High Stakes

by Erin McCarthy

  First of all, the actions of Christ in his life would indicate emphatically that he had to have had some sort of communication with God. Francine says that he was clairaudient and was able to hear and speak with God directly and that God first contacted him when he was four years old. (Now, skeptics out there might say something to the effect that here we go again, and if Christ heard a voice he was probably schizophrenic). It is interesting that scholars and theologians have no problem with the seemingly endless parade of prophets who bring the word of God throughout the Old Testament. These prophets are even quoted extensively in New Testament gospels like Matthew. Do we question how these prophets got their information from God? No, we do not; we just accept these prophets as part of history and assume their information came from God.

  Just what constitutes a prophet? A prophet is a person who foretells future events or gives messages from a divinity. In modern-day terminology, he or she would be a clairvoyant, a psychic, a medium or clairaudient. Soothsayers, seers and oracles would all come under the definition of being prophets because they foretold future events. Religious figures such as Buddha or Muhammad would also be called prophets, for they brought messages from a higher power or divinity.

  To call Jesus Christ a prophet would not be wrong, for he foretold future events such as his Passion; but in reality, he was more of a psychic and teacher. He healed many with his psychic abilities of healing by the laying on of hands, and his miracles of healing are told in many places of the New Testament. We also know that he was clairaudient, not only by his actions, but we also know of his conversation with God in the garden of Gethsemane, in which he asked God to lift the burden of his Passion. God must have replied because Christ said, “Thy will be done.” So far we have Christ manifesting at least three different psychic abilities—clairvoyance (foreseeing the future), healing and clairaudience (hearing God).

  We also hear of Christ walking on water, calming the sea in a storm, making a few fishes and pieces of bread into many, congregating fish for nets, making wine from water, raising the dead, and a multitude of other miracles. There are certainly some physical psychic abilities working here, where he can evidently manipulate the physical attributes of nature and the molecular structure of matter.

  If, as the Bible says, these miracles attributed to Jesus took place, then we have a being who not only manifested psychic abilities like no other in history, but one who would seem to be empowered by our divine Creator to help him in his mission. The only problem that we seem to have doesn’t come from Jesus, but from the works and manipulations of man, because as we have already asked—can we trust the accounts of the Bible?

  I find it somewhat ironic that the very people (early Christians) who want the world to believe in the divinity of Christ are also the ones who threaten that divinity more than anyone else with their editing, manipulation and omissions of New Testament scripture that raise doubts as to its authenticity and truth. This is then compounded with a Church that has perhaps one of the most bloody and corrupt histories known to man in its search and implementation for power and control. I know I have said this several times, but if Christ came down to earth in this day and age, I don’t believe he would want to call himself a Christian. It is a sad commentary for our wonderful Messiah.

  Christ and his small entourage joined a trade caravan and set off first for the area we know as Turkey today. As an aside, when I visited Turkey I found that the Turkish people will fight you if you deny Jesus’ trip to Ankara, where he eventually passed through again later on in life. I found Ankara to be a very holy place, more holy than most churches I’ve been to because Jesus had been there. The Turkish Christians also fully believe in the Anatola (the Mother God), and even their rugs show her in symbolism with her hands on her hips.

  Jesus studied in Turkey at Byzantium (later known as Constantinople and today as Istanbul), its capital city. This was a meeting place of scholars, merchants, artisans and theologians, and this is where he was first introduced to various beliefs in Gnosticism. As he preached, Christ was a seeker of knowledge and wisdom and he avidly learned as many philosophies as possible from his travels. Francine says he stayed in a type of villa, using money from the family coffers. The picture of a poor, beggarly man—dusty and dirty—is just not factual. He wore fine garments and traveled with well-kept family and assistants. He ate at the best tables and studied with Persian and Arab scholars. He had a photographic mind and assimilated everything. While in Byzantium he became friends with a scribe who took down his thoughts and musings.

  Francine says that Jesus stayed in Byzantium only a few months, but even then he seemed to gather crowds of people around him. You must realize that in Eastern countries they are used to holy people or prophets who come and go, especially if they are on their own journey or mission. Many fakirs (holy men) even today travel in India by delivering wisdom and then go on to village after village living off alms given them. Jesus attracted people because of his charisma and innate wisdom and even though he was still very young, he always seemed to make an impression on those around him.

  His search for knowledge, combined with the exuberance of youth, spurred him onward toward the Far East. Francine says he left Byzantine and traveled eastward through the Anatolia region of Turkey, where he assimilated philosophy about the Mother God and then continued onward southeast into what was then known as Mesopotamia (Iraq) and the city of Babylon. From Babylon he went into what was then known as Persia (Iran) and eastward through Afghanistan into ancient India. Having money, he secured passages on trade caravans for protection and the best routes to India.

  Francine says he stayed in India for close to ten years, studying under the Brahmans of the Hindu religion and also under Buddhist priests. While in India, he traveled to the areas of Kashmir and Tibet, seeking the highest teachers and masters possible for his studies. After some years, he sent his brothers back home to Israel with messages for his parents that he would be studying for an extended period of time. They put up a great resistance because James, who was very close to him and a sensitive in his own right, knew with all certainty that Christ’s road would be fraught with pain and suffering and skepticism. Jesus more or less convinced them that they had to go back because his mission had to be done and was written in the scriptures, and also convinced them that they were needed at home and could help him more there by taking care of the family. So James and John and their servants went back to Israel, knowing that Jesus was staying on to study and prepare for what he had to do.

  Francine says that while James was with Jesus, he did take notes and did to a certain degree document their travels with a journal or diary. She also says that sometime in the not too distant future, some or all of these writings will be discovered by archaeologists, much as the National Geographic Society recently found the Gospel of Judas.

  Francine says Jesus was attracted to these Eastern philosophies because of their simple wisdoms and teachings of peace and that his brothers were more inclined to be skeptical because they had been ingrained with the ideas of Jewish rebellion against the Romans. As history tells us, later on these differences were made apparent when James and John became members of the Jewish Christians and James became their head, but we will get into that later in the book.

  While in India and the surrounding areas, Christ again started attracting followers. According to Francine, he had several disciples while in India and crowds would gather to listen to this young but seemingly wise man from Israel. It is also at this time that Jesus became much more ascetic in his way of life to concentrate on his studies. He mingled with the poor and even did some healings.

  Unlike the Bible that states Jesus’ first miracle was at the wedding feast of Cana (when he turned water into wine), Francine says his first miracle was when he healed a boy of leprosy in the area of what is now known as Calcutta in India. This was not a startling revelation to a country both then and now used to seeing a prophet or holy man able to levitate, heal and give spiritu
al knowledge. Many of the holy men in India had done such acts. Francine says he was directed by God to do this, as it was a sort of baptism by fire for what was to come.

  As he studied and learned, his old Judaic teachings of a vengeful and fearful God changed to that of a loving and compassionate God. Although the more passive religions of Hinduism and Buddhism attracted him, Jesus could not reconcile his total belief in one true God with all of their teachings. He did embrace the philosophy of reincarnation and also the many loving concepts of both religions. He also learned to communicate on the level of his audience…giving stories and parables to get his message across to the poor and illiterate, rather than preaching dogma that they could not understand. This wisdom was to serve him for the rest of his days.

  For those of you who think this is pure fantasy, I have a big surprise in store for you. There are dozens of texts from Eastern scholars that indicate that Christ was indeed in India and the surrounding areas at that time. He was called by many names by different cultures of people—“Issa,” “Isa,” “Yuz Asaf,” “Budasaf,” “Yuz Asaph,” “San Issa” and “Yesu.” Many of these texts point out that he was a prophet or holy man from another land and some even point out that he was from Israel.

  In Kashmir, in the city of Srinagar, are two separate fascinating monuments. First, there is the Roza Bal (or Razabal), which is purported to be the tomb of Jesus Christ. According to the beliefs of those in the area, Christ came to this area after his survival of the crucifixion and lived to be 120 years of age and was then buried in this tomb. Also, on a large hill of the city called the Takhat Sulaiman (Throne of Solomon), there is a monument that has four inscriptions, two of which are still legible. The inscriptions were recorded, however, and read as follows:

  The mason of this pillar is Bihishti Zargar. Year fifty and four.

  Khwaja Rukun son of Murjan erected this pillar.

  At this time Yuz Asaf proclaimed his prophethood. Year fifty and four.

  He is Jesus, Prophet of the Children of Israel.

  Now, these monuments are very perplexing to Christians. They logically relate to Christ coming back to this area after his survival of the crucifixion. Therein lies the problem, because the Christian faith believes Christ died on the cross. One of the monuments is even supposed to be his tomb! (Francine says that the tomb doesn’t contain his body, because he actually died in France, but the people of the area so venerated him that they put up a symbolic tomb). Here we have two monuments in the obscure area of Kashmir that say categorically that Christ not only survived the crucifixion, but also came to this area after that event and lived. Both of these monuments are very ancient and date to the time of Christ, but are we to readily surmise that they are some elaborate hoax? What in God’s name would be the point of creating such an ornate fake when it is believed that Christ wasn’t even known outside of Israel yet? It was not for several hundred years after his supposed death that Christianity would even become a popular religion. Christian scholars cannot give a reasonable explanation for these monuments, while scholars who believe he did go to India say they are part of their proof that he did, and still other scholars who believed he survived the crucifixion also say this is proof of his survival.

  Although the evidence seems to be substantial, it is not the only evidence that is out there concerning Jesus’ travels. There are many Eastern texts that mention him and his works in the Far East. It is also interesting to note that one of the largest religions in the world, Islam, venerates Christ as a prophet and messenger from God. Muslims believe he survived the crucifixion and did not die on the cross. I certainly cannot relate all the sources here, for they are too many, but if you would like to read more about this time in Christ’s life, you can start by reading the following books: The Jesus Mystery by Janet Brock; Jesus Lived in India by Holger Kersten; The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ by Nicholas Notovich; and A Search for the Historical Jesus by Dr. Fida Hassnain.

  Let’s be logical about this. Why would these Far Eastern texts reference Jesus and praise and talk about this wonderful prophet and teacher from Israel and the Holy Land if they had never seen him? Why would they make up a fictional character like this? The religion of Islam was not in existence yet, so there was no agenda to promote it or to try to downplay the divinity of Christ. The faith of Christianity was just starting and didn’t have any scope or influence whatsoever at that time; and Hinduism and Buddhism were pacifistic religions confined to the Far East. Pure logic just dictates that there was no hoax or fiction and that these writings were true.

  These ancient texts of the Far East haven’t been ignored by scholars, but they have been suppressed and/or ignored by many Christian scholars and the Church. Why, you might ask? To perpetuate the dogma that the Catholic Church and other Christian churches have put out for centuries. Can you imagine how the truth about Christ’s surviving the crucifixion and not ascending into heaven but living on in other countries would rock Christianity? The Christian world would be devastated, not because it in any way affects the divinity of Christ, but because their Church had covered up the truth.

  Just as the Church has suppressed its influence on the makeup of the New Testament, so it seems to extend to the life of Christ and how he lived and died. As we progress through Christ’s life, you will see the glaring holes of untruth about him, perpetuated by the Church, surfacing time and time again. Much of this can be blamed on Paul, the self-proclaimed apostle, and the Church adopting “Pauline Christianity.” Although Paul never met Christ and was never an eyewitness to any portion of his life, we have Paul “interpreting” what Christ meant and how he lived his life. It is Paul who says Christ ascended into heaven (backed up by Church editing of gospels), and it is Paul who brings forth the whole concept of atonement (dying for our sins). Christ said nothing about atonement, but Paul put it forth to the masses as his own interpretation and it has become a weapon for guilt ever since. In my humble opinion, the Catholic Church’s biggest error was in following Paul’s lead. Big mistake.

  Another aspect of the character of Jesus, according to my guide, Francine, is the fact that he was basically a loner at this time in his life. Even though he loved his mother, through his parables he talks more of the father figure. Jesus was ever the prodigal son because of his devotion to God the Father. Loving his Father in heaven at the age of fourteen or fifteen probably was the very thing that set him on his journey. Some authors feel that Jesus, who was the eldest child, abandoned his mother so he could travel after his father, Joseph, died. I don’t feel this is true. Mary apparently had enough money and the other brothers carried on the work. He wouldn’t have been much of a spiritual messiah if he left his mother a destitute widow.

  Through his parables he shows that he did have sympathy for the poor widow. He even speaks of a mother who lost a silver coin and lit a lamp and swept all night until she found it. Some theologians feel this was his guilt coming out for having left his mother. I don’t see it this way, not only because he gives examples of poverty, widowhood, how to trust your servants, etc., in his teachings, but also that he was just giving a view on the poverty that did exist at the time. The father figure psychologically plays out favorably by Jesus feeling more comfortable being surrounded by men. But that could also be because women did not have the status of men at that time. Even though Christ is known to have given women a more equal status with men, if you look closely most of the healings in the Bible attributed to him were of men. Now, in no way do I want to portray Jesus as a misogynist who was disrespectful of women, but custom in those times dictated that women were not treated as equals to men. He was raised in a culture of unequal status between male and female, but he defended them and softened toward women as he got older.

  I think this traveling period of aloneness was filled with anguish and sometimes despair. I have always believed—call it intuition or my psychic ability—that he knew what was in store for him later on in his life. To know that he was the Messiah or the chosen one
would have been frightening to anyone. This time of traveling and learning in other countries was really a dichotomy to him because on the one hand he was happy in the learning of new philosophies, religions and cultures; and yet, on the other hand, he had this weight of being the Messiah constantly on his shoulders.

  The internal strife within him must have been difficult to bear. Two factions were operating—the fear of what was to come on the emotional side and yet the intellect knew what he had to do and what his destiny was. I’m sure no other living person knew his Chart like he did. Most of us just blindly live life and hope we are spiritually on track. I’m also sure the human part of him rebelled against his fate, but he knew it was written and this heavy responsibility must have weighed heavily on him. So, being the Messiah, he had to avail himself of all possible learning—not only in the synagogue but in the local areas of Galilee, Nazareth, Bethlehem and other local towns; as well as other countries and cultures with their philosophies and religions. He had to be astute about people and the social and political climate, as well as the economic patterns of the times, and yet knowing that things and people don’t change much. That’s why his parables are timeless. People don’t change much, just their time and topography. People still cheat, treat each other badly, waste their money and look down on the poor and lower classes. He knew he had to learn and talk for the ages. Truth is truth and it is immutable and it doesn’t matter if it’s spoken now or two thousand years ago.

  In the book The Passover Plot by Hugh J. Schonfield, the author agrees with some of this, especially Christ’s love of his heavenly Father. But the author and I disagree on his seeming neglect of his mother. We truly don’t hear much about her, but we certainly don’t hear anything about Joseph. I’m sure he got his information about life outside his home because he left so young. Jesus was obviously a great observer, and from the observance of others in family life or just the conclusions he came to by watching others through his journeys, he had a great insight into how people reacted to one another.