Размер шрифта
-
+

Jesus and Christ - стр. 108

After a pause of three ritualistic twitches of his beard, as if imitating the fairy-tale wizard Hottabych, the professor said:

–Now let's move on to baptism," he said in his refined voice. – According to the Gospel account, at the age of about 30 (Luke 3:23), Jesus entered the public ministry, which he began by being baptized by John the Baptist at the Jordan River. When Jesus came to John, who had preached much about the imminent coming of the Messiah, the astonished John said: "I need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?" To this Jesus replied that "we must fulfill all righteousness," and was baptized by John. At the baptism, "heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended on Him in bodily form like a dove, and there was a voice from heaven saying, 'You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased.'" (Luke 3:21-22) I'm not going to argue here. Remember, I talked about many arguments about different interpretations of the meaning, inconsistency of logical meaning, about contradictions of different places of writing? And depending on the interpretation, the same place in the scripture – a verse, a chapter or a sentence – is explained in different ways. Look, or rather, pay attention to the above quoted… The Holy Spirit descended upon Him in bodily form… In bodily form?! And a voice from heaven was heard. From heaven! Let's not argue why and how in bodily form. But the conclusion is inevitable. It turns out that at this moment the spirit of heaven entered him, and not earlier. After his baptism, Jesus withdrew to the desert to prepare himself in solitude, prayer and fasting for the fulfillment of the mission with which he came to earth. From this we can conclude, and not just so the rite in the church is still called "the sacrament of baptism", that it was a kind of initiation into a secret clan. As if an unspoken record – "he is his own". And he, of course, had to agree to be a supporter of radical ideas. Otherwise, what's the point of secrecy? You have to be in the clan of those who are against the government. Only by accepting this ritual one became one's own. Like members of secret societies or in a clan of thieves: to enter the clan, an adept must commit a crime or something for which he would be persecuted by the authorities. The next thing is preaching. Jesus, as we know, gave a sermon on repentance in the face of the coming of the kingdom of God. Let's just say that this was the overt, propagandistic part of his oratory. Of course, his call to the people was not just a call to be kinder and repent. It was necessary to justify why it was necessary to be kinder, for what and to whom to repent, because God is in heaven, and the bosses mocked here every day. However, it was in his preaching (there were many preachers at that time, it was a kind of fashion in the Jewish tradition) that he emphasized the meaning of some other God than there was. The oppressed and oppressors, as the ruling and those who are ruled, i.e. the hierarchy of power and castes of society, have always existed; this has always been played upon by those who wanted to change this power. That is, to displace and become power themselves. Of course, the power knew it, and those who came to power in this way tried even more to usurp it, to take into account the ways by which they came to power. There are plenty of examples, one can remember the French Revolution with the subsequent rebuilding of the city so that the squares were wide so that barricades would not be built, one can also remember Japan, where a clan of ninja once came to power, and after the leader completely banned the militant sect, and there is no need to talk about the terror and restriction of the freedom of expression by the Communists. For example, Lenin, the brother of a criminal who attempted to assassinate the tsar, could study at university. And in the system of power he founded, the whole family and even fellow villagers would have been banished to the penal colony, if not shot. Under Stalin, certainly. Although there are different opinions on this. If we take into account the fact that revolution weakens the state, then there are plenty of examples of this. The same Jerusalem was destroyed and the Jewish people were subjected to a terrible genocide. Then. I'm not talking about the holocaust. By the way, if you will be shown historical monuments on a tour of Jerusalem, ask about the year of construction. Otherwise, how did the warlord Sèvres completely destroy Jerusalem, and plow up the area. Now, Jesus knew what he was getting into, but look at his geography. Despite the fact that the center of Christ's preaching was the holy city of Jerusalem, the longest with his sermon traveled through Galilee, where Jesus was received more joyfully. It is understandable, because it was his native land. Jesus also traveled through Samaria, Decimated City, and visited Tyre and Sidon. Now remember serfdom. I am not talking about earlier times, especially in the East. Even at the beginning of Soviet power in the USSR not everyone had a passport. Actually, they were introduced then, but you could not go where you wanted to go, especially if you lived in the countryside. Peasants, although they were no longer serfs, and even though they were declared to be owners of not only their land, but of the entire state, according to the promises of the Soviet authorities, they were tied to their collective farm. Their passports were kept with the chairman. You could leave only with his permission. And now imagine: someone in the occupied territory, where everyone is suspected of rebellion, goes wherever he wants, over long distances, and even agitates people, talking about the allegedly impending arrival or the need to change the government to escape the oppression of the invaders. Could mere mortals feel so at ease, do you think? But let's not be pathetic. Let's think about the real life of that society. After all, you must agree, whoever Jesus was, whoever he was in our view, in our faith – he was killed as a man. What do you say to me? I think, either Jesus had some power, or he was favored, and the power itself, or the story is embellished in the process of numerous historical edits, or the author's imagination found it most attractive to make such a picture of Jesus' life, without thinking about the real state of affairs, or … perhaps we do not know something. That's what our mission is organized to do. Though in fact we want to prevent a tragic event for our civilization. Agree: to give birth, to force your creation to follow the doctrine, and then to realize the apocalypse – well, at least not divine, both in the sense of reasonable logic and love, as God positions himself. Well, or he is so positioned to us, his representatives, including me.

Страница 108