onslaught of the condition by around 18 months.
Academics examined more than 100,000 participants and tracked them for nearly two decades. They spotted a third fewer cases of dementia among people who had engaging jobs which involved demanding tasks and more control — such as government officers, directors, physicians, dentists and solicitors, compared to adults in ‘passive’ roles — such as supermarket cashiers, vehicle drivers and machine operators. And those who found their own work interesting also had lower levels of proteins in their blood that have been linked with dementia.
The study was carried out by researchers from University College London, the University of Helsinki and Johns Hopkins University studying the cognitive stimulation and dementia risk in 107,896 volunteers, who were regularly quizzed about their job. The volunteers — who had an average age of around 45 — were tracked for between 14 and 40 years. Jobs were classed as cognitively stimulating if they included demanding tasks and came with high job control. Non-stimulating ‘passive’ occupations included those with low demands and little decision-making power.
4.8 cases of dementia per 10,000 person years occurred among those with interesting careers, equating to 0.8 per cent of the group. In contrast, there were 7.3 cases per 10,000 person years among those with repetitive jobs (1.2 per cent). Among people with jobs that were in the middle of these two categories, there were 6.8 cases per 10,000 person years (1.12 per cent).
The link between how interesting a person’s work was and rates of dementia did not change for different genders or ages.Lead researcher Professor Mika Kivimaki, from UCL, said: ‘Our findings support the hypothesis that mental stimulation in adulthood may postpone the onset of dementia. The levels of dementia at age 80 seen in people who experienced high levels of mental stimulation was observed at age 78.3 in those who had experienced low mental stimulation. This suggests the average delay in disease onset is about one and half years, but there is probably considerable variation in the effect between people.’
The study, published this week in the British Medical Journal, also looked at protein levels in the blood among another group of volunteers. These proteins are thought to stop the brain forming new connections, increasing the risk of dementia. People with interesting jobs had lower levels of three proteins considered to be tell-tale signs of the condition.
Scientists said it provided ‘possible clues’ for the underlying biological mechanisms at play. The researchers noted the study was only observational, meaning it cannot establish cause and that other factors could be at play. However, they insisted it was large and well-designed, so the findings can be applied to different populations.
To me, there is a further implication in that it might be fair to expect that those in professions such as law, medicine and science might reasonably be expected to have a higher IQ than those in blue collar roles. This could indicate that mental capacity also plays a part in dementia onset but that’s a personal conclusion and not one reached by the study.
And for those stuck in dull jobs through force of circumstance, all is not lost since in today’s work culture, the stimulating side-hustle is fast becoming the norm as work becomes not just a means of financial survival but a life-enhancing opportunity , just as in the old adage of ‘Find a job you enjoy and you’ll never work another day in your life’!
Dementia is a global concern but ironically it is most often seen in wealthier countries, where people are likely to live into very old age and is the second biggest killer in the UK behind heart disease, according to the UK Office for National Statistics. So here’s a serious suggestion to save you from an early grave and loss of competencies – work hard, play hard and where possible, combine the two!
The gospels which were excluded from the official canon, the New Testament, at the Council of Nicaea are known as the Apocrypha. One of these Apocryphal works, General Atiku, is the gospel of Phillip. In this gospel, the intimate relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene is openly discussed thus:
“And the companion of the Saviour is Mary Magdalene. But Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on the mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said unto him, why do you love her more than all of us? The Saviour answered and said to them, why do I not love you like her? … Great is the mystery of marriage, for without it the world would never have existed. Now, the existence of the world depends on man, and the existence of man on marriage.”
It is clear from the above statement, General, that Jesus held marriage in high regard because he himself was part and parcel of it. The disciples (that is, most of them) were offended not because he and Mary were an item but because they simply did not approve of her as she was a Gentile and a commoner.
Otherwise, the kissing was not offensive at all: it was a customary expression of mutual affection between the sacred bride and groom. This we gather from the prototypically romantic Old Testament text known as The Song of Solomon, which opens with the words, “Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is better than wine.” As the Davidic groom, Jesus was therefore entitled to kiss Mary Magdalene as his bride.
THE FIRST MARRIAGE
In September AD 30, General Atiku, Jesus and Mary Magdalene had their First Marriage ceremony. Jesus had turned 36 in that year, the appropriate marriage age for a Davidic heir, and September was the holiest month in the Jewish calendar. Having been born irregularly himself (in the wrong month of the year because of his father Joseph’s intransigence), Jesus was determined that he himself follow the law to the letter so that his child would not suffer the same indignities as he did. The First Marriage is captured in LUKE 7:35-50.
The marriage took place at the home of Simon the Pharisee. This, General, was another name for Simon Zelotes, the stepfather of Mary Magdalene. Although Mary Magdalene is not directly named, she is described as a “sinner”. This was another term for Gentiles, as in the eyes of the Jewish God, they were unregenerate and therefore hopeless sinners. Mary Magdalene, whose mother Helena-Salome was of Syrian origin (Syro-Phoenicia to be specific), was a Gentile.
On the occasion, Mary Magdalene performed three acts on Jesus as set out in LUKE 7:38. She wept; kissed his feet; and anointed him with ointment. This is what a bride was supposed to do to her groom as clearly evinced in The Song of Solomon, a series of love poems concerning a spouse and her husband the King.
Of the three rites, perhaps it is the weeping that require elucidation, General. This was at once symbolic and sentimental. The First Marriage was simply a ceremony: the moment the ceremony was over, the husband and wife separated, that is, they lived apart until the month of December, when they came together under one roof. This was in accord with Essene stipulations for dynastic marriages, that is, those of the Davidic Messiah and the priestly Messiah.
Prior to the First Marriage, the bride was known as an Almah, meaning a betrothed Virgin. After the First Marriage ceremony, the Almah was demoted to a Sister. This was because the ensuing three-month separation meant husband and wife would not indulge in sexual activity and so the wife was as good as a sister to her husband. The imagery of Sister also being a wife is seen in 1 CORINTHIANS 9:5, where the apostle Paul refers to his wife as Sister. In ACTS 23:16, Paul’s wife is again referred to as his Sister.
Now, when the Almah became a Sister, General, she was metaphorically called a Widow, because she was being separated from her newly wedded husband. As such, she was expected to symbolically weep on account of this separation. That explains why Mary Magdalene had to weep at her first wedding. It is a pity, General, that most Christians and their clergy miss the real story so wrongly indoctrinated are they.
In December AD 30, Jesus moved in with Mary Magdalene to consummate the marriage. It was hoped that Mary would fall pregnant so that in March the following year, a Second (and final) Marriage ceremony would be held. Sadly, conception did not take place. According to Essene dynastic procreational rules, the couple had to separate again. They would reunite in December AD 31 for another try at conception.
The reason they separated was because for a dynastic heir, marriage was purely for procreation and not for recreational sex. But even that year, General, Mary did not fall pregnant, necessitating another year-long separation. What that meant was that Mary would be given one more last chance – in December AD 32, by which time Jesus would have been 38. If she did not conceive this time around, the marriage would come to an end through a legal divorce and Jesus would be free to seek a new spouse.
THE FINAL MARRIAGE
In December 32, Mary Magdalene, General, finally conceived. When Jesus was crucified therefore in April 33 AD, his wife was three months pregnant. By this time, the Second Marriage ceremony, the final one, had already taken place, this being in March. The Second Marriage is cursorily related in MATTHEW 26:6-13; MARK 14:3-9; and JOHN 12:1-8.The John version reads as follows:
“Jesus, therefore, six days before the Passover, came to Bethany, where was Lazarus, who had died, whom he raised out of the dead; they made, therefore, to him a supper there, and Martha was ministering, and Lazarus was one of those reclining together (at meat) with him; Mary, therefore, having taken a pound of ointment of spikenard, of great price, anointed the feet of Jesus and did wipe with her hair his feet, and the house was filled from the fragrance of the ointment.
Therefore said one of his disciples – Judas Iscariot, of Simon, who was about to deliver him up – ‘Therefore was not this ointment sold for three hundred denaries, and given to the poor?’ and he said this, not because he was caring for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and what things were put in he was carrying. Jesus, therefore, said, ‘Suffer her; for the day of my embalming she has kept it, for the poor you have always with yourselves, and me you have not always.’”
This story (also see JOHN 11:1-44) centres on four people primarily, General. They are Jesus; Lazarus; Mary; and Martha. “Mary” was actually Mary Magdalene. “Martha” was a titular name for her mother, Helena-Salome. In the Lazarus story, the two ladies are referred to as “sisters”. This denotes conventual sisters, like the Catholics refer to conventual nuns, and not sisters by blood. Helena-Salome actually headed a nunnery. By the same token, the reference to Lazarus as “brother” has a connotation akin to what Pentecostals refer to as “Brother in Christ”.
Thus, the story revolves around Jesus the groom; his bride Mary Magdalene; his father-in-law Simon Zelotes; and his mother-in-law Helena-Salome. This is a family affair folks, which provides strong hints as to the exact relationship between Jesus and Mary. The raising from the dead of a man called Lazarus, sadly, was not a miracle at all: it was a ceremonial restoration from excommunication back to the Essene governing council, which comprised of Jesus and his so-called 12 disciples.
The “Lazarus” who was thus restored was actually Simon Zelotes, at the time the most “beloved” by Jesus of the entire apostolic band, who had been demoted under circumstances relating to a Zealot uprising against Pontius Pilate. More will be said on the subject at a later stage.
The anointing of Jesus by Mary with “spikenard”, General, harps back to ancient married rituals as patently demonstrated in The Song of Solomon. This was the second time Mary had anointed Jesus, first at the First Marriage in September AD 30 AD and now at the Second Marriage in March 32 AD. On both occasions, Mary anointed Jesus whilst he sat at table.
In SONG OF SOLOMON 1:12, the bride says, “While the King sitteth at his table, my spikenard sendeth forth the smell thereof”. The anointing in the gospels was therefore an allusion to the ancient rite whereby a royal bride prepared her groom’s table. Only as the wife of Jesus and as a priestess in her own right could Mary Magdalene have anointed both the feet and head of Jesus.
The anointing in effect had two purposes: first, to seal the marriage, and second, to officially announce to the Jewish nation that Jesus was the Davidic Messiah (and not his younger brother James, who had been so promoted by John the Baptist). It all harped back to the tradition in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, where Kings or Pharaohs were anointed for office (in their case with crocodile fat) by their half-sister brides.
The King’s bride actually kept the anointment substance for use for one more time – when the King died. You can now understand, General, why Jesus said “the day of my embalming she has kept it” in reference to his anointing by Mary Magdalene and why the first person to feature at the tomb of Jesus was none other than Mary Magdalene!
Three passages in the Lazarus story (in JOHN11: 1-44) are particularly telling. They are Verses 20, 28, and 29. They read as follows: “When Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went out to meet him, but Mary stayed in the house … After Martha said this, she went back and called her sister Mary privately. ‘The Master is here,’ she told her, ‘and is asking for you.’ When Mary heard this, she got up and hurried out to meet him.” The reason Mary (Magdalene) first kept her place before proceeding to meet Jesus, General, is not supplied in the Johannine gospel.
However, the Apocryphal document which has come to be known as The Secret Gospel of Mark sheds more light, General. It explains that on the first occasion, Mary did come out to meet Jesus along with her mother Martha (Helena-Salome) but upon being rebuked by the disciples of Jesus, she repaired back to the house. Why was she lashed out at, General? Because according to the Essene matrimonial code, she was not permitted to come out of her own accord and greet her husband: she was to wait until he had given her express permission to emerge.
There is yet another element in the conduct of Mary Magdalene that has parallels with Solomon’s queen, General. In the back-and-forth romantic dialogue between the couple, the queen is referred to as a “Shulamite” (SONG OF SOLOMON 6:13). The Shulamites were from the Syrian border town of Solam and we have already seen that Mary’s first foster father, Syro the Jairus, was a Syrian, as was her mother Helena-Salome.
JUDAS DENOUNCES THE MARRIAGE
The marriage of Jesus to Mary Magdalene was vehemently opposed by most of his so-called disciples. The most vociferous on this position, General, was Judas Iscariot. The writer of the John gospel characterises Judas as a “thief” who used to pilfer alms money but that is a smear. The gospels were written post-eventual and therefore Judas’ name was already in ignominy.
His detractors therefore had a field day at sullying his character. Yet prior to the betrayal, Judas Iscariot, General, was one of the most respected figures among the Essene community. At the time of Jesus’ marriage, Judas was the second-highest ranking Essene after Simon Zelotes (that is the meaning of “Judas of Simon” in the passage quoted above, meaning “Judas the deputy of Simon”): Jesus was third, although politically he was the seniormost.
Judas opposed the marriage on grounds, primarily, that Mary Magdalene was not only a Gentile but a commoner. Judas had the right to pronounce on Jesus’ marriage because it was he who was in charge of the Essene’s order of Dan, to which Mary Magdalene belonged prior to her marriage to Jesus and therefore had the right whether to release her for marriage or retain her in the convent. Judas would rather the spikenard (the most expensive fragrance of the day, the reason it was only used by queens) was sold and the money generated donated to the Essene kitty (“the poor” was another name for Essenes: when Jesus in the Beatitudes said “blessed are the poor”, he was not referring to you and me: he meant the Essenes).
Sadly General, as high-standing as he was, Judas had no right of veto over the marriage of a Davidic heir: only Simon Zelotes had by virtue of his position as the Essene’s Pope. Simon Zelotes was Mary Magdalene’s step-father and there was no way he was going to stand in the way of the marriage of his own daughter. Moreover, Jesus had already begun to fancy himself as Priest-King.
As far as he was concerned therefore, he was at once the Davidic Messiah and the Priestly Messiah – the Melchizedek. Thus even if Simon Zelotes had perchance objected to the marriage, Jesus would have gone ahead with it anyway. It was Jesus’ highly unpopular appropriated role as the Melchizedek, General, that set him on the path to Calvary.