Christianity

From Alternative Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Christianity was the Russian fascist political movement in the 1st century AC, which evolved to the first religion of the Human civilization.

Book sources[edit | edit source]

1st century AC[edit | edit source]

3rd century AC[edit | edit source]

4th century AC[edit | edit source]

Arguments for using the term fascist[edit | edit source]

Christianity was:

Two writing traditions: Apostolic and Ancestral/Royal[edit | edit source]

  • There were many texts written in both of the branches of original Christianity. They varied.
    • The people's Apostolic Church created the Gospels. We are very familiar with their spirit. The Gospels revere Andronicus-Christ and do not accept any equality with Him. This is a reverence of a disciple for his Teacher. Christ is the Sun, which is unblemished.
    • In the Ancestral-Royal circle they also were writing a lot (or used chroniclers and writers). Naturally they were writing a lot about their famous ancestor Lord Christ. But the flavour of these texts was essentially different. From them subsequently grew the 'ancient'-Greek myths about Zeus/Christ and his numerous relations Olympian Gods, and also the 'ancient'-Greek legends about God Osiris-Christ and his nine closest gods. Modern commentators refer all such Christian testimonials to an historical period - 'paganism', naturally shifting it back to 'antiquity' and separating it from Christianity.
  • The differences between the texts of the apostolic tradition and Ancestral-Royal literature were so great, that today researchers have to explain with great difficulty vivid parallels and analogies between the Apostolic Christianity and 'paganism', which emerge repeatedly.

Symbolism[edit | edit source]

Two symbols meaning the same

In the epoch of the 1100-1500 the following two well-known symbols effectively signified the same thing. It is a crescent moon with a star and a Christian cross adjacent to a crescent moon. Today a crescent moon with a star is considered to be exclusively a symbol of Islam, of the Muslim faith, and a cross, at the base of which there is a crescent is regarded purely as a Christian symbol. However, Christianity of the 1100-1500 was one entity, and it was only at the end of the 5th century AC that a split began to appear, which led in the 6th century AC to the division of Christianity into several denominations Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Catholicism, Judaism, Buddhism, etc. A formerly united Christian symbol a crescent moon and a star=cross possibly first symbolised the Star of Bethlehem, which lit up at Christ's birth in year 1152, and also the solar eclipse, associated with the crucifiction of Christ in year 1185. You may recall that during the solar eclipse the sun initially turns into a half crescent. The crescent may also symbolise the Moon, which blocks the Sun. The star (cross) inscribed inside the crescent was depicted in various ways four-pointed, five-pointed, six-pointed and eight-pointed.


The beginning of the religious schism[edit | edit source]

In the XV-XVI cc. there was a visible religious schism in the formerly unified Christianity which split into several large branches: Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Catholicism, Buddhism and Judaism. But these names they would acquire later, only in the XVII-XVIII cc.

All the main religions known today originated from the same root from the Royal (and later from the Apostolic) Christianity of the XII-XIII cc. This explains the conclusions made by the school of scientists of the XIX century, working in the field of the Comparative Religion. Having processed a vast amount of material they discovered a lot in common between the aforementioned religions. But being constrained by the incorrect chronology, they decided, that the Christianity had absorbed in itself allegedly earlier cults. This is incorrect. On the contrary, the unified Christianity of the XII-XV cc. branched out into several religions. Each of them inherited a considerable part of the former cult, having modified it. The previously universal symbolism was also divided. A broad cross began to be used by the Orthodox Church; a narrow cross by the Catholic Church; a six-pointed star also another form of the cross by Judaism; a crescent with a star also another form of the cross by Islam. So in the XV-XVI cc. the following branches-religions began to differentiate.

1) THE ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY, probably the closest to the original religion of the XII-XIV cc., spiritually chaste and austere. Ancient Russia becomes the centre of the Orthodox Christianity. The Orthodox Christianity prevails in the Balkans and in the East. In the past it was called Capholic or Catholic. Thus the term 'Catholic' changed its meaning in the XVI-XVII cc. From the term meaning one whole Christianity it has narrowed to meaning only the Western-European Catholicism, separated only in the XVI-XVII cc.

2) ISLAM OR THE MUSLIM FAITH in the East, originally very close to Christianity. Also a very strict and ascetic religion.

3) CATHOLICISM predominantly in the West. It moved away from the original reserved religion. In the XV-XVI cc. Catholicism existed in the form of the 'ancient' Greek and Roman pantheon of the gods with bacchanalian and orgiastic elements. As a consequence of such practices spreading, diseases occurred in some of the countries of Western Europe, which were called venereal diseases after Venus the goddess of love [544], v.5, [2v1], ch.1:3.

To eliminate such undesirable social consequences a reform of the Western-European religion was required. In some countries the vicarious rulers of the Great Empire introduced the Inquisition [5v1], ch.12:9.4. After the church reforms and successful machinations of the inquisition, the Catholic branch of Christianity acquired the modern form familiar to us today, also very reserved. [5v1], ch.12:10.

4) Another variant of Christianity is Buddhism in the East. India, China, etc.

5) JUDASIM both in the West and in the East (the Karaims). Originally it was a form of the Royal Christianity. Over time Judaism underwent a profound evolution.

17thCenturyReligiousSplit.jpg

6) The rest religions that were not so widespread. They 'split off' from the ones mentioned above only in the XVII century, see image.

The Gospels were written at the end of the XII the beginning of the XIII cc. However in the XIV-XV cc. they were substantially edited. The rest of the Books of the Bible, of both the New and the Old Testaments, were written not earlier than the early XIII century. The editions of the Gospels and the Books of Psalms that exist today date back to the XIV century. The rest of the books of the Old Testament were edited in some instances up to and including the XVII century [6v].


The Koran and the Bible[edit | edit source]

Over the course of time Islam underwent great change and only recently assumed its current form.The Western commentators' of the XIX century's attitude towards the Koran and Muhammad (still not completely overcome to this day) was on the whole very sceptical. Purporting that it is a derivative recent text, largely based on the Old Testament Bible, on the Judaic and Christian works. Originally, they say, recorded either on the bones, papyrus, palm tree leaves, pebbles, or preserved in memory...

Now we understand the reasons for such a negative attitude. The fact is that the chronologists of the XVI-XVIII cc. brutally distorted the past. The Bible and the 'ancient classic' texts, which in reality were created in the XIII-XVII cc., were dated to the deepest antiquity and declared venerated works embedded in the foundation of the entire civilization. The Koran, written approximately in the same epoch, was shifted to a not so remote past and the first year of The Hijra era was professed to be 622. As a result, the Koran, purportedly turned out to be 'much younger' than the Bible and the 'ancient classics'.

Moreover, as a result the Koran and the Bible turned out to be the holy books of different religious movements, seceding from the previously united Christianity of the XIII-XVI cc. This made a strong impression on the representatives of various spiritual schools which emerged in the XVII-XVIII cc. which was reflected in their appraisal of the holy books.

The new chronology fundamentally changes this psychological picture. It becomes clear that the Koran is one of the versions of the holy books which were created in the XIII-XVII cc. that is to say simultaneously to the Bible. This is why many testaments in the Koran are not the 'quotations from the canonised Bible', but often independent and original. Even when they describe the same events as the Bible, the interpretation is different. What the bewildered commentators declare to be 'incorrect citation' of the Bible and the other sources known to us today is just a different perspective on the mediaeval events contemporary to the authors of the Koran. That is why the Koran is a vitally important and fascinating book, and in regards to us, we read the Koran with an immense interest from the beginning to the end. It turns out that it conveys to us important information lost or cleaned out in the other religious movements.

After the split of the Great Empire the attitude in the Romanovs' Russia towards the Koran and Muhammad became complicated. The emerged religious schism further aggravated tension between the Romanovs and the rulers of Turkey. Nevertheless in the Russian scientific community, unlike in Western Europe, the attitude towards the Koran on the whole remained respectful. It was published and translated in our country as a major work which merited serious study. Even the wars of the pro-Western Romanovs with Turkey didn't influence the respectful attitude towards the Koran in Russia. Despite the attempts of the Romanovs to drive a wedge between the Russians (the Orthodox Christians) and the 'Mongol' Tatars (the Muslims), it didn't succeed.

The Western torrent of 'scientific criticism' at some point descended not just on the Koran, but also on the Book of Mormon [6v]. The accusations against it were in many respects similar to those towards the Koran. Generally the Book of Mormon is often declared to have been 'made up' in the XIX century. The reasons for this 'criticism' are the same. As it turned out the Book of Mormon which surfaced in the XIX century has conveyed to us an old version of history which substantially differs from the Scaligerian one. Subsequently this book was immediately condemned and categorised as 'illegitimate'.

The XVII century author Andrey Lyzlov annotated the Koran and captured a great deal accurately. But as a XVII century Christian, already having been brought up with a sceptical attitude towards Islam, he thought that the Koran (and Islam on the whole) despite, allegedly, being in conflict with the Christians, nevertheless borrowed important ideas from 'earlier' Christianity, Judaism and 'Paganism'. It is not entirely true. All these movements emerged from the whole Royal (and later the Apostolic) Christianity of the XII-XVI cc. That is why they retained so much in common.

At the same time the opinion voiced by Lyzlov has its reasons. As we understand now, the Koran was created in the XV first half of the XVII cc. as some kind of specific 'ecumenical Book' intended to rectify the rupture, which emerged in the Empire and in the religion. The Islamic leaders sincerely desired to restore the former unity. At least for the significant part of the former Empire (Western Europe was not considered 'their own' any longer). To achieve that they incorporated into the Koran ideas close to the representatives of different religious branches. Their intention was to attract them under their banner. To a great extent it succeeded. Islam has united a great number of people.

The Koran's structure also becomes clear. It is a highly poetic work filled with allegories, and also ideas close to the Christians, the Jews and the 'Pagans'. The poetic language has attracted many. The idea of the restoration of the former unity struck a chord.


History[edit | edit source]

  • Incidentally, the phrase 'Greek faith' earlier used to mean 'Christian faith', and the CHRISTIANS were once called GREEK (GREEK was used for CHRISTIANS).

1st century AC[edit | edit source]

2nd century AC[edit | edit source]

  • After the First Crusade in 1204 those of Christ's relatives who came to believe in Him as a God came to power. But they also regarded their own persona as holy given that God Andronicus-Christ was their relative. The 'ancient'-Egyptian artefacts and imagery convey to us the atmosphere of this ancestral Christianity, i.e. - the memorials of the royal family burial site. Egyptian Christ-Osiris, his worst enemy Set, his wife-mother Isida, etc. were close relatives. Occasionally they fought between themselves, killed and persecuted each other, but nonetheless their relationship remained ancestral.
  • At first there were no fundamental differences between the two branches of Christianity, but they have soon appeared and it is clear why.
    • The ancestral-royal branch of the Christianity was not large, but it commanded absolute power. At first, and for quite a long time, it reigned supremely over the Empire. The Christian Czars in the first centuries of Christianity perceived themselves as relations to God Andronicus-Christ and forced all of the people to venerate them as deities.
      • 'In Paganism was established a system where there existed gods in the heavens and GODS ON EARTH, I.E. THE EMPERORS'.
    • The Christians of the Apostolic Church were forced to offer sacrifices to the gods, i.e. to the living emperors. Many refused. It was they who were to become the first Christian martyrs. If the emperors demanded from the Christians 'the proper veneration', then it most likely meant that the emperors considered the Apostolic Christians to be of the same faith, but having strayed from the true path, which was punished.
  • The people's Apostolic Christianity, unlike the Ancestral Royal Christianity, was popular on the mass scale and, what's important, could organize itself and created a stable church, which was called Apostolic.

3rd century AC[edit | edit source]

  • Constantine the Great, aka czar-khan Dmitriy Donskoy, molds Apostolic Christianity into the state religion of the entire gigantic 'Mongol' Empire. Since then the czars-khans of the Empire ceased to be the Gods.
    • This upheaval took place at the end of 3rd century AC and was far from painless. This matter was resolved in the major Kulikovo Battle in 1380. The great importance, which was given to the Kulikovo Battle and its numerous representations in world history, also becomes clear.
  • At the end of 3rd century AC after the Battle of Kulikovo, in the Great = 'Mongol' Empire the Apostles' Christianity was adopted as the state religion. The bloody sacrifices were banned. From the end of the 14th century Royal Christianity was declared as 'paganism' (primal Judaism), that is to say 'a false cult'. Hostility to it began, which also affected the attitude to the former relics. The places of worship themselves were preserved because they were Christian. But terminology, ritualism and many other things which create the 'external appearance', as well as the form of customs, changed. As before the faithful would arrive to visit the Holy places, however by then they would generally be the Apostles' Christians. The former 'pagan' past of the relics had begun to be forgotten and turned into a well-respected, but none the less 'someone else's past', 'antiquity'. The new priests would slightly change the old names, which would compound the confusion in people's minds. Eventually the Christians were made to think that Zeus, Apollo, Dionysus were some ancient deities and that the deep past of Beykoz, Chufut-Kale and Fiolent was by no means Christian, but in fact, 'pagan'.


5th century AC[edit | edit source]

  • A particularly severe distortion was created in the 1500-1700, when the false Scaligerian history was invented and implanted by force. It confused the picture even more. While combatting the memory of the Great Empire, they did their best to consign to oblivion the former 'Mongol' relics, including the older places of worship. To a large extent it was successful. However, 'success of the reformers' was far from complete.


6th century AC[edit | edit source]

  • As not so long ago, in the 1600-1700 many could still remember the true history. Of course the younger upcoming generations were soon re-educated, however, a firm tradition had already been developed and established. That is why until now many come to Beykoz mountain, Cape Fiolent and the City of Chufut-Kale to worship, though not longer fully aware of the true meaning of these holy places.