The men known as Jesus in the New Testament—Part Two: Understanding the Psychology of Jesus

June 23, 2014 / Posted in  Ancient Egypt, Bible, Church history, Jesus Christ, Jewish history, NAR, Old Testament, Roman Catholicism

Understanding the psychology of Jesus

Contents

1. Introduction: Psychology and Literature

2. Jesus the glutton and drunkard

2a. Psychology of gluttony

2b. Psychology of drunkenness

3. Psychology of a peaceful Jesus

3a. Psychology of peace

3b. Psychology of denial

3c. Jesus loved little children

4. Psychology of the Warrior Jesus and Violence

4a. Jesus hated little children

4b. Jesus: Self-centered and arrogant

4c. Psychology of divinity

5. Jesus and the naked male youth

5a. Psychology of vengeance

6. Jesus the psychopathic warrior

6a. Psychology of war

6b. Psychology of Jesus and zombie friends

7. Bibliography

Primary documents

Monographs and book reviews

Psychological Studies—Books and articles

Web links

8. End Notes

Text

1. Introduction: Psychology and Literature

Many people fantasize about being a part of the world of Star Wars. Others see Harry Potter as real. Some have died in suicide pacts to become a part of civilization marked by a comment. An increasing number turn to legends of past lives and cultures: druids, witches, and more established religions that want people to believe in the incredulous. All of these can be understood with a knowledge of psychology.

Psychological studies of literary figures are not new. The search for answers in human interaction frequently can be found in literature characterizations. These characterizations represent ideals or fears fed by external sources: politics, religion, family dysfunctions.

Sigmund Freud turned to literature to understand and posit psychoanalytic theories that in turn changed our notions of human behavior by exploring new or controversial areas like wish-fulfillment, sexuality, the unconscious, and repression.¹ While sex did play a major role in Freudian psychology, so do did dreams, their interpretation, and phobia: all an intertwining part of religion. Freud was among the most outspoken that religion is a collection of fantasies and dreams that feed off the uneducated and the bewildered, causing civilizations falling into discontent and willing to adopt any savior that can promise them peace of mind.

It is within the broad brush strokes of literature that we can expand our understanding of how language and symbols operate. This is done by demonstrating their ability to reflect unconscious fears or desires. It is a technique used by ancient playwrites and later mythic enhancers who wanted their ontologies accepted as reality.

Freud was joined in his study with Carl Jung whose theories about the unconscious are a key foundation of Mythological Criticism. Mythological Criticism encompasses not only the ancient and modern world of fairy tales, but more so, the charting of illusionary texts as being sacred writ. This is a cornucopia of various ancient texts from Oracles to the more elaborate books on faith: the Book of the Dead, Torah and Prophets, New Testament, Qur’an and beyond. It is with the dissecting and analysis of ancient writings that most more contemporary (after 1 CE) tracts have been studied and proven right or wrong.²

There are numerous approaches to psychological criticism of literature and the figures that people it. While all approaches have value,  in general, only one methodology is usually employed out of three primary approaches:

1. An inquiry into the creative process of the artist who goes from that which is concrete to that which is allegorical and mythological. The focus is on the nature of literary genius and how it relates to normal mental functions,
2. The psychological study of a particular artist in determining if the artist’s life, work, inter-exchanges and intra-exchanges with people affect or influence the motivations and/or behavior of the characters. This is more common with writers after the Fall of the Temple in 70 CE who expressed their dismay and anger through through the inscription of a carpenter’s son who allegedly lived forty years earlier. This is not surprising, given the psychological pressure and desire for an answer as to why times were difficult and people were persecuted, even though not a single contemporary knew for a fact that this was the profession of either Jesus or his human father Joseph, or any of his natural brothers born to his mother Mary or any human male: “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?” ³ much less the work or supervision by any of his human sisters” “Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Are his sisters not here with us?”⁴
3. The analysis of fictional characters using the language and methods of psychology as defined in dissecting and studying speeches given, actions taken, and associates made and visited or lived with. How does the movement of the character define the psychology of the character—and, ultimately, or the writer. In most cases, it is known, the character of fiction is but a two-way mirror into the character of the author or authors.

 

2. Jesus the glutton and alcoholic

Gluttony and alcoholism are among the most common problems in most societies. Without help they are the most dangerous problem. Both appear in the story about Jesus as recorded in the Gospel of Matthew. It is appropriate that “Matthew” wrote this account since Matthew (Hebrew: מַתִּתְיָהוּ‎ Mattityahu or מתי Mattay: literally Gift of YHWH; in Greek: Ματθαῖος or Matthaios who was sometimes known as Levi⁵) is recorded as being a “Lebbeus”: or publican”⁶: “Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus”⁷ a common word for a tax-collector.

Most tax-collectors were seen as drunks who were taken off by those in default of paying their taxes to try to soften any penalty. These included James “son of Alphaeus” and “Jude”. It was not before the fourth century CE that any figure of importance made the claim that Matthew could read and write,⁸ but he would have studied at the Temple to keep tax records. Authenticity is another issue, as Matthew allegedly lived in the first century but the writing and word choice of the gospel is no sooner than the second century, making the work questionable and its authorship uncertain.⁹

2a. Psychology of gluttony

The psychology of gluttony has long intrigued mental health practitioners. From a sociological viewpoint certain groups have considered obesity a desirable trait, especially in poor areas and nations where hunger and starvation are common.

Obesity has shown those who have less the wealth of those who are fat. At the same time, those who have been affluent, especially in the distant past used their wealth to demonstrate that they could eat well and drink without stop, especially at fertility orgies, as with the Bacchanal¹⁰ that was known throughout the Mediterranean world.

The emotional factors involved in obesity relate to two very general concepts: 1) gaining of satisfaction in the incorporating process by being hailed as being of above means and to illustrate the role of wealth in communities; 2) gaining of satisfactions as an end result of gluttony such as requiring more clothing, larger means of transportation especially on the shoulders of a coterie of carriers, and the desirability of being above others as with potentates. In each case the gluttony of Jesus fits comfortably as a talisman of being special, having an abundance of food in an impoverished age, and being able to drink to inebriation while others consume modestly due to cost and other factors (although this characteristic is not consistent through the other textual redactions).

In the cases studied it was evident that: 1) obesity was used both for offense and defense: to show superiority over others, while at the same time defending over-consumption as a right of a leader, soothsayer or assumed man of wealth who was supported by followers; 2) the pattern in some instances was sadistic and in others masochistic: sadistic inasmuch as the Jesus could consume large amounts of food while others who may or may not have been with him could not as with the population that was begging for crumbs of bread, and masochistic since the gluttony was reserved either for Jesus or possibly a select few so that others watching the feasting would be pained by not being invited into the food orgy; 3) oral satisfaction extended beyond socially acceptable forms as seen with the testimony of those who saw the gluttony of Jesus; and, 4) obesity was used to simulate a masculine ideal as with the acclamation of the glutton being a chosen member of a select group or a leader (messiah) of a nation.¹¹

2b. Psychology of drunkenness

Being drunk has psychological reasons, antecedents and problems. Drunkenness and alcoholism both are related to risk behaviors.

Risk behaviors are formed around substance use and abuse (over consumption of alcohol with a deliberate or semi-conscious avoidance or information on the resulting problems of over-indulgence, such as kidney failure, brain cell damage, and so forth—or in the first century CE). The farce known as slurred speech, inability to control basic motor functions and urinary relief, etc.

At the same time, drunkenness is a deliberate (and sometimes as an unwanted but continued) deviance from that action or actions/speech that was considered to be limited to the early stages of the life course but ejected from that standard to consume the entire life cycle leading at times to premature death as well as taking unnecessary risks leading to inadvertent death as with riding untamed horses (or driving too fast in a chariot or riding wildly on an untamed animal while under the influence of alcohol). It also found slurred and unruly behavior in playing games and getting feisty when death could be the outcome such as chasing bandits or brigands, attacking military posts or with false bravado pitching money changers from a courtyard set aside for monetary transactions in selling animals for sacrifice,  or joining large groups of people to hear unpopular speeches or those rifled against incumbency in politics, religions or economics: especially those engaged in robbery,¹² etc.

While the onset of sociological dysfunctioning, risk behavior has been well studied laboriously and lavishly requiring numerous hours, case studies, and interview. Current studies on the psychology of drunkenness are declining and the timing of cessation of risk behaviors of different domains during young adulthood in not in syncopation with reality.

Today’s psychological studies focus on the prevalence and longitudinal developmental patterning of alcohol use, drinking to the point of drunkenness, smoking, cannabis use, deviance, and HIV-related sexual risk behavior. A thorough study of texts chiseled into or painted on to slabs of rocks, or calligraphed onto parchment or papyrus, and other data from the ancient world will show similar situations and causation, such as touching lepers,¹³ raising the wrath of senior community leaders,¹⁴ etc.

Alcohol was common in the time of the Biblical Jesus.¹⁵ and drunkenness was common as seen with the wedding at Cana where the host thought the old and cheaper wine would be save until last, yet the Jesus who changed water into wine (an old Egyptian tale of the gods Horus and Dionysus¹⁶) has it presented to the host at the end of the celebration to make a point that what is last is able to be first. In all societies, alcohol consumption has been a quadratic model, though largely stable at a high level through the late 20s, and has led to sexual risk behavior from acceptance of circumcision as was the case with those who desired to wed and bed Dinah long before the advent of Moses’ command for the severing of the foreskin of his male family members, and even unsuspecting and unwilling guests¹⁷ the unnecessary,¹⁸ unhygienic and increases the risk of HIV transmission,¹⁹ and distasteful operation.²⁰ It was a common goal and practice at weddings, recorded to transpire during entombment, praised when victories were won, etc.

In every case studied young males who were brought up in a culture to take risks, as with Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite,²¹ a prince of the country, who with the townsmen wanted /desired / lusted after the sisters of Dinah to the point that the desire/lust, became alcoholics or took to drunkenness to find an excuse to blame their resulting actions on alcohol. It was a means for mental discombobulation and led to young males willing to undergo unnecessary bodily inscriptions and surgery from tattoos to circumcision.²² Hierarchical linear regression analyses in psychological studies show that positive alcohol expectancies and impulsivity found unique associations between religious commitment and spiritual transcendence and alcohol use.

Specifically, religious commitment operated as a protective factor, while spiritual transcendence operated as a risk factor for alcohol use. Neither religious commitment nor spiritual transcendence predicted alcohol-related problems.²³ In short, a religious commitment was both a shield against alcohol and its misuse, while spiritual elevation as being a chosen one or a person of whom more was expected had alcohol-related problems. The reality of the time and place frequently led to group schizophrenia and assaults that were covered up with the claim of their uniqueness due to a god, culture, or law of an area, as with the Judaic claim that circumcision was commanded by Yahweh and enforced by Moses while in fact it was centuries older in ancient Egypt.

In the case of the drunken Jesus, this show delineation between believing in the faith of his forefathers and his own acceptance of it by hiding in alcohol led the drunken Jesus to deny his mission, his mother, his natural brothers and sisters and any activity toward it would not be generated voluntarily but come under the influence. At the same time this or another Jesus would follow the ancient cult practice of the magi (magicians) of ancient Egypt, Samaria, Sumeria, Assyria and far older civilizations by turning water into wine. There is neither a passage nor a phrase indicating that Jesus ate or drink modestly anywhere in the gospels or epistles. Nowhere in the Bible is there passage or even a phrase that suggests Jesus was ever thin, in the Bible. The only reference states that Jesus was a glutton. Wine is mentioned at the Supper in the Upper Room (commonly called, in error, the Last Supper).

The issue of a god from the Middle East,Jesus’ appearance is of importance. Refined Roman society would not have welcomed a god of Middle Eastern / Arab / Egyptian heritage who was the son of a carpenter and not of a superior god, as with Osiris or Dionysus.

Based on area, nationality and uniqueness of ancient Jews, skilled scientists have re-imaged Jesus to reflect his clime and time. If he had a beard, being a carpenter who used tools to create wooden beams and boards, he would not have had a long beard nor long hair. Working as a carpenter and as an itinerary teacher, he would not be freshly bathed. Based on Biblical internal-evidence, he would not be the scrubbed thin man that lorists have portrayed, but more simply as with the depictions in the baptistry at Ravenna,  in the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy. and elsewhere, as included here.

Intervention, including lecturing against alcohol and alcoholism seldom works, as the scriptorium of the fourth century CE attempted to incorporate into their writing of various  gospels. This is seen in the record of various Pharisees who attempted to intervene by pointing out, or shaming, the drunkenness of Jesus. Their words are recorded, but there is no record that their bullying of the drunken Jesus had an affect on the sot who was surrounded by mere mortal friends.

We find this same problem of true alcoholism and its recurring disregard for adverse actions and life-threatening actions in the last actions of the Jesus of the Gospels (he is not mentioned by name in any Epistle that were written generations before any gospel and then to build up the myth that their messiah was the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophesies). The pattern of alcoholism would have intervened, especially if Jesus drank deeply before risking his life as with the cup of the Last Supper.²⁴

Studies show that those who are drunk in public and gain public attention especially if the accused masses a large audience to speak about things and situations that were neither common nor expected as with the Sermon on the Mount and the Sermon on the Plain after which Jesus proclaims that thousands were fed on five loaves and two small fish. At the same time it charges electrolytically those who disapprove and bolsters determination to maintain a course even if it is disapproved of as with the Wedding at Cana and Jesus need to escape “a large crowd” by stepping into a boat and preaching from beyond the shore. These are actions that are commonly executed while under the influence of alcohol as deliberately seeking recognition as a drunk and being labeled as being a part of society’s deviant group.

Many times drunkenness is embraced to gain recognition so that the rest of the time that the drunk is speaking or acting, people notice and make note of it.²⁵ Other studies show that drunkenness, like theft and prostitution, can lead to schizophrenia where the schizophrenic claims to have extra prowess from a divine source when inebriated.²⁶ In cases where drunkenness exist and the drunk claims supernatural or extraterrestrial prowess, the individual (males, for the most part, have been studied, to the loss of female subjects) can psychologically swing between aggressive behavior and that of a peacemaker, proclaiming the election of peacekeepers while also promising to carry a sword and divide families.

3. Psychology of a peaceful Jesus

The peaceful Jesus is idyllic and plastic. Jesus became that which others wanted Jesus to be, with little originality and no true identity that would set Jesus apart. Most of the accounts of this Jesus are built up over the remnants of other Jesus.

With some finesse, the writers of the gospels patched together a peaceful Jesus who incorporated various attributes of distinctively other men called Jesus. This duplication is seen in the wordy and longer Sermon of the Mount²⁷ and shortened, nearly synopsised Sermon on the Plain: ^6:17 “He came down with them, and stood on a level place, with a crowd of his disciples, and a great number of the people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, who came to hear him and to be healed of their diseases; ^6:18 as well as those who were troubled by unclean spirits, and they were being healed. ^6:19 All the multitude sought to touch him, for power came out from him and healed them all.”²⁸ A reading of the text does not give the full oration for full details that must be discussed later.²⁹; as such, it shows significant interest in it being written by a later hand that tried to give it substance and join the two gospels closer together.³⁰

The two sermons differ and their difference is of striking importance. The writers of the two Gospels addressed very different constituencies.

The college of writers in the second/third centuries CE who created “Matthew”, played up the role of Jesus as Messiah. The longer Sermon on the Mount introduced Jesus’ teaching playing on Jewish nationalistic aspirations.

Luke, being politically astute about a subversive political statement, avoided the charge of serious omission, and presented the Sermon as a simple edict of generosity. This indicates that the Sermon on the Plain was re-issued Jesus material. ³¹ The greatest transmogrification comes with the writers of Luke reversing the order of many of the key issues in Matthew, such as law (“an eye for an eye”³² compared to “love your neighbor”³³).

Peacefulness has long been heralded as a sign of mental stability. While this is valid, it must be determined why a person would chose peace, especially in a community seeking war–the overthrow of the Roman garrison and the rule of Rome. This became the reason for Revelation and a blood-drenched Jesus. At the same time, what are the reasons that control or change the direction of a peacekeeper? How great of a role did fear of death, fear of loss, fear of economic ruin, and other fears play?

Peace is neither simple nor easy to obtain. Peace comes when a society has been battered by wars, rumors or wars, and the rise and fall of local military might. This is the story of first century in Judea when numerous saviors were proclaimed the messiah: Judas of Galilee (6 C.E.) who opposed a Roman tax; Menahem ben Judah (?), the son or grandson of Judas of Galilee, was a leader of the Sicarii who armed his followers with weapons captured at Masada and besieged Antonia Fortress in Jerusalem; Theudas, a Jewish rebel who led an armed revolt between 44 and 46 C.E., and John of Gischala (? after 70), leader of the Jewish revolt against the Romans in the First Jewish-Roman War, reading to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70CE.

3a. Psychology of peace

Peace has its own psychological role in the development of the mind and the mentality of the community when there is time that encourages and values developing positive orientations to previously devalued groups, such as accepting and touching lepers, feeding widows and orphans, being with the lame and blind, and treating those involved in scandals as equals. Healing past victimization (as with reaching out to Samaritans and others ostracized by the general community) and promoting altruism born of suffering are also a part of peace psychology. What many elect to ignore is there is the influence of moderating respect for authority as seen in Jesus’ teaching “render to Cesar the things that are Cesar’s”;³⁴ creating constructive ideologies as with promises of the advantage of keeping on the good and discarding the bad or harmful;³⁵ promoting understanding of the origins of violence, its impact, and avenues to prevention as with condemning violence and the instruments of violence;³⁶ promoting truth, justice, and a shared history;³⁷ and raising inclusively caring, morally courageous children.³⁸

Extreme violence frequently forces some people into a positive relation with others and between groups. There is a stark difference in the gospels, with Matthew magnifying justice and vengeance³⁹ with Luke looking toward mercy.⁴⁰

True peace, as part of the human psychology, elicits active bystandership. This is most common in preventing violence by citing what the people can do to obtain recognition either on earth or in heaven, as with the peaceful Jesus and Gandhi.⁴¹

The passive Jesus did not quarrel. He obeyed his mother and father: “Then he went down to Nazareth (sic) with them and was obedient to them. But his mother treasured all these things in her heart. ⁵² And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.” ⁴² This is not found in any of the traits of the other men known as Jesus who litter the Gospels.

The passive Jesus wanted to learn. He listened to his teachers: “⁴¹ Every year Jesus’ parents went to Jerusalem for the Festival of the Passover. ⁴² When he was twelve years old, they went up to the festival, according to the custom. ⁴³ After the festival was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed actually: brought to me subconsciously denying free will and choice behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. ⁴⁴ Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends. ⁴⁵ When they did not find him, they went back to Jerusalem to look for him. ⁴⁶ After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. ⁴⁷ Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. ⁴⁸ When his parents saw him, they were astonished.” .⁴³ At that point the warrior Jesus breaks into the room as Jesus is now in control and identifies with god. To this ecstatic ejaculation, his mother voices her complaint: “His mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.” ⁴⁹ “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?” ⁵⁰ But they did not understand what he was saying to them.⁵¹ Then he went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them. But his mother treasured all these things in her heart. ⁵² And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.” ⁴⁴

3b. Psychology of denial

Denial of family or any person within the family, especially of parents, represents a denial of reality and expression of psychological instability. In many cases, defensive denial may be a salient type of maladaptive communication that erodes relationship stability over time and may lead to more caustic conflict-escalating behaviors.

Defensive denial observed in assumed loving and/or romantic relationships can be linked back to defensive denial observed in the family of origin where one family member feels estranged from the family or is told that the person is no longer a part of the family being tantamount to be divorced from the family for any number of reasons. These reasons include insensitivity to family tradition, lack of respect of roles within the family, setting out to be independent of the family and claims that the person divorcing or being divorced assumes that he or she has a higher calling and that the family is at best of secondary worth or in most cases of lesser value.

Scientific studies show from that for both men and women, defensive denial was mediated by conflict-escalating behaviors to cause greater relationship instability over time. There is additional evidence that the expressions of defensive denial in familial or romantic relationships may have been learned in the family of origin for women, but not for men.⁴⁵

Studies show where cultural chauvinism is the norm that men seek out a more robust (extended) family as if they are part of a nation or empire when men sense they were unwanted and the birth mother was denied an abortion by a senior figure: a husband, parent, or god. Scriptures of religion are distorted where the male is dominant (as with the writings ascribed to Paul) and those who eschew sexuality witheringly work to deny other people their rights in sexuality (as with the San Francisco archbishop Salvatore Joseph Cordileone who hides his alcoholism behind hateful rhetoric claiming to be following word of Jesus that do not exist).

When a pregnancy is forced on any female, psycho-social factor rise and the fetus and subsequent birth is accepted but not wanted and the child is treated harshly and negatively to the point of denial or absence of interest as might have been the case with the infant Jesus. When men forgo parenting because of a subconscious or even conscious realization of having not been wanted, or wanting to circumvent the pains of childhood by staking out a different adulthood and avocation. ⁴⁶

3c. Jesus loved little children

The passive Jesus whom I was introduced to as a small child was a kind, young, handsome, nonviolent man who loved children: ¹³ Then people brought little children to Jesus for him to place his hands on them⁴⁷ Most children, then and today, do not find this compassion or caring caresses that have no ulterior motives.⁴⁸ and pray for them.⁴⁹

This Jesus is repudiated by the writers who noted that the disciples rebuked the little children, and then were chastised in turn as an emphasis to the superiority of the leader over the followers: ¹⁴ Jesus said, “Let the little children and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” Even this line is challenged by another “similar” comment in another gospel: “But Jesus called the children to him and said, “Let the little children (actually, in the original it is βρεφη, infants) come to me, (in the original it is: “brought to me” since no infant has bipedal ability) and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. ¹⁷ Truly, I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” ⁵⁰ One part is forgotten: ¹⁵ When he had placed his hands on them,⁵¹ he went on from there.

4. Psychology of the Warrior Jesus and Violence

The warrior Jesus, acclaimed by the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) and evangelical extremists like Lt. Gen. William “Jerry Boykin” (Vice President of the American Family Association), see Jesus as teaching little children how to fire weapons. Christians, applauded by Boykin, in India and non-Christian nations, see Child Soldiers of Uganda and the Lord’s Resistance Army who worship Jesus to be saved in the sight of their god even if they kill their own parents first. identical to the Taliban and al Qaeda that kidnaps and indoctrinates children to be suicide bombers for Allah⁵² even though suicide is forbidden in the Qur’an:

“O ye who believe!… [do not] kill yourselves, for truly Allah has been to you Most Merciful.  If any do that in rancor and injustice, soon shall We cast him into the Fire…” ⁵³ as is any killing for the faith of Islam: The taking of life is allowed only by way of justice (i.e. the death penalty for murder), but even then, forgiveness is better.  “Nor take life – which Allah has made sacred – except for just cause…”⁵⁴

Today’s most Muslims have as little knowledge about the Qur’an, although Muslim schools do teach it as a literal work rather than a text of faith⁵⁵ as most Christian are basically ignorant of the Bible and believe it to be history and fact.⁵⁶

4a. Jesus hated little children

While some of the men known as Jesus were concerned with children, and other men known as Jesus wanted mountains to fall on little children, matching the wrathful god of Noah who called for the mass drowning of the unborn, infants, little children and their families. Joshua and Gideon slaughtered the children of numerous nations to appease their god’s appetite for blood. Jesus had his own agenda when it came to war and a Holocaust of the young.

The desire for the death of a child show acute mental illness in both Yahweh and Jesus’ psychology as it does in the actions of genocides from the Inquisitions throughout Christianity from Rome to Moscow and Constantinople. Children, like adults, were sacrificed to maintain what clergy thought was the “purity of the faith” that superseded compassion or understanding: children could be armed in times of war then and with Air Force Lt. Gen. William (Jerry) Boykin.

From animal infanticide, especially among lions where the lionesses will kill their cubs if the leader is overthrown, so to it was throughout the ancient world, especially in Mesopotamia and in Judea where stories of parents set to kill their young range from Abraham determined to slaughter his first born (Isaac or Ishmael) to Japheth actually killing his daughter for Yahweh’s pleasure.⁵⁷ What the Gospels do not directly give as the reason for Jesus’ rant reflecting his mental illness are the variables leading up to infanticide and the holocaust of the young. Those who advocate infanticide and those who practice it are manipulated by time (neonaticide or the killing of a child in the first 24 hours after birth vs. filicides is usually the result of a fear of losing love or adoration over time), depression (forced by realizing the worship and adoration is no longer forthcoming), age of the mass murderer: the younger, the more violent, suggesting that not only was Jesus young but so was the god(s) of Noah being recent inventions or recognitions, and the manner or violence of death (the greater the violence of the death the younger is the attacker who acts out: frustration with his own psychological and chronological age.⁵⁸ One aspect that should be considered when reviewing the rant by Jesus yelling at women to call on the mountain to kill their unborn and young is the cross-cultural issue of infanticide.

When a person feels that he or she (usually the woman in most societies, but found equally prevalent in impoverished communities such as ancient Judea, today’s Afghanistan and other Islamic nations where the father is seen as the ultimate authority) is outside of the primary group. Jesus was from or of Galilee but not a true (native-born) citizen of Jerusalem. This led to many early confrontations of country people (paganus: acquires its religious connotations by the mid-4th century. As early as the 5th century, paganus (a derivation from the original pagus: a country person without an education) was metaphorically used to denote persons outside the bounds of civilized society as recognized by contemporary religious and political leaders) and the established ruling class supported by the Levis of the Temple. It was a subconscious jealousy of those in a more affluent living situation frequently leads to thoughts and actions that exterminate those who have more or are perceived to be of a higher social standing. Changes in society and gender factors can cause the mentally unstable to make terrorist threats against those who are accustomed to the social environment.⁵⁹

There is no record that there was any person or creature Jesus loved or was concerned about, save for Lazarus, and when he disappeared the newest disciple John and, the elusive and never named “the Beloved”.  This is in keeping with the Old Testament that expressed repeated hatred for children and the desire that children are smashed against a wall,  as long as the child was not a promised messiah. As James Tabor has argued well, the “Beloved” was most likely his natural brother James who took over the rule of the institution that Jesus is alleged to have created after Jesus died. At the same time, there is no evidence that Jesus was concerned about or for the safety and health of lambs or any animal or bird, contrary to Sunday school pictures. Jesus and his following were Jews.

Jews eat lamb, sheep, goat, birds, and other living things as enjoined by their god. No religious leader in the first (or later) century cared about the earth, its environment or ecology. There was no charted, recorded or detailed interest in protecting any plant from overuse, misuse, or extinction because the ancient Jews believed that everything was for them and there was no need to conserve: “Then God⁶⁰ said, “I (sic: We) give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.”⁶¹ There any reason Jesus would have cared for all animals: ¹² It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. ¹³ Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”⁶² The earth was to be exploited, denuded, controlled and misused at will and whim,⁶³ a key to understanding “Paul” and early Christianity: there was no love for the planet.⁶⁴ Indifference to living conditions, animals, and other people shows a decided disregard for humanity and oneself. It makes the individual who is indifferent to situations and animals equally indifferent toward other people and to actions and inaction: there is little relationship between those that are and those that merely survive, leading to lack of concern for the welfare of the self and others. This catalyst enables those who are indifferent to be cavalier in their approach to danger, personal deprivation and exhaustion.⁶⁵ Jesus would have no quandary over what happens or would happen. The moment was important, not long range plans or actions.

4b. Jesus: Self-centered and arrogant

The New Testament presents contradictory statements by the various Jesus of the New Testament about what was the role and purpose of the family. Jesus, self-centered about his own ministry, did not recognize his own mother and siblings. The arrogant and egotistical Jesus barks: “who is my mother … who are my brothers and sisters”.⁶⁶ Elsewhere there is a portrait in words of Jesus being respectful and submissive to his parents: “Then he went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them.” ⁶⁷ Jesus could not have gone “down to Nazareth” as no Nazareth (נָצְרַת, Natz’rat) was cited before 221 CE by Sextus Julius Africanus, and there is no map or inscription before the eighth century CE.

Jesus’ arrogance and egocentric dealing with others stains his character and not only makes him human but also immature and dangerous. The issue of arrogance here is critical.

Arrogance is an excess of positive self-esteem that can be differentiated among individuals as being stable self-acceptance, while self-esteem without psychological inflation is unstable and externally-dependent on an individual’s self-esteem and quest for recognition by others as a form of egocentric self-valorization.⁶⁸ Jesus has an idealized self-image that is justified by religionists as being an indication of his divinity that betrays a pathological narcissism and affective intensity and variability, surmounting a healthy attitude of life for one of aggrandizement.[70 Emmons, Robert A. (1987, January). “Narcissism: Theory and measurement.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 52(1): 11-17.]

4c. Psychology of divinity

Divinity is more than self-adulation or self-love. Divinity is the power to create and maintain that which is created. This is not the man Jesus, for his naïve egotism works on patently absurd assumptions that he is living an ideal life that would have been the result of: (a) transfer of parents’ ideal self to ideals for their children, (b) children’s perception, and (c) acceptance of these parental ideals.⁶⁹ None of these transferences can be found in the existing scripture. On the contrary, it is more evident to be the opposite: the repression of any parental involvement in lieu of the son’s desire to raise himself up as being the instrument of some greater power: the state, a god, or a perceived calling, feeling no special treatment from his parents who merely listened to his rant that he had to be about his “father’s business”, transmogrifying the concept of worship and praise into a commercialized enterprise such as a church or Temple, to the exclusion of his own family obligations.⁷⁰ His disjointment with his own family shows that he had neither an ideal life not a human love for his family.

By the time of the recorded ministry of Jesus, when the man of Galilee was presumed to be approximately thirty years of age, Jesus actually believed that he was essentially mind and soul and only incidentally body and flesh. Caution was irrelevant and ignored. There is no hint of any desire to propagate. To protect his make-believe mind from the disillusioning knowledge of his true indelible nature, Jesus drew the veil of pretense discreetly over the coarser self of being a poor son of either an unwed mother or of parents who depend on the wages of a mere carpenter. The biblical texts, furthermore, revels obscurely in the delights of self-love and self-delusion, of self-proclaiming pretend nobility (being from the “Malkhut Beit David (מלכות בית דוד) — “Royal House of David” even though the first David in the Book of Kings, has David a shepherd and poor) and an affinity with the absurd as Jesus descent would have to be traced through Mary, not Joseph and that counters ancient patriarch law.

Jesus could not wholly hide from his deluded mind the truth about his animal nature: the need for nurturing of a family, the quest to be sought out and protected, and the reality of being fallible, but this does not sit with godhood or with the identity that later writers of the Gospels needed. They needed to prove immediately that Jesus was a god, not a human son, as depicted in the adoptionist theories found in the epistle of Paul.

As Jesus denied his family he exposed his own shame of being human. It is the emotion that stains the make-believe mind with a perturbing consciousness of the contradiction between pretense and reality. There is no reference to sex or to sexuality as if both were the vile vipers viciously interweaving between the words of the epileptic who had traveled to Damascus.

This is quite unlike the Old Testament Torah where god is a voyeur who watches men who defecate and instructs them on how to bury the feces when not watching men have nocturnal emissions (wet dreams), requiring them to go away from their homes or campus to cleanse the semen from their clothing and bodies before they can return to the company of their compatriots: “¹⁰ If one of your men is unclean because of a nocturnal emission, he is to go outside the camp and stay there. ¹¹ But as evening approaches he is to wash himself, and at sunset he may return to the camp.¹² Designate a place outside the camp where you can go to relieve yourself. ¹³ As part of your equipment have something to dig with, and when you relieve yourself, dig a hole and cover up your excrement.”⁷¹

Speaking sexually, shame is the most vital (and indispensable) element in the life of make-believe. Shame has become the toxic essence of civilized behavior: pretense.

Neither the mating of the sexes nor the enfoldment of love in marriage can be greatly realized unless the process of de-civilization has gone far enough to permit human nature and animal nature to lie down together in a bed of love and feel radiantly happy and at peace with one another. Jesus begins the degradation that is enhanced by the chauvinist crusader against the early chrestianos: Love is poisoned by shame, and Paul removes all sexuality from love and claim that love is “patience and kindness,” but not erotic nor natural—based on Jesus denying his own family and the sexuality that created it.⁷²

Love and marriage fail before the wings of a fleeing eroticism that is supplanted by masochistic surrendering to the whips of others. It is not marriage that is at the zenith but the period of self-denial prior to marriage. It is not what is today considered the “normal” channel of emotions spent in desperate blind lovemaking, in sexual wear and tear, in playing the melodramatic game of hide-and-seek, in a foolish frittering away of love’s sublimity in song, verse, and illustrations for all to see and blush in front of such honesty.

This is the beginning of what many move as modernism that knowledge is a better guide to happiness, if not always to virtue, than is ignorance and rapture with sexual fulfillment. It is the Charybdis of male arrogance: surrendering all human passion in exchange for the transience of love-in-marriage that tortures the current neurotic age.⁷³ The arrogant Jesus continued to haunt me.

5. Jesus and the naked male youth

According to the Gospel of Mark, Jesus walked out of The Garden late one night with a naked man following him. He who followed Jesus, the scripture is as clear as anything written by Dios Cassius, was a young naked man: “A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus. When they seized him, ⁵² he fled naked, leaving his garment behind.” ⁷⁴

The introduction of nudity in the Passion story, the subsequent Humiliation and Crowning with Thorns, symbolizing the rays of the sun god Apollo and of Mithras adored by Roman soldiers, harkens to the deaths of both Julius Cesar and Caligula. It also follows numerous African religions predating Judaism as well as accounts circling Mesopotamia and Egypt. This has  led some senior seasoned scholars to speculate that these emperors were either prototypes for or foundations of the Jesus legend in the New Testament: Seneca the Younger,⁷⁵, Suetonius, The Lives of Twelve Caesars, “Life of Caligula”⁷⁶; Josephus,⁷⁷

“St. Paul” says nothing about this incident. Yet what is ascribed to his alleged writing comes at least 100 years before any gospel and is hailed as a record of what happened in Judea. The account of the young naked male youth following Jesus out of the garden is found only in Mark. It is found nowhere else. That strains its credulity, especially since the young man is considered an “unknown friend”: συνηκολούθεια. This term is in keeping with the reality of numerous homosexuals who had lovers whom they ignored on streets when passing each other, did not invite to public meetings to be with them, and would disavow when entering politics or any ministry as with Bishop Eddie Long, Ted Haggard, or the long line of Roman Catholic, Russian and Greek Orthodox bishops and a growing gaggle of Protestant ministers.

Cambridge Bible scholars suggest that the young man came to help Jesus, but nothing is found to support this in the text that define the man as: a young member of a family where Jesus had eaten Passover.⁷⁸ Is this conjecture? The text is clear.

The issue of the “cloth”⁷⁹ is unique. It is costly, and most likely fashioned in India for the wealthy. Only a few could afford to buy and wear it.⁸⁰

Σινδόνα is applied to the fine linen similar to the fabric which Joseph of Arimathæa (an ancient town in Palestine, its location is not known: Matthew 27:5.) bought for the Body of Jesus. It is in discussion of that purpose that it is included in the Old Testament of the Septuagint⁸¹ referring to “fine under garments.”

Jesus followed by a young naked man holding an expensive piece of fabric, and Jesus said nothing! That terrified me. I had been taught by my pastors and parents that any nudity was a ticket straight to hell. It seemed that the youth was “overly concerned” but not as worried as not to flee when he was grabbed, tearing away from the hold and abandoning his “undergarments” (ἐπὶγυμνοῦ: being naked) in the hands of a palace guard.

My sister, always eager to pluck the mote from my eye while ignoring the beam in her own (Matthew 7:3-5), was the first to tell me that the naked youth was queer. I thought she meant “strange.”

Impatient, Mary Helen barked an article to preface her noun: a queer. She intoned, as any Lutheran pastor would remonstrate, that the naked youth was not only queer but the incarnation of the Devil.

A queer Devil was to entrap Jesus. Those who became⁸² queer,⁸³ would also be minions of the Devil: a fantastic frenzied fiend with a long hard red tail who was wrought to seduce any male he would approach! The account became increasingly erotic. Sadly, the gospels gave no further details–in the official canon.

5a. Psychology of vengeance

My sister always called me The Chaff. I was not worried. Jesus was a man of vengeance who would separate the chaff from the wheat.

I learned that Jesus was the Great and Unforgiving Judge who forbade aspersions and name calling: “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister ⁸⁴ will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’⁸⁵ is answerable to the court.⁸⁶ And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.”⁸⁷ I took small comfort in thinking that Mary Helen would find her own reward–later.

One New Testament Jesus is unforgiving and without mercy. Jesus is recorded as saying: “…whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness and is guilty of an eternal sin.”⁸⁸

The Holy Spirit is not unique to the Bible. It is a shadow that comes from ancient Egypt, with the god Osiris being the original Holy Spirit in the Middle East: “The holy book of the Egyptians about the great invisible Spirit, the Father whose name cannot be uttered, he who came forth from the heights of the perfection, the light of the light of the aeons of light, the light of the silence of the providence (and) the Father of the silence, the light of the word and the truth, the light of the incorruptions (sic), the infinite light, the radiance from the aeons of light of the unrevealable, unmarked, ageless, unproclaimable Father, the aeon of the aeons, Autogenes, self-begotten, self-producing, alien, the really true aeon.”⁸⁹ It is another shadow that covers a multitude of rabbis known as Jesus that peppers the New Testament. It acts as a medieval flying buttress for those who are psychopathic schizophrenics.

Unfortunately ignored, the issue of vengeance, or responding back to one who defamed or did not do as told, is childish but human. It has spanned time in various theologies where a petty god who could not control the actions of his or her people demanded vengeance:⁹⁰ a worldwide flood,⁹¹ the slaughter of babies in a foreign land, such as Egypt,⁹² a demand for foreskins as a symbol to set a chosen people apart (Moses’ declaration was not from any god but a repeat of existing practices among the Egyptians who were uncomfortable with flying sand settling under the foreskin of the penis—predating the Hebrew practice by thousands of years) but one of vengeance requiring submission,⁹³ the same as in the word Islam ⁹⁴

6. Jesus the psychopathic warrior

The most colorful and violent mass murder is the Jesus warrior. He will separate families,⁹⁵ and according to many twenty-first century mad men, will ride out of the clouds on a horse (identical with the return of Muhammad on the back of a horse named al-Buraq: البُراق‎ al-Burāq that translates as “lightning”).⁹⁶)

Jesus will being covered with human blood as he descends on a rainbow,  carrying a weapon, such as US Air Force Lt. General William (Jerry) Boykin, Family Research Council Executive Vice President. Boykin pounded that Jesus will carry an AK-47 assault rifle as Jesus would reject the AR-15⁹⁷, a popular belief throughout open-carry-weapons adoring Texas.

Today the most common Jesus, hailed by military leaders and personnel and the New Apostolic Reformation is Jesus the Warrior. Sometimes he was called Jesus Christ. Rarely, he was informally hailed by his Greek title: Χριστός (Cristos). A few zealots addressed Jesus indirectly as Warrior (לוחם) or War leader (מנהיגמלחמה). In the ancient Middle East the common name for a deliverer was Messiah (משיח).

Simon bar Jonas being the first to hail him as “the Christ”. ⁹⁸ Simon’s declaration is not found elsewhere in any gospel, not even Mark. There is no evidence anywhere in any gospel than Matthew and John–both written late and neither having textual evidence to show an early authorship–that their friend was universally considered a messiah.

Simon Peter’s response to the Christ’s question: “Who do you say that I am” was met with the resounding declaration, “You are the Messiah”. Such an utterance was a common exaltation for an approaching warrior that vibrated throughout the Near East.⁹⁹. Because of the power and control of the known world by Rome, and to honor its emperors, the second part of the adoration included the verbal ejaculation: “the Son of the living God”. ¹⁰⁰ It was a title that was bestowed on the gods Apollo, Mithras, Jesus and the inventor of Christianity: Emperor Constantine I.¹⁰¹

Trumpeting “you are the Christ” was a call to arms for a martial man to lead troops into battle. The Jews wanted a temporal Messiah who would overthrow Rome. Rome wanted a leader who would bring the entire world under its banner and religions. The Jews and Romans were an ideal couple to reach these lofty goals. Within each sphere of influence and power there was a constant, albeit minority thought of a real battle in the middle of the first century CE. It would be realized by later Christians persecuting Romans for gold, glory, and god. It would come in the carnage of emerging Christians’ pounding, plummeting, piercing iron through non-believers and fallen apostates.

This warrior Messiah became substance for early Christian fanaticism, with many early apologists for genocide and holocaust against non-Christians based on a spurious reading of Jesus cleansing the Temple: “On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple courts (actually: courtyards) and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, ¹⁶ and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts. ¹⁷ And as he taught them, he said, “Is it not written: ‘My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations’? But you have made it ‘a den of robbers.’”¹⁰² Verse 17a is from Isaiah 56:7, 17b and was lifted/plagiarized from Jeremiah 7:11. Verse 19 is questionable as to authenticity and origin as some early manuscripts read: came, Jesus rather than including the “disciples”.

In the popular reading of Jesus chasing out the money-changers, a key element has been forgotten. What has been forgotten is that this tale was based not on a man expelling money changers from the Temple itself, as no money changers would be allowed inside as there was insufficient space to accommodate them. It is a story of the early violence exerted by Jesus. Jesus was angry. His action in the courtyard of the Temple was a pushing back against the money lenders and chasing them outside of the inner courtyard to an outer courtyard where commercial activities were permitted.¹⁰³ It was the title of a war leader and enemy of the people Christ.¹⁰⁴

Written large in the epistles, the warrior Jesus, elevated and glorified by Saul of Tarsus, was quite different, in fact the exact opposite. This Jesus “Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes.”¹⁰⁵ Here the “Devil” is any temporal enemy, state, or religion who opposes the religion of Moses,¹⁰⁶ A religion man-made and man-controlled springing from ancient religions of Egypt and central Africa.

The warrior Jesus had little time for any parent or sibling.¹⁰⁷ There is a deliberate denial of Jesus having brothers that is clearly stated in the Book of Acts with the introduction of Saul as Paul of Tarsus;¹⁰⁸

It is possible that Jesus was being groomed for a position in the Temple and with the denial of reality there would generate a psychosis of individuality over the community goodwill. The issue of “The Temple” has many possibilities, from the time a child was seen either listening to rabbis (the most common thesis) or debating rabbis (the more aggressive modern interpretation) or being silent within the self with the body being the Temple, is under debate or each has a distinct contender for the man known as Jesus.¹⁰⁹ Much has been made over the alleged declaration that each Jesus made about being “about my Father’s business”—but with no rational or sense. In the Abrahamic world of religion God the Father was commonly known as “Father” as well as the title for a biological father.¹¹⁰ It had keen qualities that were sexual demanding reproductive skills, but this is not found in any message or record of actions of any Jesus of the Gospels. The distinction was not acute as the biological father was considered to represent the divine. Any children produced were considered to be “sons of god” as well as “sons of Adam.”¹¹¹

I learned more about this Jesus when the Department of Defense ordered me to report for a pre-induction physical at Fort Iowa. After reporting for military induction I met a third Jesus. He was an unabashed warrior who would ride ahead of his troops into battle.¹¹²

What would be a delight to the National Rifle Association and the gun aficionados who argue that their alleged second amendment rights surpass the rights of any child or adult killed by a gun is the injunction of Jesus supporting their lunacy. While there is no evidence that Jesus carried weapons, the duplicitous  Jesus demanded other, his followers regardless if they were disciples or apostles, buy weapons: “He said to them, ‘But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one’…”¹¹³ Jesus demanded allegiance. He wanted war according to John of Patmos: “She gave birth to a son, a male child, who ‘will rule all the nations with an iron scepter’.” ¹¹⁴ The problem with this verse is that it is plagiarized from Psalm 2:9a: “You will break them with a rod of iron” that can also be translated as: “will rule them with an iron scepter” ¹¹⁵ This is what the evangelical plutocrats hunger for: a crowned king followed by a protracted and bloody war.

6a. Psychology of war

War provides an important and timely context for studying guilt as war imposes guilt on the soldier, the soldiers family and community, and on those who do not march into battle. Guilt leads to surrender of the self, of one’s assets, dignity and even personality as the individual soldier becomes but a small part of the war machine, so essential in obtaining total mind and body control over those who make up its number.

Those who rebel against total surrender to a war leader frequently are bullying into committing suicide, others strikeout and kill co-combatants. In either case the Lord of Hosts, the King, or the War Leader takes on an aura of superiority and anointment.¹¹⁶ The religious war leader is even more blood lusting and psychotic than the god of ancient Israel who killed 70,000 of his chosen people over one-half a shekel he believed that King David had cheated him out of by taking a census.¹¹⁷ Those who support war are men who feel that their manhood is threatened. Under this threat, war supporters react with a variety of compensatory behaviors and cognitions: including aggression, retaliation and retaliatory proclamations and denunciations,  support for sacrosanct hierarchies that cannot be questioned, low tolerance for homosexuality, and support for war by lies about causes, antecedents and raison d’être. Religious war-hawks seldom have a clear understanding of the needs of the moment and center all political activity around themselves.¹¹⁸ Because of external forces perceived as threats, when Christianity was established by the Emperor Constantine, early communicants began to attack none-believers. This escalated under Theodosius who allowed Christian to persecute perceived enemies more viciously than any Roman gladiator, and keep the objects taken from homes of pagan.¹¹⁹

I returned to the warrior Jesus, who it was promised, would winnow the chaff from the wheat: “His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”¹²⁰ It was bad science as fire quenches itself when all combustibles are used up: hydrogen, oxygen, and so forth, but he would protect me as fine grain.

6b. Psychology of Jesus and zombie friends

The story of Jesus and the zombies is probably the best known fabel in the New Testament. The zombies, however, do not appear frequently. Zombies travel to Jerusalem only after Jesus speaks his last words: אלהי אלהי למא שבקתני (ēlâhî ēlâhî lamâ šabaqtanî) after which begins:“At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split ⁵² and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. ⁵³ They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.”¹²¹

Zombies also are a part of the chronicle of Lazarus. Lazarus became a zombie when Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead: “³⁸ Jesus, once more deeply moved, came to the tomb. It was a cave with a stone laid across the entrance. ³⁹ “Take away the stone,” he said. “But, Lord,” said Martha, the sister of the dead man, “by this time there is a bad odor, for he has been there four days.” ⁴⁰ Then Jesus said, “Did I not tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?” ⁴¹ So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. ⁴² I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me.” ⁴³ When he had said this, Jesus called in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!” ⁴⁴ The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face. Jesus said to them, “Take off the grave clothes and let him go”.¹²²

The tale of Lazarus is much like the zombie daughter of Jairus in the New Testament: “³⁵ While Jesus was still speaking, some people came from the house of Jairus, the leader of the synagogue. “Your daughter is dead,” they said. “Why bother the teacher anymore?” ³⁶ Overhearing what they said, Jesus told him, “Don’t be afraid; just believe.” ³⁷ He did not let anyone follow him except Peter, James and John the brother of James. ³⁸ When they came to the home of the synagogue leader, Jesus saw a commotion, with people crying and wailing loudly. ³⁹ He went in and said to them, “Why all this commotion and wailing? The child is not dead but asleep.” ⁴⁰ But they laughed at him. After he put them all out, he took the child’s father and mother and the disciples who were with him, and went in where the child was. ⁴¹ He took her by the hand and said to her, “Talitha koum!” (which means “Little girl, I say to you, get up!” It is an uncommon feminine Aramaic expression that in Greek is Ταλιθα κουμ and in Arabia in the name of القفزة الثالث stars) ⁴² Immediately the girl stood up and began to walk around (she was twelve years old). At this they were completely astonished.”¹²³. Lazarus does return as John the Beloved, within sentences of the official account (it is not substantiated by any Roman or other record): the Gospels.

For aeons, people in various lands and cultures have believed in the “living dead.” Today, zombie like action is seen as one of the many attributes of Parkinson Disease, while clinical and research evidence suggests that the schizophrenic syndrome consists of many etiologic, pathogenic, and clinical subgroups, and is accelerated with overuse of prescribed drugs.¹²⁴ Some psychologists have argued that zombies typify disgust with an era or person,¹²⁵ especially the fear of predators and apocalyptic ends to what is known.¹²⁶

Zombies have a quest for intelligence but are relegated by powerful forces: political and religious, to be deprived of any individual judgment unless the league together and march to advance the goals of a war lord, king or pharaoh or other leader.¹²⁷ To elevate status in the ancient world, it was common for warlords, messiahs, and similar people to employ zombies, or at least the tale of zombies awakening when the leader has found righteousness in his cause (there were no women) and has the zombies march on the non-believing temple or its followers. This makes the Jesus of the Zombies of Jerusalem the only true leader of a revolution and an actual son of a god as understood in religions of Africa and Mesopotamia that are far older than Judaism.

7. Bibliography

Primary documents

Eusebius (4^th century CE). Vita Constantini.

Jerome, Liber De viris inlustribus: Gennadius liber De viris inlustribus. Leipzig, Deutschland: J. C. Hinrichs, 1896.

Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews.

Seneca the Younger, On Firmness.

Suetonius, The Lives of Twelve Caesars, “Life of Caligula”.

Books & Articles – Apologetics, Hermeneutics, etc.

al-Alawi al-Maliki, Muhammad (1414/1993). al-Anwar al Bahiyya min Isra wa l-Mi’raj Khayr al-Bariyyah. (Mecca, Saudi Arabia: s.n., 1414/1993.

Anderson, Paul N. (2006). The Fourth Gospel And the Quest for Jesus: Modern Foundations Reconsidered. London, UK & New York, NY, USA: T & T Clark.

Boswell, John Eastburn (1984). “Exposition and oblation: the abandonment of children and the ancient and medieval family”. American Historical Review 89 (1): 10–33.

Bowersock, Glenn Warren; Brown, Peter Robert Lamont & Grabar, Oleg eds. (1999), Late Antiquity: a guide to the postclassical world, Cambridge, MA, USA; London, England: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Campbell, Joseph (1991). Masks of God: Creative Mythology. New York, NY, USA: Arkana, 4.23.

Deschner, Karlheinz (1980). Abermals krähte der Hahn: eine kritische Kirchesgeschicte von den Evangelisten bis zu den Faschisten. Dusseldorf, Stuttgart etc., Deutschland, 1980: Econ Verlag.

Deschner, Karlheinz (1987).Opus Diaboli : fünfzehn unversöhnliche Essays über die Arbeit im Weinberg des Herrn. Reinbek bei Hamburg, Deutschland: Rowohlt. 1987.

Dockery, David S. (2011). Holman Concise Bible Commentary. Nashville, TN, USA: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Fisher, George Park (1890). Essays on the Supernatural origin of Christianity: with special reference to the theories of Renan, Strauss, and the Tübingen school. New York, NY, USA: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Freud, Sigmund (rpt 1982). Bildende Kunst und Literatur. Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag.

Freud, Sigmund (1917). Das Unheimliche. Leipzig, Deutschland: s.n..

Freud, Sigmund (1939). Der MannMoses und die monotheisticsche Religion: drei Abhandlungen. New York, NY, USA: Longmans, Green.

Freud, Sigmund (1924). Psychoanalytische studien an werken der dichtung und kunst. Leipzig, etc., Deutschland: Internationaler Psychoanalytischer Verlang.

Freud, Sigmund (1935). Gesammelte Werke : chronologisch geordnet. 4. Vierter Band, Zur Psychopathologie des Alltagsleben. Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland : S. Fischer Verlag.

Freud, Sigmund (1969, 1987 reprint). Schriften zur Kunst und Literatur. Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland: Fischer Tashenbuch.

Goshen-Gottstein, Alon (2001, Spring). “God the Father in Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity: Transformed Background or Common Ground?” for The Elijah Interfaith Institute, first published in Journal of Ecumenical Studies. 38:4.

Ide, Arthur Frederick (1992; intro. Decherd Turner). Moses: the Making of Myth and Law. Las Colinas, TX, USA: Monument Press.

Kirk, Robert (2006). Zombies and Consciousness. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Miller, John W. (1999). Calling God “Father”: Essays on the Bible, fatherhood, and culture. New York, NY, USA: Paulist Press.

Moss, Candida R. (2013). The myth of persecution: how early Christians invented a Story of Martyrdom. New York, NY, USA: HarperOne.

Najovits, Simson R. (2003-2004). Egypt, Trunk of the Tree, New York, NY, USA: Algora. Vol. 2, 2004.

Renan, Joseph Ernest (1883-1893).   Histoire des origines du christianisme. Paris, France: Calmann Lévy, 1883-1893, Vol. 1: Vie de Jésus (1863).

Renan, Ernest, Schenkel, Daniel & Strauss, David Friedreich (1864). Die Palingenesie des Christenthums, nicht des Buchstabens, sondern des Geistes … in besonderer Beziehung auf die neuesten Angriffe gegen das Christenthum von Seiten David Strauss, Renan und Schenkel, etc. Regensburg, Bavaria, Deutschland: n.p.

Riches, John (2000). The Bible: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Robinson, James (1999). Gospel of the Egyptians. Nag Hammadi Library. San Francisco, CA, USA: HarperCollins.

Schmidt, James, Lieutenant Colonel. (2012). Victory rests with the Lord: God in the Vietnam War. Bloomington, IN, USA: West Bow Press.

Schröder-Kappus, Elisabeth, Wagner, Wolfgang (1998). Michael Sattler. Ein Märtyrer in Rottenburg (1490-1527). Tübingen, TVT Media.

Strauss, David Friedrich (1837). Streitschriften zur Vertheidigung meiner Schrift über das Leben Jesu und zur Charakteristik der gegenwartigen Theologie. Tübingen, Deutschland: C.F. Osiander.

Tabor, James, D. (2012). Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle transformed Christianity. New York, NY, USA: Simon & Schuster.

Thompson, Thomas L. (2005). The Messiah Myth: the Near Eastern roots of Jesus and David. New York, NY, USA: Basic Books.

Wilken, Robert Louis (1984). The Christians as the Romans saw them. New Haven, CT, USA: Yale University Press.

Wollschläger, Hans (1973). Die bewaffneten Wallfahrten gen Jerusalem, Zürich, Switzerland, n.p.) 1973.

Zwetsloot, Hugo (1954). Friedrich Spee und die Hexenprozesse: die Stellung und Bedeutung der Cautio criminalis in der Geschichte der Hexenverfolgrungen. Trier: Paulinus-Verlag.

Monographs and book reviews

Jenkins, Claude (1955, April) The English Historical Review. Vol. 17 no. 275: 328.

Mandrou, Robert (1955, January) Revue Historique. Vol. 214, No. 2: 335-336.

Undreiner, George J. (1955, July) in The Catholic Historical Review. Vol. 14 no. 2: 159-160.

Thesis and Dissertation

Jackson, David (1986). “Jesus warrior in the temple? A study investigating differing interpretations of Jesus (with special focus on the Temple cleansing) and his relationship with the Zealots and violence.” Unpublished thesis (MA) Catholic Theological Union; Portland, OR, USA: Theological Research Exchange Network.

Pailler, Jean-Marie (1984). Bacchanalia, la repression de 186 AV. J.-C. a Rome et en Italie: vestiges, images, tradition. Dissertation: Univ. de Paris IV – Sorbonne – Paris 1984. Published: Rome, Italy, École Française (u.a.).

Psychological Studies—Books and articles

Babor, Thomas F. (1994, December). “Avoiding the horrid and beastly sin of drunkenness: Does dissuasion make a difference?” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 62(6), Dec 1994, 1127-1140. Special Section: The Nature and Treatment of Alcoholism.

Bellak, Leopold (1977), “A drug-free week after admission.” Schizophrenia Bulletin, Vol. 3(3): 342-344, with an erratum at Bellak, Leopold (1977). “A drug-free week after admission”: Erratum. Schizophrenia Bulletin, Vol. 3(4): 526.

Boice, Robert (1981, May). “Captivity and feralization.” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 89(3): 407-421.

Brodbeck, Jeannette; Bachmann, Monica S.; Croudace, Tim J.; Brown, Anna (2013, September). “Comparing growth trajectories of risk behaviors from late adolescence through young adulthood: An accelerated design.” Developmental Psychology, Vol. 49(9): 1732-1738.

Brorson, J.R. & Brewer, K (1988, June). “St Paul and temporal lobe epilepsy”. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. Vol. 51(6): 886-887.

Burris, Jessica L.; Sauer, Shannon E.; Carlson, Charles R. (2011, August). “A test of religious commitment and spiritual transcendence as independent predictors of underage alcohol use and alcohol-related problems.” Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, Vol. 3(3): 231-240.

David, Henry P. (2011, April). “Born unwanted: Mental health costs and consequences.” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 81(2): 184-192.

Dobson, Velma & Sales, Bruce D. (2000, December). “The science of infanticide and mental illness.” Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol. 6(4): 1098-1112.

Ekman, Paul & Keltner, Dacher. (1997). “Universal-Facial-Expressions-Of-Emotion”. In Segerstråle, Ullica Christina Olofsdotter. & Molnár, P. (Eds.) Nonverbal communication: Where nature meets culture. Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 27-46.

Emmons, Robert A. (1987, January). “Narcissism: Theory and measurement.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 52(1): 11-17.

Finkel, Norman J.; Burke, John E.& Chavez, Leticia J. (2000, December). “Commonsense judgments of infanticide: Murder, manslaughter, madness, or miscellaneous?” Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol. 6(4): 1113-1137.

Geher, Glenn (2014). Evolutionary Psychology 101. New York, NY, USA: Springer Publishing Company.

Gerber-Münch, Irene & Jung, Carl Gustav; Stiftung für Jung’sche Psychologie. Goethes Faust : eine tiefenpsychologische Studie über den Mythos des modernen Menschen. Küsnacht, Switzerland: Verlag Stiftung für Jung’sche Psychologie, cop. 1997.

Jung, Carl Gustav. Über die Beziehungen der analytischen Psychologie zum dicterischen Kunstwerk.(Zürich, Switzerland, 1922).

Kunst, Jennifer L.& Reed, Michele (1999, May). “Cross-cultural issues in infanticide: A case study.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, Vol. 5(2): 147-155.

Landsborough, D (1987, June). “St Paul and temporal lobe epilepsy.” Journal of  Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry Vol. 50(6): 659–664. 

Lannin, Daniel G.; Bittner, Karen E.; Lorenz, Frederick O. (2013, December) “Longitudinal effect of defensive denial on relationship instability.” Journal of Family Psychology, Vol. 27(6), Dec 2013, 968-977.

Malatesta, Victor J.; Sutker, Patricia B.; Treiber, Frank A. (1981, April). “Sensation seeking and chronic public drunkenness.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 49(2): 292-294.

Parker, Sharon K. & Griffin, Mark A. (2002). “What is so bad about a little name-calling? Negative consequences of gender harassment for overperformance demands and distress.” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 7(3), July: 195-210.

Reeve, George H. (1942, October). “Psychological factors in obesity.” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 12(4): 674-678.

Roback, A. A. (1944). A dictionary of international slurs. Oxford, England: Sci-Art Publishers.

Scheff, Thomas J. (1970). “Schizophrenia as ideology.” Schizophrenia Bulletin, Vol. 1(2): 15-19.

Schmalhausen, Samuel D. (1928). “Problems of the sexes.” In Schmalhausen, Samuel D. (1928). Why we misbehave, (pp. 126-157). Garden City, NY, USA: Garden City Publishing, 313 pp.

Schütz, Astrid (2000). Psychologie des Selbstwertgefühls: von Selbstakzeptanz bis Arroganz. Stuttgart Deutschland: Kohlhammer.

Sherman, Nancy (2014, April), “Recovering lost goodness: Shame, guilt, and self-empathy.” Psychoanalytic Psychology, Vol. 31(2): 217-235.

Slattery, W. Michael (2007). Jesus the warrior? Historical Christian perspectives & problems on the morality of war & the waging of peace. Milwaukee, WI, USA: Marquette University Press.

Sournia, Jean-Charles (1986). Histoire de l’alcolisme. (Paris, France): Flammarion.

Steele, Claude M. (1975). “Name-calling and compliance.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 31(2), February: 361-369.

Staub, Ervin (2013, October). “Building a peaceful society: Origins, prevention, and reconciliation after genocide and other group violence.” American Psychologist, Vol. 68(7): 576-589.

Williamson, Laila (1978). “Infanticide: an anthropological analysis”. In Kohl, Marvin. Infanticide and the Value of Life. New York, NY, USA: Prometheus Books. pp. 61–75.

Winegard, Bo M.; Winegard, Ben & Geary, David C. (2014, March) “Eastwood’s brawn and Einstein’s brain: An evolutionary account of dominance, prestige, and precarious manhood.” Review of General Psychology, Vol. 18(1): 34-48.

Zentner, Marcel & Renaud, Olivier (2007, March) “Origins of adolescents’ ideal self: An intergenerational perspective.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 92(3): 557-574.

Web links

Armageddon

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/jesus-return-earth-ar-15-assault-rifle-article-1.1620805

http://thedailyblogreport.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/gen-jerry-boykin-jesus-will-return-to-earth-with-an-ar-15-rifle-and-wants-you-to-carry-one-too/

http://cretoniatimes.com/2014/02/20/jesus-discards-ar-15-in-favor-of-ak-47/.

Bigotry and racism

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/17/1307537/-Heritage-Foundation-taunts-Muslim-woman?detail=email.

Religion

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-glyn-williams/the-brides-of-allah-the-t_b_4761027.html.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/hobby-lobby-president-proposes-public-school-bible-course-109321/

Religion and health

http://www.intactamerica.org/news

http://www.biomedsearch.com/article/Unhygienic-male-circumcision-procedures-HIV/204611514.html.

Sexuality

American Academy of Pediatrics: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/113/6/1827.abstract and “Sexual Orientation and Adolescence at Pediatrics Vol. 113 No. 6 June 1, 2004
pp. 1827 -1832.

American Medical Association: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/about-ama/our-people/member-groups-sections/glbt-advisory-committee/ama-policy-regarding-sexual-orientation.page.

American Psychiatric Association: http://clgs.org/official-statement-concerning-homosexuality-american-psychiatric-associatio.

American Psychological Association: http://www.clgs.org/official-statement-concerning-homosexuality-american-psychological-associat.

Perry, Rick (2014). http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/texas-gop-advances-reparative-therapy-for-gays/2014/06/06/7da10262-ed3b-11e3-8a8a-e17c08f80871_story.html

Perry, Rick (2014). http://time.com/2863620/rick-perry-homosexuality-alcoholism-2/

Psychological Association of the Philippines: www.interaksyon.com.

Rape as god’s punishment for the victim’s sin: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/06/19/3450750/rape-victims-bob-jones/?elq=~~eloqua..type–emailfield..syntax–recipientid~~&elqCampaignId=~~eloqua..type–campaign..campaignid–0..fieldname–id~~.

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/america-tonight-blog/2013/11/5/addressing-sexualassaultonafundamentalistchristiancampus.html.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will-college-become-the-victims-of-progressivism/2014/06/06/e90e73b4-eb50-11e3-9f5c-9075d5508f0a_story.html.

Science and politics

Perry, Rick (2011). http://onlyinamericablogging.blogspot.com/2011/10/scientists-to-rick-perry-not-in-my-name.html

Perry, Rick (2014). http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2014/05/scott-in-oakland-park-im-not-a-scientist.html.

Scott, Rick (2014). http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/floridas-rick-scott-im-not-scientist.

Video: bible interpretation

Murder of witches: http://forum.bible-discussion.com/showthread.php?31162-Christians-Killing-Children-for-being-witches

8. End Notes