(I wrote this and never published it, so I went over it again, and here it is)

I am NOT a Christian. (or a “Christian”)

I thought about becoming a Christian, but then I realized I would be the only one.

Buh-dump-bump.

As my first aside, I did create my own “religion”, of sorts, of which I am the only (official) member. It is called Aquarianis. Or, The New Age Mystic Order of the Aquarian Knowledge of The Christ Ideals. (where “christ” is literally translated as “The Chosen One(s)”) It is probably best described as a New Age form of neo-modern pseudo-‘Xtianity’ based on the concepts and precepts of primitive Christianity (+/-) with a paranormal, supernatural, and mystical flavor. (although, actually, associating it in any way, shape, or form with ‘Xtianity’ more or less does it a disservice) It has more to do with spirituality, especially True Spirituality, than “religion”, although is does have dogmatic elements. It is meant to be as “pure” as possible, though. Aquarianis translates loosely from the Latin as “for all Aquarians”. This alludes to the Age of Aquarius, which we are in, or starting, depending on how you like to interpret such things. Probably close enough for Government work to call it a Go at this point. Perhaps I’ll talk more about this in another journaling. Link: http://www.Aquarianis.org/

This entry is not about Aquarianis, it is a book review, of sorts, of a literary tome titled, “The Vegetarianism of Jesus Christ : The Pacifism, Communalism and Vegetarianism of Primitive Christianity“, by Dr. Charles P. Vaclavik, publish 1986. It was re-published under a different title, with added material, as “The Origin of Christianity : The Pacifism, Communalism and Vegetarianism of Primitive Christianity” in 1989. I have not read the revised edition.

I suggest this book to people who are interested in Christianity, religion, history, vegetarianism, pacifism, non-violence, and related issues. It is a very good, and interesting read. Both volumes are out of print, but you can still purchase them at Amazon.com for a decent price.

Note that this book is not a religious book. It is an historical book about a religious subject. Dr. Vaclavik is a professor of History. He is also a vegetarian. And A Christian. (Lutheran?) One day he wondered (paraphrased), “If I am a Christian, should I be a vegetarian? Or should I not be a vegetarian?” So he began doing historical research into the subject using his talent, experience and knowledge as a historian. What he discovered caused him to do more research, and more research, and then write his book.

What he basically found is that original, primitive Christianity is completely different from the Christianity of today. Besides the fact that what is called Christianity today is actually Paulianity (more about that later), “Christianity” has been severely and extremely modified and, essentially corrupted, over time by various people and factions and groups and a number of other people. Pretty much since day one. (‘AD’)

In typical historian fashion, Vaclavik went to historical sources, preferably first-person, and also second-person, and sometimes third-person, with occasional N-person sources. The problem is, the larger the number ‘N’ gets, the more unreliable the source of information. (usually — read about and study Historical Science to get a better understanding of that and how it works) And even first, second, and third-person sources aren’t all that reliable. Which is why corroboration from multiple sources is good. That doesn’t guarantee reality and truth, but, along with other soft-science techniques, it potentially gets you close to reality and truth, possibly close enough to be believed with some level of good and acceptable sufficiency. That’s a quick and simple description of “historical science”.

So, with that in mind, Vaclavik went to the writings of the first-person sources. These would be people who actually knew Jesus. (the disciples and others of the time who met him, heard him speak, saw him, etc.) Then he went to the second-person sources, who were people who knew or talked to people who knew or personally talked to Jesus, heard him speak, etc. And similarly for third-person, and so on.

So he looked at the writings, and purported writings, of the disciples. There is much argument about whether one or more of these writings, from the Bible, and possibly elsewhere (e.g., New Testament apocrypha, the Gnostic Gospels, Nag Hammadi library, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc…), are truly the actual writings of these people. Modern day religious scholars have written books about these issues. He also looked at other writers and philosophers of the time, and the writings of the ante-Nicene Fathers, who were early theologians of the times before the (First) Council of Nicea (AD 325), in the early decades and centuries of the early millennium. Along with these, he looked at people who wrote about the times. And a picture started forming, like puzzle pieces falling into place.

As you might be able to tell, I’m ‘speaking’ very generally and loosely and from memory. So take anything I say with a grain of salt and read the book(s).

But his suggestion is that Jesus was an Essene. And it is fairly well-known and accepted that the Essenes had three basic, fundamental concepts that they believed in and exercised: Pacifism, Communalism, and Vegetarianism. Thereby the sub-title of the book. So, along with some other information he gleaned from various sources, he suggests that Jesus would also believe in, follow, and incorporate those ideas. The ‘fact’ that Jesus was a pacifist is no big surprise. Communalism (not communism) is somewhat neutral. You see that in some sects of Christianity to various levels and degrees and manners. It’s the vegetarian part that gets people’s attention.

As if the vegetarianism isn’t “bad enough”, he also suggests that Jesus was an Animal Rights Activist. He gets that from the event where Jesus turns over the money changer’s tables. You have to read that section. I found it one of the more interesting sections of the book.

He also goes off on some tangents, although they are often not too far off, or he brings them back around as part of his evidence and ‘poof’. But it is always interesting, informative, and educational. Like how Paul basically co-opted “Christianity” and made it Paulianity, which is more or less what is practiced today. How Paul got a lot of people to “convert” to Christianity, like the Gnostics and Druids and Jews and many others. And how all of those people were summarily removed from the equation leading up to the First Council of Nicea, where they basically created the beginnings of Catholicism, and Christianity as we know it today. He also talks briefly about why the King James version of the Bible is called that. (that King James, and some others, decided what books of the Bible would be included and excluded and how they would be interpreted and translated, etc.) And he discusses the Dead Sea Scrolls and a lot of other things like that.

Anyway, pardon my rambling review. Get the book and read it. If you’re the type of person you think you are, you will like it.

There also most likely was not an actual person by the name of “Jesus”. That might be more my take on the subject. If anything, “he” (or she) was an amalgamation of more than one person, some of who might have been named “Jesus” (Joshua, Yeshua, etc.) If an actual person actually existed, he would be in the historical record, and there literally is none. Except in the “Bible”, which doesn’t really count. As an historical record, the Bible basically sucks. That is, it is a poor source, and, historically speaking, it can’t be relied upon for much. Except where the parts of it are corroborated by other accounts in the historical record. One should find it odd that Jesus is quoted, and discussed, and referenced in relatively fair detail in the Bible, but not mentioned anywhere else. As I like to say, “That means something.”