Different Cultures with Differing Customs than ours on Love, Relationships, Marriage and Laws

First off, I want to say that I am not selling anything, and every source cited below is free on the internet, I am just using these sources to further extrapolate on the subject at hand.

Here is the Copyright Disclaimer :

“Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational and personal use, tips the balance in favor of fair use.”

I’ve been posting quite often about the differing types of cultures throughout history and how their ideas of love, life, relationships and judiciary issues are much different than our own in the West. Starting with regard to relationships, today in the West we are programmed with Judeo Christian-centric views on love and marriage, which is monogamy by default (even though there are a litany of cases in the Bible of polygamy). People are vehemently angry when I question that this form of relationship is not quintessential, nor will it lead us to the ultimate bliss among those looking for a meaningful relationship. They’re angry and threatened, because this is all they know or have been taught. When we say a ‘Traditional Family’ we instantly think of a nuclear family, with one man and one woman, living together and loving each other for life. Even though the divorce and infidelity rates are sky-high (which I will detail further at the end of this blog), we still cling to this failed institution of lifelong monogamy.

There are always exceptions to every rule, but the majority of couples will eventually separate. Over 90% of all monogamous relationships will fail (I’ll get more in depth on the actual statistics at the end of this). You’re not likely to marry your high school sweetheart or the first person you date. There are exceptions, but this isn’t the rule. Though it’s a ubiquitously understood colloquialism that marriages end over half the time, many still believe they are capable of maintaining a relationship with one person for life. This is a huge problem and I believe there must be a solution. I believe it starts in opening our minds to different cultures and ideals on these major issues. I’m of the persuasion that many relationships or marriages fail because of rigidity and formality. Humans are not rigid creatures! We are evolving and fluid creatures.

As Bruce Lee said, “Notice that the stiffest tree is most easily cracked, while the bamboo or willow survives by bending with the wind.”

We see many monogamous relationships crack more oft than naught, because of this very reason. The expectations for your partner are so high, that it can turn you into a literal controlling, overly emotional psychopath or sociopath. When things are relaxed and flow naturally, that’s when relationships succeed, no matter what form they’re in. Bruce Lee also said to be like water, adapting, moving through the cracks, finding your own path and being free. We are constantly evolving and growing. Does this mean that we leave everything in the past, including people, objects, memories, etc..? No, but to believe they will always be as meaningful in our lives as they are at this current moment, just isn’t reality.

We should (and will) use them as a spring-board to propel us forward, to gain mastery in our next set of trials and tests in life. As it pertains to relationships and love, most often, we are not going to find ourselves with the same set of people for life. They come and they go, like a flowing stream, we pass by many new rocks and ravines as we move forward, each of them very ‘meaningful’.  This filters through every part of our lives, whether it be our jobs, friends, geographical location, the cars we drive, etc.. we are constantly growing and moving forward, which means, we will inevitably leave certain things behind. You may still be friends with those you grew up with or went to High School with, for example, but you’ll eventually move to a new city and make new friends who are more involved and pertinent to where you are at that moment in time.

“Self-knowledge involves relationship. To know oneself is to study oneself in action with another person. Relationship is a process of self evaluation and self revelation. Relationship is the mirror in which you discover yourself – to be is to be related.”
― Bruce Lee

“Time means a lot to me because you see I am also a learner and am often lost in the joy of forever developing.”
― Bruce Lee

I wanted to set the precedent with this, before I delve more deeply into this topic, not only to show how different our culture is from others, but to show how mankind has evolved and to broaden your mindset on how ‘things should be.’ We have all been conditioned by a certain set of standards, rules and restrictions, but I don’t believe we should be this way. That’s the main purpose in creating this blog, not necessarily about the subject matter at hand, but the objective in getting you to evolve and step outside of the ‘box’ we’re all forced to be in, considering there just may be a ‘better way(s)’.

With that said, I’ll get back on topic. I also want to note that I don’t advocate all of these practices within the cultures I’m about to discuss, but we tend to be conditioned with the idea that our default morals / mores are the best way to live. I think we should look at a broad spectrum of ideas, evaluate what works and what doesn’t, then take what’s useful and discard the rest! Going through antiquity, you’ll find that many cultures (even some today throughout the world) were much more loosely open about sexuality, love and relationships or marriage. Before the Bible or Koran were created and all three Abrahamic faiths dominated much of society, we had many religions before them, and they were highly sexual and much more open about romance.

From the Indians (In India) – Hindus, to Egypt to Greece to Rome and even the Native Americans before the white man came, they were engaging in every form of sexuality possible (homosexuality, polyamory, orgies, bisexuality, etc..), and even left us with carvings of their sexuality in caves (hieroglyphs), monuments, pottery and statues (including sex toys).  I want to give you some examples on how different many ancient cultures were about these topics, including laws for certain types of behavior that we’d see as strange or not as strict, in today’s standards.


There are over 500 officially recognized Native American Tribes, so none of this is a Panacea of every one of them, but there were certainly similarities between the groups. Many Native Tribes were very polyamorous and more egalitarian. While sex was a part of traditional Native American marriage, marriage was not about sex. Prior to marriage, young people were expected to engage in sexual activities. Sex was not confined to marriage. The Europeans, and particularly the missionaries, had a great deal of difficulty in understanding that women had power in Indian society and that they had the right to sexual freedom. Indian societies were not organized on the patriarchal, monogamous norms of European society. Christian missionaries were deeply shocked and offended by the fact that Indian women were allowed to express their sexuality. At the same time, many of the European men were delighted by this.

How egalitarian the Tribes were, was one of the things that bothered many of the early Christian Missionaries, particularly the Jesuits in New France, as they viewed marriage as a relationship in which the woman subjugated herself to the man. In Indian marriages, men and women were equals. Polygyny (the marriage of one man to more than one woman at the same time) was fairly common throughout North American Tribes. In some cases a man would marry sisters – a practice that anthropologists call ‘sororal polygyny.’

Weyodi O’Clerc Stern says this about her own Comanche Tribe :

“My tribe, the Comanches, for instance were traditionally polyamorous, with both women and men free to take more than one spouse. As it was explained to me by my elders when a woman married a man she also married his brothers. Instead of the hokey “blood brother” (which is actually a European tradition) nonsense a Comanche man would be considered the brother of any man who had had sexual relations with his wife. Women also made men brothers without their consent. Even when approaching the other man for redress of wrongs in such a case, the first husband had to address his wife’s paramour as “brother”. The deed was done, the men would be brothers for the rest of their lives. On the other side women were sisters who had sexual relations with the same man and when a man married a woman he also married her sisters. When speaking to my husband my grandmother consistently referred to my sisters as “your other wives” and to my sisters and me she would indiscriminately refer to any one of her grandson-in-laws as “your husband”. I always had to ask her ‘Which one?’” (end quote)

Former Navajo tribal chairman Peter MacDonald explains Navajo polygyny this way:

“A man would marry a woman, then work hard for his family. If she had a sister who was not married, and if the man proved to be caring, a good provider, and a good husband, he would be gifted with his wife’s sister, marrying her as well.” (end quote)

In the Cherokee Tribe, personal autonomy for women was akin to modern, U.S. women, in that they were more-or-less free to hump whomever they chose, as long as it wasn’t incestuous. Cherokee historian James Adair also understood Cherokee women to be allowed the honor of promiscuity, noting that there were no punishments for adulterous women. In fact, most Cherokee men wouldn’t argue over adulterous women because it was deemed to be “beneath” them (Louis-Philippe). Cherokees were matrilineal, meaning children were NOT part of their father’s family. This is a very foreign subject to most modern “Western” people today. Your mother’s brother was basically your father and the most important person in your life. In a way your biological father was just the person that happened to be having sex with your mother. Sexual encounters would, indeed, occur in the bean-fields and other places of a relatively private nature. I really recommend the book entitled, “Cherokee Women” by Theda Perdue. She’s one of the top scholars in this field.

The Seneca tribe of the Iroquois Nation is one of the many indigenous societies to practice polygamy and polyandry as the standard for human relationships. It was normal for men and women to have more than one life partner, creating a family structure that wasn’t simply dependent upon two-parent child-rearing or relationships, but rather a network of support between all partners. Having more than one husband or wife wasn’t simply about sexual relations, as many contemporary critics of polygamy and polyandry tend to assume. But rather it was about love, partnership, and sex being experiences that didn’t have to remain restricted between two individuals. And yes, women valued these experiences too. For more on the Iroquois, read Barbara Mann’s book entitled, “Iroquoian Women.”





Among many of the tribes, a widow often married her deceased husband’s brother – a practice which anthropologists call the levirate. When a man’s wife died, he would often marry one of her sisters – a practice which anthropologists call the sororate. Many of the tribes also practiced exchanging wives. One man might become infatuated with the wife of another and propose an exchange. If this was agreeable, the two men would exchange wives from time to time. Among the Lakota Sioux Tribe, for example, two men who have pledged devotion to each other may express this relationship by marrying sisters and by exchanging wives on certain occasions. Among the Pawnee Tribe, brothers sometimes shared wives. It was not uncommon for two or more brothers to set up a joint household, sharing their wives and their property.

Polyandry (the marriage of one woman to more than one man at the same time) was found among many of the tribes. This practice was often not recognized by Europeans, including many ethnographers, as it seemed so alien to them. The Pawnee, for example, practiced a form of temporary polyandry. When a boy reached puberty, his mother’s brother’s wife would take charge of him and initiate him into sex. He would continue having sex with her until he married. For a period of four or five years, the young man, and perhaps his brothers as well, would be a junior husband for this woman, creating a temporary state of polyandry. Polyandry also occurred as a form of an anticipatory levirate.

In Native American cultures, marriage was neither religious nor civil. There was usually no religious ceremony involved, only a public recognition of the fact of marriage. In most cases there was no formal ceremony. The couple simply started living together. In most Native American cultures, nearly all adults were married, yet marriage was not seen as permanent. It was recognized that people would be together in a married state for a while and then separate. Divorce was accomplished easily since the couple did not own property in common. Each partner simply picked up his or her personal property and left. Divorce was neither a civil nor a religious concern-this was a private matter among the people involved. While some American commentators bemoan the negative impact of divorce upon children, in Native cultures, each child had many fathers, many mothers, and many siblings. A child was not property but a member of a large family and thus had rights. Since divorce was accepted and the raising of the child was the responsibility of many relatives, not just the biological mother and father, divorce does not appear to have had negative impact on the children.

Informal polyandry is a feature of some hunter-gatherer societies, such as the Inuit of northern North America, or the Yanomamo of the Orinoco river basin in South America.
The Western concept of marriage did not exist among the indigenous tribes of Hawai‘i either (Sahlins, 1985, pp, 22-25), and even if a common definition of marriage is applied (Malinowski, 1962, p. 252; Ford and Beach, 1951, pp. 187-192), sexual/genital interactions were socially accepted in many “nonmarital” and non-committed relations. The concepts of premarital and extramarital sexual activities were absent, and it was probably true of Hawai‘i, as it was said to have been true of much of Polynesia, that “there are no people in the world who indulge themselves more in their sensual appetites than these” (Ellis, 1782, Vol. 2, p. 153).

Few cultures are as sexually liberated as those of the ancient Amazon rainforest. Nearly 70 percent of the tribes practiced multiple paternity, in which all of a woman’s sexual partners were fathers to her children. It was commonplace for people to be open about having multiple sexual partners in the ancient Amazon. Open sexual arrangements were socially accepted, even expected, according to anthropologist Robert Walker. And these multiple attachments were anything but casual. Men acted as father figures to the children of any and all of their partners. A woman could marry one man, making him the primary father to her children, but all the other men in her life would be considered vital secondary fathers.

As Walker explains, this was partly because of the ancient Amazonians’ rather unique take on genetics:

“In these cultures, if the mother had sexual relations with multiple men, people believed that each of the men was, in part, the child’s biological father. It was socially acceptable for children to have multiple fathers, and secondary fathers often contributed to their children’s upbringing. In some Amazonian cultures, it was bad manners for a husband to be jealous of his wife’s extramarital partner. It was also considered strange if you did not have multiple sexual partners. Cousins were often preferred partners, so it was especially rude to shun their advances.” (end quote)

For children, having as many fathers as possible had its advantages. More dads meant more gifts and support for the child, which is known to increase a youngster’s odds of reaching adulthood. Besides, it was a rather pragmatic solution to a basic fact of life in a culture where warfare was all too common and brutal. If a child’s primary father died, he or she would have other males around to step in and act as father figures, easing the newly widowed mother’s burden.

Men also benefited from this system. Sharing paternity brought men together, cementing bonds and friendships (basically, just like Three Men and a Baby, just with less Steve Guttenberg). Indeed, one of the best ways for two men to cement an alliance was to share wives, often in a family – brothers were some of the most frequent wife-sharers According to Walker’s new research, of 128 indigenous groups in lowland South America, 53 are known to practice multiple paternity, while only 23 are known to practice single paternity. The remaining 52 don’t have clear conception beliefs, making it difficult to know whether they once possessed this custom. That means at least 40% and perhaps as much as 70% of these groups once practiced multiple paternity, which definitely means it was a common feature of Amazonian civilization.

The Moche Tribe existed along north coast of Peru from 200 AD to 850 AD. It was a complex, state level society that covered a large geographical area. Their cities, temples, and agriculture dotted the northern Peruvian coastline in what are considered two factions of the Moche: the Northern and Southern. The Moche are probably best known and recognized for their complex pottery styles. One of those styles was their erotic pottery, which can be seen below.


The Moche erotic pottery is characterized by the various sexual acts depicted, which include acts of oral, vaginal, and anal sex as well as masturbation. These acts are most commonly shown between a man and a woman, although male on male homosexual acts are present, too. Although heterosexual sexual relations are the most common it is interesting to note that vaginal sexual acts are the most rarely depicted. Common sexual acts demonstrated in Moche erotic pottery are (in order of most common to least common) heterosexual anal sex, acts of masturbation, and heterosexual oral sex. There are also several vases that portray males with their erect penises. These pieces are known as phallic libations. These are functional ceramics used as pouring vessels, with the erect penis being used as the spout. More pictures of their pottery below :


There are some other oddities in Latin America when it comes to mating. A small village in Brazil called Mehinaku is a place where size really does matter. This refers not to the size of your package, but rather the size of your catch. There, men compete for partners and sex by presenting women with fish. The man with the largest fish wins the girl. Among those in the Guajiro tribe of Colombia, much like singles in the US, this indigenous group scores on the dance floor. The Guajiro ladies catch a fella by tripping him during their ceremonial dances. If she trips him, they must have sex.

I want to interject my own thought in here for a second. You have these New-Agers out here, with their dream catchers, crystals, feather head-dresses, practicing Native mysticism with their sage sessions, etc.., but with a Judeo-Christian mindset towards polyamory and open sexuality (claiming poly sexuality is “low vibration or low archonic energy” that create karmic soul ties, which need to be purged), etc.. yet, not being aware that the majority of Native Tribes were into orgies, every form of polyamory, wife swapping / swinging (the concept of adultery was petty and “beneath them”), nephews using their uncles’ wives as their initiation into sex for many years, etc.., and just overall, being more casual with sexuality than the flower children Hippies, smoking the ganja at Woodstock 1969. Ain’t that some shit! The 3-headed Abrahamic Monster has infected many pagan beliefs too. The biggest Cult is CULTure.

Everyone loves to hold onto their fairytales. Once researchers give you a logical answer for the phenomena, and then put a scientific label or technological term on it, all of a sudden, it loses its ‘magic.’ This is the very reason why these ‘myths’ originated in the first place. The Ancients brought inanimate objects, planets, natural occurrences, etc.. to life via anthropomorphizing them and giving them a story. This was not only a motivator in people’s personal lives to live for something greater, but unfortunately, it was also a form of mind control. In this case, they made lifelong monogamy, larger than life, gave it a huge 5 to 6 figure $$$$ wedding ceremony (more like drinking binge party) and told everyone this was the quintessential relationship form of bliss! But It was a pipe dream sold to people who would unfortunately find out the truth, the hard way, several years later in divorce court.

We also find that many of the North American Tribes had what was known as ‘Two Spirit’ people. Basically it was a person who is androgynous. “Two Spirit” is not interchangeable with “LGBT Native American” or “Gay Indian”, this title differs from most western, mainstream definitions of sexuality and gender identity in that it is not so much about whom one is sexually interested in, or how one personally identifies; rather, it is a sacred, spiritual and ceremonial role that is recognized and confirmed by the Elders of the Two Spirit’s ceremonial community. Third and fourth gender roles traditionally embodied by two-spirit people include performing work and wearing clothing associated with both men and women. Not all tribes/nations have rigid gender roles, but, among those that do, the most usual spectrum that has been documented is that of four genders: feminine woman, masculine woman, feminine man, masculine man. The term ‘Two Spirit’ was adopted by consensus in 1990 at an Indigenous lesbian and gay international gathering to encourage the replacement of the outdated, and now seen as inappropriate, anthropological term ‘berdache.’

Author Brian Gilley, who wrote the book entitled, “Becoming Two-Spirit: Gay Identity and Social Acceptance in Indian Country” and anthropologist Will Roscoe, claim that over 130 Tribes had the presence of male-bodied two-spirits. However, as I said before, there were no Pan-Native terms. Not all Native Tribes ascribed to this view. The Ojibwe journalist named Mary Annette Pember argues that this depiction threatens to homogenize diverse Indigenous cultures, painting over them with an overly broad brush, potentially causing the disappearance of “distinct cultural and language differences that Native peoples hold crucial to their identity.”

Don Pedro Fages was third in command of the 1769–70 Spanish Portolà expedition, the first European land exploration of what is now the U.S. state of California. At least three diaries were kept during the expedition, but Fages wrote his account later, in 1775. Fages gave more descriptive details about the native Californians than any of the others, and he alone reported the presence of homosexuality in the native culture. The English translation reads:

“I have submitted substantial evidence that those Indian men who, both here and farther inland, are observed in the dress, clothing and character of women – there being two or three such in each village – pass as sodomites by profession…. They are called joyas, and are held in great esteem.”

Nowadays, some Zapotec natives from Mexico are born as males, but later cross dress as women and practice all activities associated to the female gender. Such people are known as muxe. Among the Iroquois, there is a single report from Bacqueville de la Potherie in his book published in 1722, Histoire de l’Amérique septentrionale, that indicates that an alternative gender identity exists among them. This may have also been the case among the Incas and the Aztecs, but sources show that the missionaries from Europe destroyed any artifacts or beliefs within these cultures, thus, allowing for Christian influences to flourish there.

The Jesuits and French explorers told stories of Native American men who had “Given to sin” and “Hunting Women” with wives and later, the British returned to England with similar accounts. George Catlin said that the Two Spirit tradition among Native Americans “Must be extinguished before it can be more fully recorded.” In keeping with European prejudices held against Natives, the Spanish Catholic monks destroyed most of the Aztec codices to eradicate traditional Native beliefs and history, including those that told of the Two Spirit tradition. In 1530, the Spanish explorer Cabeza de Vaca wrote in his diary of seeing “soft” Native Indian males in Florida tribes dressing and working as women. Just as with all other aspects of the European regard for Indians, gender variance was not tolerated. Europeans and eventually Euro-Americans demanded all people conform to their prescribed two gender roles.


As Europeans forced their way into North America, colonial governments eagerly formed white power structures, land grabbed from Natives and implemented the genocidal conversion tactics that has defined the relationship between Native Americans and Euro-American governments. When Christopher Columbus encountered the Two Spirit people, he and his crew threw them into pits with their war dogs and were torn limb from limb. The inhuman treatment Christians offered was only the beginning of the Native American holocaust.

As Europeans and subsequently Euro-Americans moved from east to west, they spread diseases and imposed European culture and religions onto Natives. In the 20th century, as neurotic prejudices, instigated by Christian influences, increased among Native Americans, acceptance of gender diversity and androgynous persons sharply declined. Two Spirits were commonly forced by government officials, Christian representatives or even their assimilated Native communities to conform to standardized gender roles. Those who felt they could not make this transition either went underground or committed suicide.

A Spanish Friar named Bartolome de Las Casas eventually wrote about the horrors of the white Christians inflicted upon the Natives. Here are quotes of his below from his diary :

“And never have the Indians in all the Indies committed any act against the Spanish Christians, until those Christians have first and many times committed countless cruel aggressions against them or against neighboring nations.

More than thirty other islands in the vicinity of San Juan are for the most part and for the same reason depopulated, and the land laid waste.

We can estimate very surely and truthfully that in the forty years that have passed, with the infernal actions of the Christians, there have been unjustly slain more than twelve million men, women, and children. In truth, I believe without trying to deceive myself that the number of the slain is more like fifty million.

After the wars and the killings had ended, when usually there survived only some boys, some women, and children, these survivors were distributed among the Christians to be slaves.

And of all the infinite universe of humanity, these people are the most guileless, the most devoid of wickedness and duplicity, the most obedient and faithful to their native masters and to the Spanish Christians whom they serve.

These people are the most devoid of rancors, hatreds, or desire for vengeance of any people in the world. They are the most guileless and most patient, humble and caring people you will find anywhere.

The reason for Christians killing and destroying such an infinite number of [Native] souls is that the Christians have an ultimate aim, which is to acquire gold, and to swell themselves with riches in a very brief time and thus rise to a high estate disproportionate to their merits.

It should be kept in mind that their insatiable greed and ambition, the greatest ever seen in the world, is the cause of their villainies.

With my own eyes I saw Spaniards cut off the nose and ears of Indians, male and female, without provocation, merely because it pleased them to do it. …Likewise, I saw how they summoned the caciques and the chief rulers to come, assuring them safety, and when they peacefully came, they were taken captive and burned.

They laid bets as to who, with one stroke of the sword, could split a man in two or could cut off his head or spill out his entrails with a single stroke of the pike.

They took infants from their mothers’ breasts, snatching them by the legs and pitching them headfirst against the crags or snatched them by the arms and threw them into the rivers, roaring with laughter and saying as the babies fell into the water, “Boil there, you offspring of the devil!”

They attacked the towns and spared neither the children nor the aged nor pregnant women nor women in childbed, not only stabbing them and dismembering them but cutting them to pieces as if dealing with sheep in the slaughter house.

They made some low wide gallows on which the hanged victim’s feet almost touched the ground, stringing up their victims in lots of thirteen, in memory of Our Redeemer and His twelve Apostles, then set burning wood at their feet and thus burned them alive.

With still others, all those they wanted to capture alive, they cut off their hands and hung them round the victim’s neck, saying, “Go now, carry the message,” meaning, Take the news to the Indians who have fled to the mountains.

They made a grid of rods which they placed on forked sticks, then lashed the victims to the grid and lighted a smoldering fire underneath, so that little by little, as those captives screamed in despair and torment, their souls would leave them.

The Indians were totally deprived of their freedom and were put into the harshest, fiercest, most horrible servitude and captivity which no one who has not seen it can understand. Even beasts enjoy more freedom when they are allowed to graze in the field.” (end)
– Bartolome de Las Casas


The imposition of Euro-American marriage laws invalidated the same-gender marriages that were once common among tribes across North America. The Native American cultural pride revivals that began in the 1960s / Red Power movements brought about a new awareness of the Two Spirit tradition and has since inspired a gradual increase of acceptance and respect for gender variance within tribal communities. It was out of this new tribal and self respect that encouraged the shedding of the offensive “Berdache” term that was assigned by Europeans.

I will leave the last words to the late Lakota actor, Native rights activist and American Indian Movement co-founder Russell Means: “In my culture we have people who dress half-man, half-woman. Winkte, we call them in our language. If you are Winkte, that is an honorable term and you are a special human being and among my nation and all Plains people, we consider you a teacher of our children and are proud of what and who you are.”

P.S. Here is more from the diary of Las Casas and also the diary of Christopher Columbus :

“As soon as I arrived in the Indies (they thought they were in India, but really they were in the Americas), on the first Island which I found, I took some of the natives by force in order that they might learn and might give me information of whatever there is in these parts, and in that way they soon understood us and we them, whether by word or by sign; and they have been very useful to us.

I still have them with me, and they still insist that I come from heaven, in spite of all the exchanges they have had with me, and they were the first to announce this wherever I went, and the others would run from house to house and to the nearby towns shouting: “come, come and see the people from heaven.” In this way they all flocked in, men and women alike, great and small, once they were confident about us; none were left behind, and they all brought something to eat and drink, which they gave with marvelous affection.
They do not bear arms, and do not know them, for I showed them a sword, they took it by the edge and cut themselves out of ignorance. They have no iron. Their spears are made of cane. It appears to me, that the people are ingenious, and would be good servants and I am of opinion that they would very readily become Christians, as they appear to have no religion. I could conquer the whole of them with fifty men, and govern them as I pleased.
As I saw that they were very friendly to us, and perceived that they could be much more easily converted to our holy faith by gentle means than by force, I presented them with some red caps, and strings of beads to wear upon the neck, and many other trifles of small value, wherewith they were much delighted, and became wonderfully attached to us. Afterwards they came swimming to the boats, bringing parrots, balls of cotton thread, javelins, and many other things which they exchanged for articles we gave them, such as glass beads, and hawk’s bells; which trade was carried on with the utmost good will. But they seemed on the whole to me, to be a very poor people.
They knew no sect and were not idolaters, except that they all believe that power and good come from heaven, and they believed very firmly that I and these ships and crew came from heaven and in this belief they received me everywhere, once they had overcome their fear. And this is not because they are ignorant; rather, they are of subtle intelligence and can find their way around those seas, and give a marvelously good account of everything; it is only because they have never seen men clothed or ships of that kind.”

– Christopher Columbus Captain’s Log, 1492



The chief source-and, on many matters the only source-of information about what happened on the islands after Columbus came is Bartolome de las Casas, who, as a young priest, participated in the conquest of Cuba. For a time he owned a plantation on which Indian slaves worked, but he gave that up and became a vehement critic of Spanish cruelty. Las Casas transcribed Columbus’s journal and, in his fifties, began a multi-volume History of the Indies. In it, he describes the Indians. They are agile, he says, and can swim long distances, especially the women. They are not completely peaceful, because they do battle from time to time with other tribes, but their casualties seem small, and they fight when they are individually moved to do so because of some grievance, not on the orders of captains or kings.
Women in Indian society were treated so well as to startle the Spaniards. Las Casas describes sex relations:
Marriage laws are non-existent men and women alike choose their mates and leave them as they please, without offense, jealousy or anger. They multiply in great abundance; pregnant women work to the last minute and give birth almost painlessly; up the next day, they bathe in the river and are as clean and healthy as before giving birth. If they tire of their men, they give themselves abortions with herbs that force stillbirths, covering their shameful parts with leaves or cotton cloth; although on the whole, Indian men and women look upon total nakedness with as much casualness as we look upon a man’s head or at his hands.
The Indians, Las Casas says, have no religion, at least no temples. They live in large communal bell-shaped buildings, housing up to 600 people at one time … made of very strong wood and roofed with palm leaves…. They prize bird feathers of various colors, beads made of fishbones, and green and white stones with which they adorn their ears and lips, but they put no value on gold and other precious things. They lack all manner of commerce, neither buying nor selling, and rely exclusively on their natural environment for maintenance. They are extremely generous with their possessions and by the same token covet the possessions of their friends and expect the same degree of liberality. …
In Book Two of his History of the Indies, Las Casas (who at first urged replacing Indians by black slaves, thinking they were stronger and would survive, but later relented when he saw the effects on blacks) tells about the treatment of the Indians by the Spaniards. It is a unique account and deserves to be quoted at length:
Endless testimonies . .. prove the mild and pacific temperament of the natives…. But our work was to exasperate, ravage, kill, mangle and destroy; small wonder, then, if they tried to kill one of us now and then…. The admiral, it is true, was blind as those who came after him, and he was so anxious to please the King that he committed irreparable crimes against the Indians….
Las Casas tells how the Spaniards “grew more conceited every day” and after a while refused to walk any distance. They “rode the backs of Indians if they were in a hurry” or were carried on hammocks by Indians running in relays. “In this case they also had Indians carry large leaves to shade them from the sun and others to fan them with goose wings.”
Total control led to total cruelty. The Spaniards “thought nothing of knifing Indians by tens and twenties and of cutting slices off them to test the sharpness of their blades.” Las Casas tells how “two of these so-called Christians met two Indian boys one day, each carrying a parrot; they took the parrots and for fun beheaded the boys.”
The Indians’ attempts to defend themselves failed. And when they ran off into the hills they were found and killed. So, Las Casas reports, “they suffered and died in the mines and other labors in desperate silence, knowing not a soul in the world to whom they could turn for help.” He describes their work in the mines:
… mountains are stripped from top to bottom and bottom to top a thousand times; they dig, split rocks, move stones, and carry dirt on their backs to wash it in the rivers, while those who wash gold stay in the water all the time with their backs bent so constantly it breaks them; and when water invades the mines, the most arduous task of all is to dry the mines by scooping up pansful of water and throwing it up outside….
After each six or eight months’ work in the mines, which was the time required of each crew to dig enough gold for melting, up to a third of the men died.
While the men were sent many miles away to the mines, the wives remained to work the soil, forced into the excruciating job of digging and making thousands of hills for cassava plants.
Thus husbands and wives were together only once every eight or ten months and when they met they were so exhausted and depressed on both sides … they ceased to procreate. As for the newly born, they died early because their mothers, overworked and famished, had no milk to nurse them, and for this reason, while I was in Cuba, 7000 children died in three months. Some mothers even drowned their babies from sheer desperation…. in this way, husbands died in the mines, wives died at work, and children died from lack of milk . .. and in a short time this land which was so great, so powerful and fertile … was depopulated. … My eyes have seen these acts so foreign to human nature, and now I tremble as I write. …
When he arrived on Hispaniola in 1508, Las Casas says, “there were 60,000 people living on this island, including the Indians; so that from 1494 to 1508, over three million people had perished from war, slavery, and the mines. Who in future generations will believe this? I myself writing it as a knowledgeable eyewitness can hardly believe it….”



Sources :

Link 1 : http://www.cherokee.org/AboutTheNation/Culture/General/TheOldCherokeeWedding.aspx

Link 2 :

Link 3 :

Link 4 :

Link 5 :

Link 6 :

Link 7 :

Link 8 :

Link 9 :

Link 10 :

Link 11 :

Link 12 :

Link 13 :

Link 14 :

Link 15 :



The Greeks were a sexually promiscuous society in every way. Even their pantheon of gods and goddesses were seen engaging in every sexual act possible. We see this same thing in certain points of Roman history as well. In many Greek myths we see them transforming themselves into animals to have sex with humans or vice-versa. For example, Dionysus, God of Wine, was always accompanied by fauns, half-human, half-goat creatures famous for their sexual energy.

During the Dionysiac festivities, the high priest or Phallophoroi would wear a penis ornament while the other priests would carry milk and torches. They would go on a procession carrying a basket filled with phallic-shaped fruit that represented the God. These festivities were carried out during March and December, and during the theatrical performances, sexual rituals would be carried out, which would allude to the sacred episodes of Dionysus’ life.

Another Greek deity known for his sexual exploits was Zeus, who did the impossible to satisfy his desires. For instance, he transformed into golden rain to possess Danae, who had been locked away by her father. In one myth he even took the shape of a bull to abduct Europa (mother of King Minos of Crete, a woman with Phoenician origin of high lineage, and after whom the continent Europe was named) and in another he morphed into a swan to lie with Leda (Aetolian princess who became a Spartan queen). His shapeshifting abilities knew no bounds, he even turned into a serpent to have sex with his own daughter Persephone (daughter of Demeter and Queen of the underworld with King Hades).

Let’s start with some of the oldest Greek aspects of life, love and sexuality, which would be in Sparta (existed from 900BC to circa 300BC). Greek Historian Xenophon (4th Century BC Greek Historian) in his historical annals “Constitution of the Lacedaemonians”, on the training of Spartan women and wives. Read below :

“It was not by imitating the customs of other states, but by knowingly doing the opposite to most of them, that Lycurgus made his fatherland pre-eminently successful.

(1.3) To begin at the beginning, here is his legislation about the procreation of children. Other people raise the girls who will bear the children and who are supposed to have a good upbringing with the most limited portions of food and the smallest possible amount of delicacies. They make sure they abstain from wine completely or give it to them mixed with water.

The other Greeks think that girls ought to sit in isolation doing wool work, leading a sedentary existence like many craftsmen. How could they expect that girls raised in this way could produce significant offspring? (1.4) By contrast, Lycurgus thought that slave women could make a sufficient quantity of clothing.

But as far as free women were concerned, because he thought childbearing was their most important function, he decreed that the female sex ought to take bodily exercise no less than the male. He established competitions of running and of strength for women with one another, just as he did for the men, because he thought that stronger offspring would be born if both parents were strong.

(1.5) As for a wife’s sexual relations with her husband, Lycurgus saw that men in other cultures during the first part of the time had unlimited intercourse with their wives, but he knew that the opposite was right. He made it a disgrace for the husband to be seen approaching or leaving his wife. As a result it was inevitable that their desire for intercourse increased, and that as a result the offspring (if there were any) that were born were stronger than if the couple were tired of each other.

(1.6) In addition, he stopped men from taking a wife whenever they chose and decreed that they marry when they were in their prime, because he thought that this was better for their offspring. (1.7) He saw that in cases where it happened that an old man had a young wife, the men were particularly protective of their wives, and he knew that the opposite was right. He required that the older man bring in a man whose body and mind he admired and have him beget the children. (1.8) But in case a man did not want to cohabit with his wife, but wanted worthy children, he made a law that he could beget children from a woman who was noble and had borne good children, if he could persuade her husband.  (1.9) He agreed to allow many such arrangements, for the wives who wanted to have two households and husbands who wanted to acquire brothers for their children, who had blood and powers in common, but did not inherit their property.

Thus Lycurgus had different ideas about the begetting of children, and anyone who wishes to may judge whether or not he succeeded in producing in Sparta men who were superior in height and strength from the men in other states!”


Plutarch (2nd Century AD Roman Historian and Biographer) in his historical annals “Life of Lycurgus” (Lycurgus was the lawgiver in Sparta, living circa 9th Century BC), further explaining how women in Sparta should be, as well as the marriage life between men and women.

“As for education, he considered it to be a lawgiver’s most significant and noblest work. For that reason he began first off by considering legislation about marriage and childbirth. For Aristotle is wrong when he says that it was because he tried and failed to make the women chaste that he gave up the idea of controlling the freedom and dominance the women had acquired because they were compelled to be in charge because of their husbands left them behind [while they were on campaign] and so were more considerate of them than was appropriate, and addressed them as ladies.

Rather it was that Lycurgus took particular care about the women as well as the men. (14.2) He made the young women exercise their bodies by running and wrestling and throwing the discus and the javelin, so that their offspring would have a sound start by taking root in sound bodies and grow stronger, and the women themselves would be able to use their strength to withstand childbearing and wrestle with labour pains. He freed them from softness and sitting in the shade and all female habits, and made it customary for girls no less than boys to go naked in processions and to dance naked at certain festivals and to sing naked while young men were present and looking on.

(14.3) On occasion the girls made good-natured jokes about young men who had done something wrong, and again sang encomia set to music to the young men who deserved them, so as to inspire in the young men a desire for glory and emulation of their deeds. The man who was praised for his courage and was celebrated by the girls went away proud because of their praise. But the sting of their jokes and mockery was as sharp as serious admonition, because along with the other citizens the kings and the senators attended the spectacle. (14.4) There was nothing shameful in the girls’ nakedness, because it was accompanied by modesty and self-control. It produced in them simple habits and an intense desire for good health, and gave the female sex a taste for noble sentiments, since they shared with the males virtue and desire for glory. As a result they tended to speak and think the kind of thing that Gorgo, the wife of king Leonidas, is reported to have said. When (as it seems) a foreigner said to her, ‘You Spartans are the only women who rule over their men’, she replied, ‘Because only we are the mothers of men’.

(15.1) These customs also provided an incentive for marriage. I mean the naked processions of maidens and competitions in full view of the young men, who were attracted to them not (as Plato says) ‘by sexual rather than logical inevitability’.  In addition, Lycurgus attached disgrace to bachelorhood; bachelors were forbidden to watch the naked processions (15.3) Men married the girls by kidnapping them, not when they were small and immature, but when they had reached their full prime. Once the girl had been kidnapped a so-called bridesmaid cropped her hair close to her head, clothed her in a man’s cloak and sandals, and left her lying on a pallet in the dark. The bridegroom, not drunk or debauched, but sober, and after having dined as usual at the common table, came in and undid her belt and carried her off to the marriage bed.

(15.4) After spending a short time with his wife he went off in a dignified way to his usual quarters, in order to sleep with the other young men. He kept on doing like this from then on: he would spend his days and sleep at night with his comrades, go to his wife secretly and cautiously, because he was ashamed and afraid that someone would discover him in her room, and meanwhile his wife was devising and planning with him how they might devise opportunities for secret meetings. (15.5) They carried on like this for some time, so long that some of them had children before they saw their wives in the daylight.

Such interviews not only provided opportunity to practise self-control and moderation, but kept their bodies fertile and always fresh for loving and eager for intercourse, because they were not satisfied and worn out by continual intercourse, but had always some remnant of an incentive for their mutual passion and pleasure.

(15.6) By endowing marriage with such restraint and order, he was equally able to dispel empty and womanish jealousy, by ensuring that although they removed unworthy offences from marriage, they could share the begetting of children with their fellows, and they made fun of anyone who turned to murder or war on the grounds that they could not share or participate in such practices. It was possible for an older man with a younger wife, if he was pleased with and thought highly of one of the virtuous young men, to bring him to his wife and having filled her with noble seed, to adopt the child as his own. Similarly it was possible for a good man, who admired the chaste wife of another man, to persuade her husband to let him sleep with her, so that he could plant his seed in a good garden plot and beget good children, to be brothers and kin to the best families … (15.9) His physical and political program at that time was very far from the laxity among the women that was said to have developed later, and there was no thought of adultery among them.

(16.1) Fathers did not have authority over raising their offspring.

Instead, the father took his child and brought it to a place called Lesche, [26] where sat the elders of the tribe. They examined the child, and if it were well-formed and strong, ordered it to be raised, and gave it one of the nine-thousand lots.

But if the child were ill-born and maimed, they discarded it in the so-called Apothetae, a kind of pit near Mt. Taygetus, (16.2) on the grounds that it was not profitable for it to live, either for itself or for the state, if it were not well-framed and strong right from the start. This is why [Spartan] women washed infants not in water but in wine, in order to test their strength. For it is said that undiluted wine causes convulsions in babies who are epileptic or weak, and that healthy babies are tempered by it and their frames strengthened.

(16.3) Their nurses took special care in their craft, so that they were able to raise infants without swaddling cloths around their limbs, and left their figures free, and the babies were contented with their regime, and not fussy about food, and not scared of the dark or afraid to be left alone, and free of ignoble irritability and whining. For this reason certain foreigners purchased Spartan nurses for their children. They say that Amycla, the nurse of the Athenian Alcibiades, was a Spartan.” (end)

So you see, they engaged in many abnormalities according to today’s standards. From homosexuality, bisexuality, polyamory, pedophilia, threesomes and even played games where the man would have to ‘sneak’ in to have sex with his wife (thinking this would keep the passion strong between the couple over the long haul). The men also shared wives with the strongest, most virile males available. We see depictions of some of these practices through their artifacts and pottery, such as these below





The 2nd Greek pot above, was painted around 500 BC. It is actually a wine-cooler designed to be used at an elite Athenian drinking party. The “symposium” as it was called, enabled men to leave their wives at home and let their hair down together. But it also offered opportunities for them to drink too much and end the evening in the arms of a prostitute. The half-man, half-horse creatures depicted here warn against the loss of dignity (humanity even) that too much fun can bring, and underline why the god of wine, Dionysus, had to be worshiped. Their antics proved so shocking that at the end of the nineteenth, beginning of the twentieth century the erection of the kneeling satyr was painted out by museum curators leaving his drinking cup hovering.

Both in Greece and Rome, we see erotica all over the place, from art, artifacts, statues, coins, monuments, even lamps or streetlights with sexual insignia (after the ruins of Pompeii and Herculaneum were excavated, from being completely inundated with ash when Mt. Vesuvius erupted in 79AD, there were nothing but these sexual relics and sites found). Pompeii had highly explicit mosaics and paintings, from nude sculptures to figurines of penises and vaginas. You can watch a short clip on the archaeological finds in Pompeii in the link below :

As a matter of fact, several phallic necklaces were used as a sign of manhood, virility, and power. They were passed from soldier to soldier as a token of good luck during battle. Phallic statuettes were also displayed in infant burials to protect the deceased on their way to the underworld. It’s said that Romans believed in some sort of demonic figures who haunted men, so they would put a phallic artifact with strange shapes and motifs to scare those evil spirits trying to harm them. Here is a picture of those artifacts below


We like to think that the sexual feature of human nature has always been seen the same way as we understand it today.  Each society and culture, with their own world views, looks back at the past and constructs their own interpretation of it. A sculpture such as that of Pan making love to a goat plunges us back into darkness and uncertainty, and makes the chasm of two millennia feel as abyss-like as ever. We will never be able fully to comprehend what the sculpture meant to the Romans who first saw it. Where we see smut or rape, perhaps they saw comedy or even tenderness. All we can say with certainty is that their attitudes towards sex and violence differed radically from ours. Understanding the past is an elusive, ever-changing quest.

(The god Pan having sex with a goat, found in Herculaneum ; shown in picture below) :


The Etruscans were an early, wealthy Italian (later Roman ; beginning around 3rd Century BC) tribe, who lasted from 800 BC to circa 260 BC. They were said to be very open sexually as well. Greek Historian Theopompus (4th Century BC) wrote in his historical annals ‘Histories’ about Etruscan family life. Several features of the libertine conduct attributed by Theopompus to the Etruscans occur also in Plato’s ideal State and in Xenophon’s (4th Century BC Greek Historian) description of Sparta. Read below :

“Sharing wives is an established Etruscan custom. Etruscan women take particular care of their bodies and exercise often, sometimes along with the men, and sometimes by themselves. It is not a disgrace for them to be seen naked. They do not share their couches with their husbands but with the other men who happen to be present, and they propose toasts to anyone they choose. They are expert drinkers and very attractive.

The Etruscans raise all the children that are born, without knowing who their fathers are. The children live the way their parents live, often attending drinking parties and having sexual relations with all the women. It is no disgrace for them to do anything in the open, or to be seen having it done to them, for they consider it a native custom. So far from thinking it disgraceful, they say when someone ask to see the master of the house, and he is making love, that he is doing so-and-so, calling the indecent action by its name.

When they are having sexual relations either with courtesans or within their family, they do as follows: after they have stopped drinking and are about to go to bed, while the lamps are still lit, servants bring in courtesans, or boys, or sometimes even their wives. And when they have enjoyed these they bring in boys, and make love to them. They sometimes make love and have intercourse while people are watching them, but most of the time they put screens woven of sticks around the beds, and throw cloths on top of them.

They are keen on making love to women, but they particularly enjoy boys and youths. The youths in Etruria are very good-looking, because they live in luxury and keep their bodies smooth. In fact all the barbarians in the West use pitch to pull out and shave off the hair on their bodies.” (end)

We also find that many of the laws in ancient Italy, were very different from our own as well. For example, Gortyn was a municipality on the island of Crete. It amalgamated into Rome in the 1st Century BC, but before then, it had a Code of Law of its own. Here are excerpts from the Gortyn Law Code circa 450 BC (inscr. Creticae 4.72, cols. ii.3-27, ii. 45-iv.54, v. 1-9. vi.31-46, vi.56-vii.2, vii.15-viii.19, xi. 18-9. G)

“The various laws recorded on this long and beautifully incised inscription differ in many respects from Athenian practice (cf. nos. 80 and 81). In Gortyn women appear to have somewhat more independence: instead of a dowry, daughters have a specific portion of the inheritance equal to half of that of a son; under certain (perhaps only remotely possible circumstances) even an heiress might be able to choose her husband; a women can keep her own property (rather than having her dowry returned to her father or kyrios) and half of the cloth she has woven during the course of the marriage.

Sexual offences

(ii.3-27) If a person rapes a free person, male or female, he shall pay 100 staters, and if [the victim] is from the house of an apetairos,[2] 10 staters; and if a slave rapes a free person, male or female, he shall pay double. If a free man rapes a serf, male or female, he shall pay 5 drachmas. If a male serf rapes a serf, male or female, he shall pay five staters.

If a person deflowers a female household serf, he shall pay 2 staters. If she has already been deflowered, 1 obol if in day-time, 2 obols if at night. The female slave’s oath takes precedence.[3]

If anyone makes an attempt to rape a free woman under the guardianship of a relative, he shall pay 10 staters, if a witness testifies.

If someone is taken in adultery with a free woman in her father’s house, or her brother’s or her husband’s, he is to pay 10 staters; if in another man’s house, 50 staters; if with the wife of an apetairos, 10 staters. But if a slave is taken in adultery with a free woman, he must pay double. If a slave is taken in adultery with a slave, 5 staters.

Disposition of property in divorce

(ii.45-iii.16) If a husband and wife divorce, she is to keep her property, whatever she brought to the marriage, and one-half the produce (if there is any) from her own property, and half of whatever she has woven within the house; also she is to have 5 staters if her husband is the cause of the divorce. If the husband swears that he is not the cause of the divorce, the judge is to take an oath and decide. If the wife carries away anything else belonging to the husband, she must pay five staters and whatever she carries away from him, and whatever she has stolen she must return to him. About what she denies [having taken], the judge is to order that she must sear by Artemis before the statue of [Artemis] Archeress in the Amyclean temple. If anyone takes anything from her after she has made her denial, he is to pay 5 staters and return the thing itself. If a stranger helps her to carry anything away, he must pay 10 staters and double the amount of whatever the judge swears that he helped her to take away.


(iii.17-44) If a man dies and leaves children behind, if the wife wishes, she may marry, keeping her own property and whatever her husband gave her according to an agreement written in the presence of three adult free witnesses. If she should take anything away that belongs to her children, that is grounds for a trial. If the husband leaves her without issue, she is to have her own property and half of whatever she has woven within the house, and she is to get her portion of the produce in the house along with the lawful heirs, and whatever her husband may have given her according to written agreement. But if she should take away anything else, it is grounds for a trial.

If a woman dies without issue the husband is to give her property back to her lawful heirs and half of what she has woven within and half of the produce if it comes from her property. If the husband or wife wishes to pay for its transport, it is to be in clothing or twelve staters or something worth 12 staters, but not more.

If a female serf is separated from a male serf while he is alive or if he dies, she is to keep what she has. If she takes anything else away, it is grounds for a trial.

Provisions for children in case of death or divorce

(iii.45-iv. 54) If a wife who is separated from her husband should bear a child, it is to be brought to the husband in his house in the presence of three witnesses, If he does not receive it, it is up to the mother to raise or expose the child. The oath of relatives and witnesses is to have preference, if they brought it.

If a female serf should bear a child while separated [from her husband], she is to bring it to the master of the man who married her, in the presence of two witnesses. If he does not received the child, it is to be long to the master of the female serf. but if she marries the same man again before the end of the year, the child shall belong to the master of the male serf. The oaths of person who brought the child and of the witnesses shall have preference.

If a divorced woman should expose her child before presenting it according to the law, she shall pay 50 staters for a free child, and 5 for a slave, if she is convicted. If the man to whom she brings the child has no house, or she does not see him, she shall not pay a penalty if she exposes the child.

If a female serf who is not married conceives and bears a child, the child shall belong to the master of her father. If the father is not alive then to the masters of her brothers.

The father has power over the children and division of property, and the mother over her own possessions. So long as [the father and mother] are alive, the property is not to be divided. But if one of them is fined, the person who is fined shall have his share reduced proportionately according to the law.

If a father dies, the city dwellings and whatever is inside the houses in which a serf who lives in the country does not reside, and the cattle which do not belong to a serf, shall belong to the sons. The other possessions shall be divided fairly, and the sons shall each get two parts, however many they are, and the daughters each get one part, however many they are.

The mother’s property shall also be divided if she dies, in the same way as prescribed for the father’s. But if there is no property other than the house, the daughters shall receive their share as prescribed. If the father during his lifetime should give to a married daughter, let him give her share as prescribed, but not more. The daughter to whom he gave or promised her share shall have it, but no additional possessions from her father’s property.

(v.1-9) If any woman does not have property either from a gift by her father or brother or from a pledge or from an inheritance given when the Aithalian clan consisting of Cyllus and his colleagues [where in power], these women are to have a portion, but it will not be lawful to take away gifts given previously.

(vi.31-46) If a mother dies leaving children, the father has power over the mother’s estate, but he should not sell or mortgage it, unless the children are of age and give their consent. If he marries another wife, the children are to have power over their mother’s estate.

Determination of social status

(vi.56-vii.2) If a slave goes to a free woman and marries her, the children shall be free. If a free woman goes to a slave, the children shall be slaves.

Heiresses [4]

(vii.15-viii.19) The heiress is to marry the oldest of her father’s living brothers. If her father has no living brothers but there are sons of the brothers, she is to marry the oldest brother’s son. If there are more heiresses and sons of brothers, the [additional heiress] is to marry the next son after the son of the oldest. The groom-elect is to have one heiress, and not more.

If the heiress is too young to marry, she is to have the house, if there is one, and the groom-elect is to have half of the revenue from everything.

If he does not wish to marry her as prescribed by law, the heiress is to take all the property and marry the next one in succession, if there is one. If there is no one, she may marry whomever she wishes to of those who ask her from the same phratry. [5] If the heiress is of age and does not wish to marry the intended bridegroom, or the intended groom is too young and the heiress is unwilling to wait, she is to have the house, if there is one in the city, and whatever is in the house, and talking half of the remaining property she is to marry another of those from the phratry who ask her, but she is to give a share of the property to the groom [whom she rejected].

If there are no kinsmen as defined for the heiress, she is to take all the property and marry from the phratry whomever she wishes.

If no one from the phratry wishes to marry her, her relations should announce to the tribe ‘does anyone want to marry her?’ If someone wants to, it should be within thirty days of the announcement. If not, she is free to marry another man, whomever she can.

Restrictions concerning adoption

(xi. 18-19) A woman is not to adopt [a child] nor a man under age.” (end)

Since the Jews and then the Christians were both under the auspices of Greece and then later, Rome, we should also include that many Jews and even some Christians, believed that polygyny was acceptable within the confines of their religious beliefs. It was the Greek utopian reformer Solon who instituted strict marital monogamy in Greek culture in 600 B.C., the first prohibition of polygamy in world history. Economists like David D. Friedman, (Price Theory, Ch. 21) can show mathematically that polygamy by itself benefits females, assuming voluntary marriages to benefit from increased choice. But there is no evidence that Solon created strict monogamy to reduce women’s choices, instead it was for the opposite side, to reduce competition among men. In order to facilitate the change, several cultural conditions were created or solidified, such as state sponsored prostitution, support for homosexuality, belief that marriage was only for procreation, as well as a cultural belief that romantic love was only between men.

By the time of Christ, pagan Greek culture had practiced centuries of strict marital monogamy, as well as did the pagan Roman culture they influenced. The first six Roman emperors had 25 wives between them, but all by serial monogamy of divorcing one to marry the next. So even the Roman emperors were bound by the power of their pagan cultural taboos. Even Napoleon divorced his wife Josephine and married another, despite continued mutual affection, only because she could not bare him a child. The Solonic taboo continued from pagan Greece, to pagan Rome, to Catholic Rome, to atheist France, where even leaders dared not break it.

So what of Jews under the rule of Greeks and then Romans? I’ll let George Joyce provide the answer in his “Christian Marriage: An Historical and Doctrinal Study”  (1933):

“When the Christian Church came into being, polygamy was still practiced by the Jews. It is true that we find no references to it in the New Testament; and from this some have inferred that it must have fallen into disuse, and that at the time of our Lord the Jewish people had become monogamous. But the conclusion appears to be unwarranted. Josephus in two places speaks of polygamy as a recognized institution: and Justin Martyr makes it a matter of reproach to Trypho that the Jewish teachers permitted a man to have several wives. Indeed when in 212 A.D. the lex Antoniana de civitate gave the rights of Roman Citizenship to great numbers of Jews, it was found necessary to tolerate polygamy among them, even when though it was against Roman law for a citizen to have more than one wife. In 285 A.D. a constitution of Diocletian and Maximian interdicted polygamy to all subjects of the empire without exception. But with the Jews, at least, the enactment failed of its effect; and in 393 A.D. a special law was issued by Theodosius to compel the Jews to relinquish this national custom. Even so they were not induced to conform.”

Here we see the interesting case that pagan Rome restricted and persecuted polygamy and the Jews for practicing it, including Diocletian, an equally infamous persecutor of Christians. And then this pattern even continued with the Christian emperor Theodosius. After this period, Christian Roman Emperors would continue the pagan Roman pattern of increasing the punishment for polygamy so that Emperor Justinian outlawed polygamy to the degree that only a few of the wealthiest Jews were able to avoid coerced divorce and keep their wives by paying a fine of ten pounds of gold in 535 A.D. By the ninth century, polygamy brought the death penalty. In order to end over eight centuries of persecution, Judaism in Europe under Rabbi Gershom decided to self-monitor among European Judaism and prohibit it among their own in the 11th Century.

[Note that Sephardic Jews, those who were not under the governments influenced by pagan Greco-Roman taboos never gave up polygamy and still practice polygamy to this day.]

This is similar to what happened to Mormons in America. The persecution of them became so great they would become the first religion to claim to receive a message from God suspending polygamy. They likewise began rigorous self-policing and persecution of their own fundamentalist sub-sects who refused to give up polygamy and divorce their wives.

But this does not address the New Testament for Christians, and how Christians came to generally oppose polygamy. Many centrally influential Christian writers admitted that the New Testament did not prohibit polygamy, including Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and Martin Luther, who wrote:

“I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter.” De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329–330.

But still others made and still make a claim that it is prohibited by a few different Biblical arguments. First is a claim already disproven by the history above, that polygamy was already not practiced by Jews of the first century, and so didn’t require specific opposition. Next is an argument based on the parallels in Paul’s phrase, “Let each man have his own wife and each woman her own husband.” However, the English of this phrase hides a detail from the Greek that proves and defends polygamy was assumed and allowed.The phrase uses two different words for “own”: heautou and idios. The difference is to clarify that a husband has a wife exclusively that he cannot share. The wife has a husband using a collective “own”, such as in the phrase “Every one return to his own city”. (Luke 2:3)  In this case, a man does not exclusively own the city in opposition to other citizens as co-owners, just as a wife’s ownership of her husband does not prohibit other wives co-owning him as husband.

The argument that Adam had only one wife, as if prohibitive of polygamy, was not a true in Biblical times, or Biblical examples, or Biblical interpretation, and so to try to reinterpret it so now requires intellectual dishonesty. At the least, intellectual negligent ignorance, but the more intelligent the person is, the more dishonest the argument becomes. Further, this type of “judicial activist” reinterpretation is what put Germany on the course of theological liberalism, allowed them to argue that Jesus was an Aryan, and all the Nazi evils that naturally followed from the theologically liberal authority to change hermeneutical methods of interpretation.

The final argument is the phrase used for a qualification for elders, “husband of one wife” in most English translations. However, the Greek is mias gunaikos andra. The word mias can mean either “one” or “first”. Context should decide, but in church history, a cultural bias colored the interpretation from the beginning. Gentile converts to Christianity, coming from Greco-Roman opposition to polygamy would assume it mean “one”. But Jewish converts to Christianity would assume this is requiring a man who would keep and not divorce his first wife. Indeed, even though John Calvin opposed polygamy, he acknowledged that the early Jewish Christians continued in polygamy.

Consider Abimelech. “When God reproved Abimelech, king of Gerar, for his intended adultery with, Sarah, wife of Abraham, he did, at the time, approve of his polygamy; for Abimelech said, “In the integrity of my heart and innocency of my hands have I done this.” “Said he not unto me, She is my sister? and she, even she herself, said, He is my brother.” And God said, “I know that thou didst this in the integrity of thy heart:” “now, therefore, restore the man his wife.” “And God healed Abimelech and his wife and his maid-servants.” God could allow him to live in open polygamy, without reproof, and “in the integrity of his heart,” but could not allow him to commit adultery, even ignorantly.” (The History And Philosophy of Marriage; James Campbell, 1869).

Whether one accepts the Jewish or pagan Greek method of interpretation of mias gunaikos andra depends on if one contemplates Jesus statement, “Until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law.” In other words, the Old Testament’s concepts and definitions of marriage are used with Jesus correcting misinterpretation. Jesus is not creating replacement definitions.. In contrast to this is the gnostic approach which tries to argue that the Law was evil and materialistic, as was God in the Old Testament, and Jesus was trying to oppose the Old Testament God. In this, official Gentile Christianity orthodoxy, at least through Imperial decrees and laws, chose, perhaps partly by accident, partly by excessive anti-Jewish bias, to follow the gnostic approach to argue against polygamy, even if it was generally critical of gnosticism.

Another issue is an attempt to reinterpret Old Testament texts claiming support for monogamy, such as Adam having only one wife, or Abraham’s second wife causing conflict. But yet, if these did not imply a strict monogamy then, then they can’t be correctly interpreted later to do so. Take the example of Abraham, the example of faith, lived with at least a third wife and unnamed concubines without any implied wrongness.

Genesis 4:19 And Lamech took two wives. The name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.
Genesis 26:34 When Esau was forty years old, he took to wife Judith the daughter of Be-e′ri the Hittite, and Bas′emath the daughter of Elon the Hittite;
Genesis 28:8-9 So when Esau saw that the Canaanite women did not please Isaac his father, Esau went to Ish′mael and took to wife, besides the wives he had, Ma′halath the daughter of Ish′mael Abraham’s son, the sister of Neba′ioth.
Genesis 30 Jacob mates with Rachel, Leah and their two handmaidens named Zilpah (Leah’s) and Bilhah (Rachel’s), and from these four women, came the 12 Children of Jacob (Israel).
Exodus 21:10 If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights.
Numbers 31:15-18 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
Deuteronomy 21:10-11 When you go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife.
Deuteronomy 21:15-17 “If a man has two wives, the one loved and the other unloved, and both the loved and the unloved have borne him children, and if the firstborn son belongs to the unloved, then on the day when he assigns his possessions as an inheritance to his sons, he may not treat the son of the loved as the firstborn in preference to the son of the unloved, who is the firstborn, but he shall acknowledge the firstborn, the son of the unloved, by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the firstfruits of his strength. The right of the firstborn is his.
Deuteronomy 25:5-10 “If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the dead man shall not be married outside the family to a stranger. Her husband’s brother shall go in to her and take her as his wife and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her. And the first son whom she bears shall succeed to the name of his dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel. And if the man does not wish to take his brother’s wife, then his brother’s wife shall go up to the gate to the elders and say, ‘My husband’s brother refuses to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a husband’s brother to me.’ Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him, and if he persists, saying, ‘I do not wish to take her,’ then his brother’s wife shall go up to him in the presence of the elders and pull his sandal off his foot and spit in his face. And she shall answer and say, ‘So shall it be done to the man who does not build up his brother’s house.’
Judges 8:30 Now Gideon had seventy sons, his own offspring, for he had many wives.
1 Samuel 1:1-2 There was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim of the hill country of Ephraim whose name was Elkanah the son of Jeroham, son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of Zuph, an Ephrathite. He had two wives. The name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other, Peninnah. And Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.
2 Samuel 5:13 After he left Hebron, [King] David took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem, and more sons and daughters were born to him.
2 Samuel 12:8 (Nathan the Prophet speaking on behalf of God to King David) I gave your master’s house (King Saul) to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more.
(NOTE : The Hebrew god here says that it was he himself who gave all those wives and concubines to David and had David asked for more wives and concubines, god said he would’ve given David even MORE).
1 Kings 11 says that King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. And while this turned his heart away (according to the ‘story’), it shows that the people were not condemning the practice of polygamy and were quite used to kings especially having more than one wife and more than one concubine.
1 Chronicles 3:1-9 These were the sons of David born to him in Hebron: The firstborn was Amnon the son of Ahinoam of Jezreel; the second, Daniel the son of Abigail of Carmel; the third, Absalom the son of Maakah daughter of Talmai king of Geshur; the fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith; the fifth, Shephatiah the son of Abital; and the sixth, Ithream, by his wife Eglah. These six were born to David in Hebron, where he reigned seven years and six months. David reigned in Jerusalem thirty-three years, and these were the children born to him there: Shammua, Shobab, Nathan and Solomon. These four were by Bathsheba daughter of Ammiel. There were also Ibhar, Elishua, Eliphelet, Nogah, Nepheg, Japhia, Elishama, Eliada and Eliphelet—nine in all. All these were the sons of David, besides his sons by his concubines. And Tamar was their sister.
1 Chronicles 4:5 Ashhur, the father of Tekoa, had two wives, Helah and Naarah
2 Chronicles 11:21 Rehoboam loved Maacah the daughter of Absalom above all his wives and concubines (he took eighteen wives and sixty concubines, and fathered twenty-eight sons and sixty daughters).
2 Chronicles 13:21 But Abijah grew mighty. And he took fourteen wives and had twenty-two sons and sixteen daughters.
2 Chronicles 24:1-3 Joash was seven years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem forty years. His mother’s name was Zibiah; she was from Beersheba. Joash did what was right in the eyes of the LORD all the years of Jehoiada the priest. Jehoiada chose two wives for him, and he had sons and daughters.
Isaiah 4:1 And seven women shall take hold of one man in that day, saying, “We will eat our own bread and wear our own clothes, only let us be called by your name; take away our reproach.”

Although many women enjoyed certain perks in society, they were not always well thought of by Greco-Roman society. Here are a few examples. Hesiod (Greek Poet, living around 700BC), has two extant works, one of which is entitled, “Works and Days” and the other is entitled, “Theogony.” He writes in the latter, that after humans received the stolen gift of fire from Prometheus, an angry Zeus decides to give humanity a punishing gift to compensate for the boon they had been given. He commands Hephaestus to mold from earth the first woman, a “beautiful evil” whose descendants would torment the human race. After Hephaestus does so, Athena dresses her in a silvery gown, an embroidered veil, garlands and an ornate crown of silver. This woman goes unnamed in the Theogony, but is presumably Pandora, whose myth Hesiod revisited in Works and Days. When she first appears before gods and mortals, “wonder seized them” as they looked upon her. But she was “sheer guile, not to be withstood by men.” Hesiod elaborates (590–93):

“From her is the race of women and female kind: of her is the deadly race and tribe of women who live amongst mortal men to their great trouble, no helpmates in hateful poverty, but only in wealth.”

Hesiod goes on to lament that men who try to avoid the evil of women by avoiding marriage will fare no better (604–607):

“He reaches deadly old age without anyone to tend his years, and though he at least has no lack of livelihood while he lives, yet, when he is dead, his kinsfolk divide his possessions amongst them.”

Hesiod concedes that occasionally a man finds a good wife, but still (609) “evil contends with good.”

In the ‘Works and Days’ version of the myth (lines 60–105), Hesiod expands upon her origin, and moreover widens the scope of the misery she inflicts on humanity. As before, she is created by Hephaestus, but now more gods contribute to her completion (63–82): Athena taught her needlework and weaving (63–4); Aphrodite “shed grace upon her head and cruel longing and cares that weary the limbs” (65–6); Hermes gave her “a shameful mind and deceitful nature” (67–8); Hermes also gave her the power of speech, putting in her “lies and crafty words” (77–80) ; Athena then clothed her; next Persuasion and the Charites adorned her with necklaces and other finery (72–4); the Horae adorned her with a garland crown. Finally, Hermes gives this woman a name: Pandora – “All-gifted” – “because all the Olympians gave her a gift”. In this retelling of her story, Pandora’s deceitful feminine nature becomes the least of humanity’s worries. For she brings with her a jar (which, due to textual corruption in the sixteenth century, came to be called a box)[9][10] containing[11] “burdensome toil and sickness that brings death to men” (91–2), diseases (102) and “a myriad other pains” (100). Prometheus had (fearing further reprisals) warned his brother Epimetheus not to accept any gifts from Zeus. But Epimetheus did not listen; he accepted Pandora, who promptly scattered the contents of her jar. As a result, Hesiod tells us, “the earth and sea are full of evils” (101). One item, however, did not escape the jar (96–9):

“Only Hope was left within her unbreakable house, she remained under the lip of the jar, and did not fly away. Before [she could], Pandora replaced the lid of the jar. This was the will of aegis-bearing Zeus the Cloudgatherer.”

Hesiod does not say why hope (elpis) remained in the jar.

Hesiod closes with this moral (105): “Thus it is not possible to escape the mind of Zeus.”

Hesiod also outlines how the end of man’s Golden Age, (an all-male society of immortals who were reverent to the gods, worked hard, and ate from abundant groves of fruit) was brought on by Prometheus, when he stole Fire from Mt. Olympus and gave it to mortal man, Zeus punished the technologically advanced society by creating woman. Thus, Pandora was created as the first woman and given the jar (mistranslated as ‘box’) which releases all evils upon man. The opening of the jar serves as the beginning of the Silver Age, in which man is now subject to death, and with the introduction of woman to birth as well, giving rise to the cycle of death and rebirth.” (end)


The next example comes from Semonides of Amorgos (Greek Poet : Lived in 7th Century BC). His poem is entitled, ‘WOMEN’ is based on the idea that Zeus created men and women differently, and that he specifically created ten types of women based on different models from the natural world. Of the ten types of women in the poem, nine are delineated as destructive: the dirty woman comes from a pig; the cunning woman originates from a fox, the incessantly curious and high-maintenance woman comes from a dog, the lazy or apathetic woman comes from earth or soil, the capricious woman of mood swings comes from seawater, the stubborn woman comes from an ass, the untrustworthy and uncontrollable woman comes from a weasel or skunk (depending on the translation), the overly proud woman comes from a mare, and the worst and ugliest type of woman comes from an ape or monkey. Only the “Bee Woman” (who is dismissed as an impossible ideal) is regarded as virtuous. The bee reference is considered homage to the earlier poem of Hesiod entitled Theogony, which uses the metaphor of women and men as bees in one part.

Here is his poem ‘WOMEN’ in its entirety below :

1 From the start, the gods made women different.
One type is from a pig–a hairy sow
whose house is like a rolling heap of filth;
and she herself, unbathed, in unwashed clothes,

5 reposes on the shit-pile, growing fat.
Another type the gods made from a fox:
pure evil, and aware of everything.
This woman misses nothing: good or bad,
she notices, considers, and declares

10 that good is bad and bad is good. Her mood
changes from one moment to the next.
One type is from a dog–a no-good bitch,
a mother through and through; she wants to hear
everything, know everything, go everywhere,

15 and stick her nose in everything, and bark
whether she sees anyone or not.
A man can’t stop her barking; not with threats,
not (when he’s had enough) by knocking out
her teeth with a stone, and not with sweet talk either;

20 even among guests, she’ll sit and yap;
the onslaught of her voice cannot be stopped.
One type the gods of Mount Olympus crafted
out of Earth–their gift to man! She’s lame
and has no sense of either good or bad.

25 She knows no useful skill, except to eat
–and, when the gods make winter cold and hard
to drag her chair up closer to the fire.
Another type is from the Sea; she’s two-faced.
One day she’s calm and smiling–any guest

30 who sees her in your home will praise her then:
“This woman is the best in all the world
and also the most beautiful.” The next day
she’s wild and unapproachable, unbearable
even to look at, filled with snapping hate,

35 ferocious, like a bitch with pups, enraged
at loved ones and at enemies alike.
Just as the smooth unrippled sea at times
stands still, a joy to mariners in summer,
and then at times is wild with pounding waves–

40 This woman’s temperament is just like that.
The ocean has its own perplexing ways.
Another type is from a drab, gray ass;
she’s used to getting smacked, and won’t give in
until you threaten her and really force her.

45 She’ll do her work all right, and won’t complain;
but then she eats all day, all night–she eats
everything in sight, in every room.
And when it comes to sex, she’s just as bad;
she welcomes any man that passes by.

50 Another loathsome, miserable type
is from a weasel: undesirable
in every way–un-charming, un-alluring.
She’s sex-crazed, too; but any man who climbs
aboard her will get seasick. And she steals

55 from neighbors, and from sacrificial feasts.
Another type a horse with flowing mane
gave birth to. She avoids all kinds of work
and hardship; she would never touch a mill
or lift a sieve, or throw the shit outside,

60 or sit beside the oven (all that soot!).
She’ll touch her husband only when she has to.
She washes off her body every day
twice, sometimes three times! then rubs herself
with perfumed oil. She always wears her hair

65 combed-out, and dressed with overhanging flowers.
Such a wife is beautiful to look at
for others; for her keeper, she’s a pain
–unless he is a king, or head of state
who can afford extravagant delights.

70 Another type is from an ape. I’d say
that Zeus made her the greatest pain of all–
his gift to man! Her face is hideous.
This woman is a total laughingstock
when she walks through the town. She has no neck,

75 no butt–she’s all legs. You should see the way
she moves around. I pity the poor man
who holds this horrid woman in his arms.
She’s well-versed in every kind of trick
just like an ape; what’s more, she has no shame

80 and doesn’t care if people laugh at her.
She’d never think of doing something kind
to anyone; she plots the whole day long
to see how she can do the greatest harm.
Another type is from a bee. Good luck

85 in finding such a woman! Only she
deserves to be exempt from stinging blame.
The household that she manages will thrive;
a loving wife beside her loving man,
she’ll grow old, having borne illustrious

90 and handsome children; she herself shines bright
among all women. Grace envelops her.
She doesn’t like to sit with other women
discussing sex. Zeus gratifies mankind
with these most excellent and thoughtful wives.

95 But by the grim contrivances of Zeus
all these other types are here to stay
side by side with man forever. Yes,
Zeus made this the greatest pain of all:
Woman/ If she seems to want to help

100 that’s when she does her keeper the most harm.
A man who’s with a woman can’t get through
a single day without a troubled mind.
He’ll never banish Hunger from his house:
unwelcome, hateful lodger, hostile god.

105 Just when a man seems most content at home
and ready for enjoyment, by the grace
of god or man, that’s when she’ll pick a fight,
her battle-helmet flashing, full of blame.
A household with a woman is at a loss

110 to give a decent welcome to a guest.
The wife who seems the most restrained and good,
she’s the most disastrous of them all;
for while her slack-jawed husband gapes at her
the neighbors laugh at how he’s been deceived.

115 Each man will diligently praise his own
and blame the next man’s wife; we just don’t see that we all share alike in this hard luck. For Zeus made this the greatest pain of all
and locked us in a shackle hard as iron

120 and never to be broken, ever since
the day that Hades opened up his gates
for all the men who fought that woman’s war.” (end)


The last example is from Juvenal (55AD-138AD), who was a Roman Satirist. In his 6th Satirical Work “Satire VI” (“Satura VI”) is a verse satire, written around 115 CE. The poem laments what Juvenal sees as the decay of feminine virtue, and uses a series of acidic vignettes on the degraded state of female morality (some would say a misogynistic rant), purportedly to dissuade his friend Postumius from marriage. It is the longest and one of the most famous (or infamous) of his sixteen satires.

The poem opens with a parody of the golden age myths and of the Ages of Man (in the Golden Age no one feared a thief, the Silver Age marked the first adulterers, and the remaining crimes arrived in the Iron Age). The goddesses Pudicitia (Chastity) and Astraea (Justice) then withdrew from the earth in disgust. He questions his friend Postumius’ plans for marriage when there are alternatives, such as committing suicide or just sleeping with a boy.

Juvenal then relates a series of examples of why women and marriage should be avoided. He describes the notorious adulterer, Ursidius, who wants a wife of old-fashioned virtue, but is insane to think he will actually get one. He then gives examples of lustful wives, such as Eppia, a senator’s wife, who ran off to Egypt with a gladiator, and Messalina, wife of Claudius, who used to sneak out of the palace to work at a brothel. Although lust may be the least of their sins, many greedy husbands are willing to overlook such offences for the dowries they can receive. He argues that men love a pretty face not the woman herself, and when she gets old, they can just kick her out.

Juvenal then discusses pretentious women, and claims he would prefer a prostitute for a wife over someone like Scipio’s daughter, Cornelia Africana (widely remembered as a perfect example of a virtuous Roman woman), since he says virtuous women are often arrogant. He suggests that dressing and speaking Greek is not at all attractive, especially in an older woman.

He then accuses women of being quarrelsome and of tormenting the men they love in their desire to rule the home, and then they just move on to another man. He says that a man will never be happy while his mother-in-law still lives, as she teaches her daughter evil habits. Women cause lawsuits and love to wrangle, covering their own transgressions with accusations of their husbands’ (although if a husband catches them at this, they are even more indignant).

In days gone by, it was poverty and constant work that kept women chaste, and it is the excessive wealth that came with conquest that has destroyed Roman morality with luxury. Homosexuals and effeminate men are a moral contamination, especially because women listen to their advice. If eunuchs guard your wife, you should be sure they really are eunuchs (“who will guard the guards themselves?”). Both high- and low-born women are equally profligate and lacking in foresight and self-restraint.

Juvenal then turns to women who intrude into matters that pertain to men, and are constantly blathering gossip and rumours. He says that they make terrible neighbours and hostesses, keeping their guests waiting, and then drinking and vomiting like a snake that has fallen into a vat of wine. Educated women who fancy themselves as orators and grammarians, disputing literary points and noting every grammatical slip of their husbands, are likewise repulsive.

Rich women are uncontrollable, only making any attempt to look presentable for their lovers and spending their time at home with their husbands covered in their beauty concoctions. They rule their households like bloody tyrants, and employ an army of maids to get them ready for the public, while they live with their husbands as though they were complete strangers.

Women are by their nature superstitious, and give complete credence to the words of the eunuch priests of Bellona (the war goddess) and Cybele (the mother of the gods). Others are fanatic adherents of the cult of Isis and its charlatan priests, or listen to Jewish or Armenian soothsayers or Chaldaean astrologers, and get their fortunes told down by the Circus Maximus. Even worse, though, is a woman who is herself so skilled at astrology that others seek her out for advice.

Although poor women are at least willing to bear children, rich women just get abortions to avoid the bother (although at least that prevents the husbands from being saddled with illegitimate, half-Ethiopian children). Juvenal contends that half of the Roman elite is made up of abandoned children whom women pass off as those of their husbands. Women will even stoop to drugging and poisoning their husbands to get their way, like Caligula’s wife, who drove him insane with a potion, and Agrippina the Younger who poisoned Claudius.

As an epilogue, Juvenal asks whether his audience thinks he has slipped into the hyperbole of tragedy. But he points out that Pontia admitted to murdering her two children and that she would have killed seven if there had been seven, and that we should believe everything the poets tell us about Medea and Procne. However, these women of ancient tragedy were arguably less evil than modern Roman women, because at least they did what they did out of rage, not just for money. He concludes that today there is a Clytemnestra on every street.

Although frequently decried as a misogynistic rant, the poem is also an all-out invective against marriage, which Rome’s decaying social and moral standards at that time had made into a tool of greed and corruption (Juvenal presents the options available to the Roman male as marriage, suicide or a boy lover), and equally as an invective against the men who have permitted this pervasive degradation of the Roman world (Juvenal casts men as agents and enablers of the feminine proclivity toward vice).

The poem contains the famous phrase, “Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” (“But who will guard the guards themselves” or “But who watches the watchmen?”), which has been used as an epigraph to numerous later works, and refers to the impossibility of enforcing moral behaviour when the enforcers themselves are corruptible.” (end)

Many high ranking Roman Politicians had similar sentiments and tried to oppress or suppress all of these openly loose ideas about emancipating women, love, romance and free sexuality. Read this quote by Cato The Elder below :

“Woman is a violent and uncontrolled animal… If you allow them to achieve complete equality with men, do you think they will be easier to live with? Not at all. Once they have achieved equality, they will be your masters….. All mankind rules its women, and we rule all mankind, yet our women rule us.”
– Cato The Elder (around 195BC ; Rome)

During the second Punic War in 215BC, Rome passed a law called ‘Lex Oppia.’ Cato argued that the law removed the shame of poverty because it made all women dress in an equal fashion. Cato insisted that if women could engage in a clothes-contest, they would either feel shame in the presence of other women, or on the contrary, they would delight in a rather base victory as a result of extending themselves beyond their means. He also declared that a woman’s desire to spend money was a disease that could not be cured, but only restrained. Cato said that the removal of Lex Oppia would render society helpless in limiting the expenditures of women. Cato pronounced that Roman women, already corrupted by luxury, were like wild animals, who have once tasted blood, in the sense that they can no longer be trusted to restrain themselves from rushing into an orgy of extravagance. The law was repealed in 195BC, but this just goes to show that everything we’re dealing with right now is not something brand new. When society becomes more gentrified, women gain more power, gynocracy takes hold and then the nation either collapses from within (providing too many services for women and children, at the expense of the family unit and men), OR they are taken over by more patriarchal nations.

Strabo (the Greek Historian, Geographer and Philosopher ; living from 64BC – 24AD) said this:
“The multitude are restrained from vice by the punishments that the gods are said to inflict upon offenders, and by those terrors and threatenings which certain dreadful words and monstrous forms imprint upon their minds. For it is impossible to govern the crowd of women, and all the common rabble, by philosophical reasoning, and lead them to piety, holiness and virtue – but this must be done by superstition, or the fear of the gods, by means of fables and wonders; for the thunder, the aegis, the trident, the torches (of the Furies), the dragons, etc.. are all fables. These things the legislators used as scarecrows to terrify the childish multitude.”

Essentially, they used religion as a way to terrify people (mainly women), so that society would be held in check. It’s important to note that just reading the history of the Roman Empire brings such glaring similarities with our own civilization, it is as if human social dynamics are literally stuck in a cycle that repeats every couple thousand years. But moving on here.

Augustus Caesar reigned as Emperor in Rome from 27 BC to 14 AD. He declared that unmarried men were worse than robbers and murderers. Most men in Rome were denied the right to vote, had no realistic opportunity to hold public office, and owned little or no property. In addition, men were conscripted into military service. The exploitation of ordinary men, common throughout history, was not just a feature of Roman public life. Roman men also evidently found their family obligations toward women to be oppressive. By about 18 BC, a large share of Roman men were reluctant to marry. To encourage men to marry, Roman Emperor Augustus passed a series of laws penalizing unmarried men and rewarding men who married and had at least three children.

The disabilities imposed on unmarried men included social devaluations. Unmarried men were forbidden to attend public games and banquets. Unmarried men were also forced to sit in less desirable seats in the theatre. These sorts of laws point to broader processes of social control. Social strategies of shaming and dishonoring have powerfully affected men’s lives throughout history. The status of men in any society cannot be adequately understood merely by literal reading of formal law and simple demographic analysis of office-holding.

Coercing men into marrying is not a historical aberration. In his ideal state, Cicero had state magistrates prohibit men from remaining unmarried. According to Plutarch’s Parallel Lives, Lycurgus, the famous law-giver of the Spartans, penalized bachelors:

“Lycurgus also put a kind of public stigma upon confirmed bachelors. They were excluded from the sight of the young men and maidens at their exercises, and in winter the magistrates ordered them to march round the market-place in their tunics only, and as they marched, they sang a certain song about themselves, and its burden was that they were justly punished for disobeying the laws. Besides this, they were deprived of the honour and gracious attentions which the young men habitually paid to their elders.”

In his Roman History, Cassius Dio wrote of Emperor Augustus separating the Roman aristocracy into married men and unmarried men. The married men were “much fewer in number.” Augustus praised the married men for following the examples of their fathers and perpetuating their class. Augustus demeaned the unmarried men:

“O — what shall I call you? Men? But you are not performing any of the offices of men. Citizens? But for all that you are doing, the city is perishing. Romans? But you are undertaking to blot out this name altogether.”

Unmarried men, according to Augustus, were immoral beasts:

“You talk, indeed, about this ‘free’ and ‘untrammelled’ life that you have adopted, without wives and without children; but you are not a whit better than brigands or the most savage of beasts. For surely it is not your delight in a solitary existence that leads you to live without wives, nor is there one of you who either eats alone or sleeps alone; no, what you want is to have full liberty for wantonness and licentiousness.”

Under Augustus, the Leges Juliae Law of 18–17 BC attempted to elevate both the morals and the numbers of the upper classes in Rome and to increase the population by encouraging marriage and having children (Lex Julia de maritandis ordinibus). They also established adultery as a private and public crime (Lex Julia de adulteriis). To encourage population expansion, the Leges Juliae offered inducements to marriage and imposed disabilities upon the celibate. Augustus instituted the “Law of the three sons” which held those in high regard who produced three male offspring. Marrying-age celibates and young widows who wouldn’t marry were prohibited from receiving inheritances and from attending public games.

The Lex Iulia de Adulteriis Coercendis Law (17 BC) punished adultery with banishment. The two guilty parties were sent to different islands (“dummodo in diversas insulas relegentur”), and part of their property was confiscated. Fathers were permitted to kill daughters and their partners in adultery. Husbands could kill the partners under certain circumstances and were required to divorce adulterous wives. Augustus himself was obliged to invoke the law against his own daughter, Julia (relegated to the island of Pandateria) and against her eldest daughter (Julia the Younger). Tacitus adds the reproach that Augustus was stricter for his own relatives than the law actually required (Annals III 24).

The Lex Papia was a Roman law introduced in 9 AD to encourage and strengthen marriage. It included provisions against adultery and celibacy and complemented and supplemented Augustus’ Lex Julia de Maritandis Ordinibus of 18 BC and the Lex Iulia de Adulteriis Coercendis of 17 BC. The law was introduced by the suffect consuls of that year, Marcus Papius Mutilus and Quintus Poppaeus Secundus, although they themselves were unmarried. In order to promote marriage, various penalties were imposed on those who lived in a state of celibacy after a certain age. Caelibes could not take an hereditas or a legacy (legatum); but if a person was celibate at the time of the testator’s death, and was not otherwise disqualified (jure civili), he might take the hereditas or legatum, if he obeyed the law within one hundred days, that is, if he married within that time (Ulp. Frag. xvii.1).

If he did not comply with the law, the gift became caducum (subject to escheat). The Lex Julia allowed widows a term of one year (vacatio) from the death of a husband, and divorced women a term (vacatio) of six months from the time of the divorce, within which periods they were not subject to the penalties of the lex: the Lex Papia extended these periods respectively to two years, and a year and six months (Ulp. Frag. xiv). A man, when he attained the age of sixty, and a woman, when she attained the age of fifty, were not included within certain penalties of the law (Ulp. Frag. xvi); but if they had not obeyed the law before attaining those respective ages, they were perpetually bound by its penalties by a Senatus-consultum Pernicianum. A Senatus-consultum Claudianum so far modified the strictness of the new rule as to give a man who married above sixty the same advantage that he would have had if had married under sixty, provided he married a woman who was under fifty; the ground of which rule was the legal notion that a woman under fifty was still capable of having children (Ulpian, Frag. xvi; Sueton. Claud. 23). If the woman was above fifty and the man under sixty, this was called Impar Matrimonium, and by a Senatus-consultum Calvitianum it was entirely without effect as to releasing from incapacity to take legata and dotes. On the death of the woman, therefore, the dos became caduca.

The law also imposed penalties on orbi, that is, married persons who had no children (qui liberos non habent, Gaius, ii.111) from the age of twenty-five to sixty in a man, and from the age of twenty to fifty in a woman. By the Lex Papia, orbi could only take one half of an hereditas or legatum which was left to them (Gaius, ii.286). It seems that an attempt had been made to evade this part of the law by adoptions, which a Senatus-consultum Neronianum declared to be ineffectual for the purpose of relieving a person from the penalties of the law (Tacit. Ann. xv.19).
Sources :

Link 1 :

Link 2 :

Link 3 :

Link 4 :

Link 5 :

Link 6 :

Link 7 :

why were men reluctant to marry in ancient Rome?

Link 8 :

Satire VI – Juvenal – Ancient Rome – Classical Literature

Link 9 :

Link 10 (Justin Martyr Dialogue to Trypho chapter 134) :


OTHER EXAMPLES : They range from ancient Mesopotamia, Assyria, Egypt, India, Nepal, to 18th and 19th Century China, and more all have differing ideas about dating, relationships, marriage and sex. Here are a few of those in a little more detail.

The Zou hun or “walking marriage” is a common practice with the Mosuo ethnic group, in the Yunnan province of China. Instead of traditional marriages, the Mosuo indicate interest, and a woman may give a man permission to visit her after dark. While sexual activities may happen with many partners, couples do not usually live together even when their relationships become longer-term; women remain with their family. Rather than caring for their specific offspring, men share responsibility for any children born to women in their own family.
The Deer Horn Muria, an animist tribe who dwell in the forests of Central India’s Chhattisgarh state, take Sex Education to a whole new level. During their ceremonial Ghotul ritual, teenage boys and girls are taught songs, folklore, tribal dance, and the ins and outs of getting it on. Girls drink a natural liquor that acts as a “contraceptive” and then choose a different partner every night. (FYI ladies, booze doesn’t kill sperm and you can get pregnant if you’re on top.) Should this “contraceptive” fail and the girl becomes pregnant, the entire village raises the child because no one knows who the father is.
In the Himalayas, the Nepalese share wives. Apparently in this polyandrous society, it is custom for men to receive a plot of land whenever they wife up. But seeing as there is a shortage of cultivable land, this seemed to be the most convenient solution.
On the Island of Mangaia, off the south Pacific Ocean, boys start having sex at around aged 13, right after their circumcision (ouch!). The island has a lot interesting sexual practices and sex is stressed as an important part of society. Older women are brought in to teach the young men sex and how to pleasure women. This is important because in Mangaia, a man’s social standing depends on how many orgasms he can have in a night. The female orgasm is also considered a thing of great importance here, and couples are pretty much required by the culture to have sex at least once a week until they are physically incapable.
The Trobriander tribe of Papua Guinea start having sex very early. Boys begin around age 10 to 12 and girls begin around age 6 to 8. Women in the tribe are extremely aggressive about seeking out sex, revealing clothing is common and lots of sex is strongly encouraged. In fact, a wedding in the tribe entails just staying over at a man’s house after you have sex instead of leaving before sunrise. When you finish the meal you’re married. Imagine how that might work out in the U.S.!
The Marquesas Islands are Polynesian islands with some odd sexual mores. Not only do they encourage the simulation of sex between children and adults, but they also initiate children into sexual practices at around 11 or 12. The strangest part is that children share rooms with their parents when they’re growing up, during which time they’re expected to watch as their parents have sex.
An ancient Egyptian tribe called The Siwa allowed gay marriage long before the never-ending fight over the subject began in the U.S. That’s not the weird part, though. The weird part is that, while being openly gay was completely accepted, what wasn’t openly accepted was any gay man that didn’t “act gay.” Men who didn’t portray the accepted characteristics of a gay man were outcast by the Siwa society.
Sexuality in ancient Egypt was open, untainted by guilt. Sex was an important part of life – from birth to death and rebirth. Singles and married couples made love. Virginity was not something ‘special’ to them, it was actually the opposite. Fertility and sexuality were held in high regard. The gods themselves were earthy enough to copulate. The Egyptians even believed in sex in the afterlife. Sex was not taboo. Even the Egyptian religion was filled with tales of adultery, incest, homosexuality and masturbation…,with hints of necrophillia! Masculinity and femininity itself were strongly linked with the ability to conceive and bear children.
…Revel in pleasure while your life endures
And deck your head with myrrh. Be richly clad
In white and perfumed linen; like the gods
Anointed be; and never weary grow
In eager quest of what your heart desires –
Do as it prompts you…

Lay of the Harpist

In Talmudic literature, the ancient Egyptians are known for their liberal sexual lifestyles and are often used as the prime example of sexual debauchery. Rashi (1040-1105AD – medieval French rabbi and author of a comprehensive commentary on the Talmud and commentary on the Tanakh) describe an Egyptian practice for women to have multiple husbands. Maimonides (1135-1204AD – was a medieval Sephardic Jewish philosopher who became one of the most prolific and influential Torah scholars of the Middle Ages. In his time, he was also a preeminent astronomer and physician), refers to lesbianism as “the acts of Egypt”.

The Egyptians had their own ways and means of getting around the fact that sex produced children as well. They had both contraceptives and abortions, mostly these were prescriptions that were filled with unpleasant ingredients such as crocodile dung. Here is one of the nicer ones: Prescription to make a woman cease to become pregnant for one, two or three years: Grind together finely a measure of acacia dates with some honey. Moisten seed-wool with the mixture and insert it in the vagina.
— Ebers Medical Papyrus (Tyldesley, J.A. 1995, Daughters of Isis: Women of Ancient Egypt, p. 62)

The Egyptian sacred ‘prostitute’ (who was probably a highly regarded as a member of Egyptian society because of her association with different gods or goddesses (such as Bes and Hathor), rather than the street walker that the modern mind imagines) advertised herself through her clothing and make up. Some of these women wore blue faience beaded fish-net dresses. They painted their lips red, and tattooed themselves on the breasts or thighs and even went around totally nude. There is no evidence that these women were paid for these fertility-related acts, so some believe that word ‘prostitute’ is probably an incorrect term for these women. In fact, the Victorian era theory that these women were prostitutes is not backed up by evidence at all. All archaeological evidence for women with such tattoos shows them to have been New Kingdom female musicians or dancers.

Another idea pointed out to me by Daniel Kolos, an Egyptologist academically trained at the University of Toronto, is that this premarital sexual activity might be a prerequisite for marriage. One of the theories that disassociates these women from being prostitutes, is that their sexual activity could be part of a “coming-of-age ritual”, just as circumcision was one for males. With Egypt’s heavy emphasis on fertility as the defining nature of a man or a woman, this idea is a highly likely probability.

Other theories could be that the young virgin girls joined itinerant performing groups – dancers, singers and the like – and during their time with these groups they experienced their first sexual encounters. If a girl became pregnant, she would probably leave the troupe to head home to her family with proof of her fertility. (Motherhood was venerated, giving a woman a much higher status in society, so pregnancy was something to be proud of in ancient Egypt.)

These travelling groups of women were strongly linked with midwifery and childbirth-related deities. The goddesses Isis, Nephthys, Meskhenet and Heqet disguised themselves as itinerant performers, travelling with the god Khnum as their porter. Carrying the sistrum and menat instruments – instruments with sexual overtones – they showed it to Rawoser, the expectant father. Knowing that his wife, Raddjedet, was having a very difficult labour, he told these women – the disguised goddesses – about his wife’s troubles, and at their offer of help, he let them in to see her.

These women do not seem to be pay-for-sex prostitutes, instead they seem to be a link with the divine, a helper of expectant mothers and singers, dancers and musicians. This is not to say that there were no pay-for-sex prostitutes in ancient Egypt, it it just that there is little evidence of this found. Considering Egypt’s very different image of sexuality, the modern concept of both sexuality and prostitution do not fit this ancient society. Women operated under a totally different cultural imperative than women today, thus ancient Egyptian sexuality must be looked at without modern prejudices. It seems that these female performers, these ‘prostitutes’, were treated with courtesy and respect, and there seemed to be a well established link between these travelling performers and fertility, childbirth, religion and magic.

Also, the Egyptians had a hieroglyph of an Ankh. They highly believed this symbol represented not only the act of sex (phallus or penis going into the vagina) but that in a special procedure known as Kundalini (Egyptian Tantra or Ankhing) one could obtain eternal life through controlling the male orgasm. The ankh was a cross with a loop at the top and the Christians actually stole this iconography though they left the loop off the cross (Jesus dying on the cross, allowed people to have eternal life, just as the act of Kundalini symbolized by the ankh, was the to eternal life – GET IT?). Christianity stole and copied a bunch more from Egypt as well, which I will share upon inquiry, but that’s not the point of this post.
If you want a more in-depth explanation about Ankhing or Egyptian Sexual Kundalini, go to this link below :

Side Note :  This is no longer the case, but in ancient Egypt they believed the Nile’s flow was powered by God’s masturbation. People would ejaculate into the Nile as a ritual to bring forth a good harvest. During the festival of the god Min, men would masturbate in public. Let’s not forget how openly sexual the Egyptians were. From artifacts to hieroglyphs on walls, caves and pyramids, we get a glimpse of how open they were about things. Here are a few pictures below

Screen Shot 2018-11-13 at 10.10.08 PMScreen Shot 2018-09-03 at 2.20.31 PM






The Pon celebration in Indonesia is like their version of what we call a “hall pass” here in America, only while hall passes are usually only hypothetical here, in Indonesia it’s a requirement. During the Pon celebration people are supposed to have sex with somebody other than their wife or husband. The celebration happens seven times a year and if someone has sex with the same person all seven times in a year (not their spouse) their wishes will come true.
The Wodaabe tribe of Niger, West Africa, consider themselves the most beautiful and most vain people on Earth. Women in the tribe have all the sexual power, and single women are allowed to have sex with whoever they want whenever they want. However, women are usually married off as children by their family. No big deal, because they have a seven-day ceremony that’s kind of like a rave every year that culminates in a dance-off where men wear makeup and peacock feathers and strut their stuff for female judges. The women watch on and if a married woman taps a man on the shoulder, that means she likes what she sees and if the man likes her back, he can steal her from her husband.

The Cambodian Kreung tribe does not allow divorce, so if you’re going to get married, you must know what you’re getting into. That’s why, when girls reach their mid-teens, their parents build them a love hut. The girl then proceeds to bring men back to her love hut and have her way with them as much as possible, often more than one a night, until she finds the one she wants to marry.

Sources :

Link 1 :

Link 2 :

Link 3 :

Link 4 :

Link 5 :

Link 6 :

Link 7 :
http://www.thekeep.org/~kunoichi/kunoichi/themestream/sexuality.html#.W42l-y2ZNAY#ixzz5Q4qo21RG © Caroline Seawright



With all of that said, I wanted to get into some of the statistics today as well as some of my own opinions. After studying science, biology, anthropology and evolution, I’ve come to the conclusion that trying to institute monogamy upon society, is the extreme of fighting human and mammalian nature. This really isn’t an opinion, this is FACT. I want to preface all of this by saying that I’m not trying to convince you of anything. YOU SHOULD ALREADY BE CONVINCED! The high divorce and high infidelity numbers are already there plainly for everyone to see! Over 90% of monogamous relationships fail. What I want to do is explain WHY it happens from a biological and anthropological angle. Anyone who is predisposed to seeing things from a logistical or analytical viewpoint will have an easy time comprehending this. We oftentimes hear that you should get into a relationship with or marry a ‘good’ person. But this isn’t about a person being good or bad, it’s about them (and YOU) being uneducated about your biological imperatives as a mammalian species. People are heavily conditioned to go against their biology and when it backfires, they can be seen as a terrible person, when it really has nothing to do with the credibility of their character.

Now that I’ve got that out of the way, I believe that the entire institution of LIFELONG MONOGAMY is one of the biggest SCAMS ever perpetuated upon humanity (aside from religion). Push your ‘feelings’ to the side and become a ‘Statistician’ and ‘Anthropologist’ on this entire issue with me for a second. Here are the raw numbers. Over a 40 year period, 67% of FIRST marriages end in divorce, with most not reaching their 10th year anniversary. This doesn’t include the couples still together in misery, living like roommates with no sex life, fucking other people on the side, wanting to get a divorce, but can’t, because kids are involved or divorce is too expensive (among other circumstances such as fearing being shamed by family and friends). Look at the cartoons, movies, media, religion (fearing punishment for sex outside of marriage) and music (99% of songs are all about monogamous relationships and ‘romantic love’). They’ve gone to extreme lengths to condition us to be this way.

The famous propagandist known as Edward Bernays (uncle was Sigmund Freud) said this below :

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons, who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”
– Edward L. Bernays – 1928 (Propagandist and nephew of Sigmund Freud)

I remember the movie ‘THEY LIVE’ from the 1980s with Roddy Piper. He puts on the glasses and sees things for how they really are. In one scene he looks at a sexy beautiful woman in a bikini on a beach. He puts the glasses on and it says ‘GET MARRIED AND REPRODUCE.’ We are completely brainwashed with this whole idea of lifelong monogamy as the quintessential relationship between people. But the numbers just do not bear this out. That’s why we OOOOOO and AHHHHH when we hear of a couple making it to a 50 year anniversary. It’s always been rare.

Divorce isn’t just an American phenomena either! Spain, Portugal, Luxembourg, the Czech Republic, and Hungary are the worst off with divorce rates higher than 60%. Belgium has the highest rate of divorce at a staggering 70%. These are more Westernized nations, where people are freely given a choice to stay or leave their partners. Other places with lower divorce rates may have religious stigmas tied to divorce, where a woman can be stoned to death if she commits adultery or wants to divorce. I think looking at the Western cultures alone should be the only way to really gauge how people naturally are with one another.

If given the choice, most couples WILL separate. The only way you can keep a monogamous relationship alive for most couples,  is to terrify them whether through acts of violence against them in this life, or threatening hell-fire in the next life. But most couples will separate when given a chance to, because monogamy is not natural for us. Most people are SERIAL monogamists, not true monogamists. They will have monogamy with one partner for a few years and then move on to the next and have a new monogamous relationship with another. There are only a slim few who can actually maintain a monogamous relationship with one person for life. The MAJORITY will simply not be able to stick to a code of true monogamy. I hope for a day to come when we will all realize all this.

Also, we have this idea that people who fail at relationships or marriages (or fail to even get into a relationship) are basement dwellers, who are TFL (True Forced Loneliness) types, who are unattractive, have no career, no status, no money, etc.. but it’s actually the opposite. The highest divorce rates are among those in the public eye. Celebrities divorce at 2 TIMES the rate than the common citizen divorces at (and they get divorced much quicker than the average person too!). So relying on looks, status, fame or money as a gauge on how successful your relationship or marriage will be, is counter-productive in this scenario as well! Here is the biggest problem I have with monogamy (and so should YOU) is that it leaves no room for GROWTH. You may be compatible with your partner right now, but in 5, 10, 15+ years, you don’t know if you will be! Most people will evolve and grow apart. I’m not the same person I was even just a couple years ago, due to new information.


If you read the book ‘SEX AT DAWN’ by Cacilda Jetha and Christopher Ryan, they give heavy, in-depth research that prove before the Agricultural Age over 10,000 years ago, people were more polyamorous and this makes the most sense from a biological standpoint. Our closest animal relatives are the chimps and bonobos (who share around 98% the same DNA as humans). They are highly polyamorous and masturbate a lot as well. While there are even some stark differences between chimps and bonobos, this one thing (being poly) is not only a consistency between these two mammalians but over 97% of ALL mammals are polyamorous ! Humans are proving to be not much different in this regard! Another study was done on testosterone levels of males. It showed that when a man was introduced to a new female and had a conversation with her, his testosterone levels went up by 30% ! It also showed that while single men have higher testosterone levels than men in monogamous relationships, the men who were in polyamorous relationships had higher testosterone than BOTH single men and men in relationships / marriage!

Here’s a little tidbit on our evolution as males, which is the smoking gun proof of all this. When a man has an orgasm, he will shoot 5 to 7 shots. The first shot is filled with antigens and chemical compounds that are designed to kill sperm inside the vagina that are NOT HIS. The last shot is filled with antigens and chemical compounds to protect his own sperm. The penis head is shaped in such a way to create suction and pull other sperm out as well. If you’ve had enough sex, you’ll have run into a female who PUSSY FARTS. This suction is like a vacuum taking sperm out that are not your own. So our human male bodies evolved with the presumption that women would have MANY SEX PARTNERS and it was giving your own sperm a chance to propagate your own progeny!When we try to force ourselves to be monogamous, we are fighting evolution and biology on a magnificent scale!

The ASHLEY MADISON hack of millions upon millions of people sleeping around behind their spouse’s back, was just one example of how we (after a certain period with only one mate) have a propensity to seek other mates. When the fairytale, fable, myth of monogamy wears off (i.e. bonding chemicals such as oxytocin, which are only there to trick us into mating and propagating the species), people are unable to handle the reality of it, so they feel trapped and they eventually break under the pressure by having a side fling and/or getting divorced.

Look at the lengths by which they’ve had to brainwash people into a ‘monogamous box’ because it’s so unnatural for us as a species! Through media, movies, cartoons, music and even religion! The controllers of society know anthropology and human dynamics. It’s to the Elite’s advantage to keep people in disarray with monogamy. They knew it would fail on a grand scale. The old adage, “It’s a village that raises the child’ comes to mind. They want people broken up into these little units of one man with one woman, so they are segregated from their friends and community. And when the relationship breaks down, now the man is a wage slave to the state and the woman is dependent upon the state for her sustenance in MOST cases. It all works in the favor of the Elites.

I hear people all the time claiming how despicable it is for folks to sleep around without being in a ‘loving relationship.’ But really, you should be MORE worried and disgusted by the masses of people who are able to stand up in front of a priest, before their family, friends and loved ones and make a VOW to the LIVING GOD (which is ironic in and of itself if you’re a Christian, read Matthew 5:33-37) that they’ll stay together forever (in sickness and health, for better or for WORSE, until death do them part), but within a few years, are able to nonchalantly divorce and move on like they never knew each other (and in most cases it’s worse, with the two hating each other). Not only that, but even have no qualms of doing it all over again and make those same wedding vows with someone new! It’s like listening to one of your favorite songs and having it on repeat. Eventually, that song wears on you and it doesn’t stimulate you as much as it did when you first heard it, so you go listen to another new favorite song. This is an example of how ‘VARIETY’ is coded and deeply embedded into our DNA as humans and primate mammalians!

This is complete MADNESS! And since we’re on the topic of religion and God here, I’d like to give a friendly reminder to you Jews and Christians that many of your Biblical HEROES such as Abraham, Moses, Jacob (Israel), Solomon, David, etc.. were all poly (polygyny in their case) where they not only had more than one wife, but they also had CONCUBINES (women on the side used for sexual purposes). And in King David’s case, it was GOD HIMSELF (according to your Bible) who gave him those wives and concubines. When David had sex with Bathsheba and then killed Uriah (her husband), God (speaking through Nathan the prophet) asked David why he did that, when, all David had to do was ask God for more (in context, more wives or concubines) and God would’ve given them to him!

I started breaking free from all the manipulation and mind control within the last few years through extensive research. Look up MK-Ultra and the Monarch Butterfly Project. Look up Project Bluebird and Project Artichoke. Look up Edward Bernays. Look up how Nazis perfected propaganda. Then research how after WW2 we had Operation Paperclip and brought the brightest Nazi scientists and propagandists over here to America to continue those mind control programs. I started looking at the raw data and numbers, and realized that many things did not add up!

Someone once told that you can’t get anymore special or ‘high’ than sex with that one lifelong partner. I responded saying, “Right, because meaningful sex with that one ‘special’ person was the golden key to unlock eternal bliss and ‘security’ within the framework of all these relationships and marriages that have failed. If the sex was so ‘special’ and gave such a ‘high’ then why are all these marriages and relationships failing more OFT than naught? It’s because it’s not special. That’s the fairytale you’ve been taught, but eventually, biology will win the battle and that sex will be just as dull as it would’ve been with anyone else. Most couples end up not having sex anymore (or they’re screwing other people on the side too), so how is sex more sacrosanct with one than multiple? Sex with one person for life is not natural. That’s not me saying that, the statistics already say that. I’m just the weatherman here reporting it to you! Why? So you don’t end up getting pelted with golf-ball sized hail-stones in a Tropical Storm  like MOST couples have (or eventually will)!”

At every wedding their should be Advisory Billboards up everywhere saying, ‘This Marriage has a 67% of failure of the next 8 years!” Studies also show that the less you spend on a wedding, the longer it tends to last. So much for ‘getting what you pay for!’ Now-a-days, pregnancy lasts longer than the relationship with the baby’s daddy! Some of you may squeak through the cracks and make it, but not many. Folks can spend thousands on a ring, they can get their family and friends to travel from all over the world to come to their $100,000+ wedding, paying for all the accoutrements for the reception, the expensive honeymoon, etc.. and you’d THINK with all that investment (even making a VOW to the BIG GUY upstairs that they’ll stay with each other until death) this would be enough to push through any difficulty, yet, around 70% of them will divorce before their 8th year anniversary. And even worse many will marry AGAIN, yet the divorce rate is HIGHER on 2nd, 3rd, 4th marriages than the first try

They’ve turned us into robots with monogamy! We were meant to be parts of whole tribes of people, loving each other, having sex with each other, growing food together, taking care of each other’s kids, etc.. Instead, they split us up into these small nuclear family units of one man and one woman KNOWING IT WOULD FAIL (they know anthropology and how humans weren’t evolved to be monogamous!), to separate us from our tribe and community.

One of the biggest issues of all was this topic on relationships and why they fail so often. I studied history and saw how Tyrants and Elites had everything to gain by segmenting the populace into these small family units. This goes all the way back to Ancient Rome for example. They placed bachelor taxes on single men as well as penalizing and shaming them in every way possible for being unmarried. They are still trying hard to corral us all like cattle.

To end this, the biggest issue I have with monogamy is GROWTH. After you’ve lived a good while on earth, you realize that you won’t be the same person you were in the past. And how rapidly you are prone to change after learning and studying more (not only scholastically, but also, through experience). Most people will not grow at the same speed. The likelihood of people growing together is the biggest hardship I can think of in any given relationship. I’m not Anti-Monogamy, you can believe and do whatever you want. But I feel it necessary to show you what you’re facing. You’re going against biology, evolution, science and nature. The biggest of all is you’re going against Personal Development. Every person will change and most of the time, the person you’re with will change at a different speed and in a different way than you will. If you’re up to the challenge of facing all those uphill battles, then be my guest, but the numbers don’t lie. MOST COUPLES will fail at all these things and the majority won’t last to their 10th Anniversary (8 years is the average).

One must also keep in mind how much money is made off of ignorance on the topic of relationships. From Viagra to couples therapy, you have no idea how nefarious it is. Mentors, gurus and therapists will usually never tell you the TRUTH about this. Eventually, biology will win the battle in MOST of your relationships. Only a few can weather the storm of fighting their evolutionary imperatives. That lizard part of the brain is stronger than we give it credit for! I know that ‘outside-the-box-thinkers’ like me are fighting against a lifetime of SOCIETAL INDOCTRINATION. Things don’t filter through a person overnight, but eventually, they’ll say to themselves, ‘YOU KNOW SOMETHING…, HE IS RIGHT!’

Before the White man came with their Bibles and their form of puritanical Christianity, the Native tribes were highly Polyamorous (as I showed), and many of the cultures from the ancient world, such as the Indians (from India), Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Aztecs, Babylonians, etc.. were highly sexual. They had no taboos and engaged in everything from homosexuality, bisexuality, orgies, etc.. They left us with many statues, hieroglyphs and monuments (including ancient sex toys), showing how sexual they were (which I also showed).

So you see, it wasn’t natural for us to be monogamous or sexually repressed in the ancient world either. I just love how people use a solipsistic appeal to themselves or their surroundings when discussing these topics. They think just because it’s not the case for THEM or people THEY KNOW, that they’ve refuted my claim. But there is a bigger world out there than YOU. Exceptions never negate any rules, the exceptions only confirm the RULE! And that fact is, MOST couples will not see their 10th marriage anniversary. The divorce rate doesn’t include people who are together in misery, with no sex life, living like roommates, fucking other people on the side and want a divorce but can’t because it’s too expensive and/or kids are involved. Look up the ASHLEY MADISON hack a few years ago. Millions upon Millions of married people were busted. The divorce numbers and cheating numbers are high enough as it is, but the infidelity rate would be even higher if we knew the many who are able to hide their cheating. You ignore all of this at your own peril.


1. Every 13 seconds, there is one divorce in America.

2. That equates to 277 divorces per hour, 6,646 divorces per day, 46,523 divorces per week, and 2,419,196 divorces per year. That means:

3. There are 9 divorces in the time it takes for a couple to recite their wedding vows (2 minutes).

4. More than 554 divorces occur during your typical romantic comedy movie (2 hours).

5. 1,385 divorces happen during the average wedding reception (5 hours).

6. There are 19,353,568 divorces over the course of an average first marriage that ends in divorce (8 years).

7. Over a 40 year period, 67 percent of first marriages terminate.

8. Among all Americans 18 years of age or older, whether they have been married or not, 25 percent have gone through a marital split.

9. 15 percent of adult women in the United States are divorced or separated today, compared with less than one percent in 1920.

10. The average first marriage that ends in divorce lasts about 8 years.

Median duration of first marriages that end in divorce:
Males: 7.8 years
Females: 7.9 years

Median duration of second marriages:
Males: 7.3 years
Females: 6.8 years

11. People wait an average of three years after a divorce to remarry (if they remarry at all).

12. In 2011, only 29 out of every 1000 of divorced or widowed women remarried.

( Source : https://www.wf-lawyers.com/divorce-statistics-and-facts/ )

*(Christians making wedding *VOWS* is fantastic irony! Their Master Jesus told them not to make ANY VOWS / OATHS / PROMISES! Not by heaven, earth or the city of the great king! But they non-chalantly make these vows to be with each other until death and most of them won’t keep their vow for more than a few years! Apparently Christians didn’t get the memo about what Jesus said to the Pharisees for following and teaching the “Traditions of Men.”)*

One final thought. 

The good thing about what I’m sharing here in regard to human evolution is that when you realize we are polyamorous creatures by default, you’ll let all that envy and jealously flee your heart and mind. Also, how many times have you heard parents ‘sigh’ out of exhaustion because of the demands of their children??!! Two parents (let alone single parents) are just not enough to take care of them, which is why poly relations are pretty much NECESSARY to raise them. 

This one ex of mine cheated on me, and I took her back. She was so paranoid after that because she thought I would do it back to her, even though I never did. She went through my phone, she would drive by my house at random times, etc. It eventually ended thankfully, but the whole thing just seems so petty and childish to me now. Had I known back then, what I know now, I would’ve sat her down and used it as an opportunity to talk about opening our relationship up to more than one person.

Ironically and paradoxically, when you’re open about this stuff and even open to the idea of casually being with other people, you can strengthen the bond between you and your MAIN partner. Nothing will ever be hidden between the both of you and you can share secrets that you otherwise wouldn’t. I’m seriously free of all jealousy.

No matter who I’m with or how much love I have for a woman, nothing she can tell me would surprise me or make me hate her. This type of freedom doesn’t have a price tag on it. These seeds I’ve been tossing out there have been planted in your heart and mind for a reason. Maybe one day, you’ll enjoy the fruit from this tree of freedom as I do. That’s really the original intent of all these posts lately. But because 99.9% of people out there are ‘programmed’ against their nature and evolutionary imperatives, you’ve gotta take precautions and protect yourself.

Experiment Workout : 1 Set / One Set, Per Body Part, Per Day (Bodyweight and/or Calisthenics Only) Results Before and After

After Lockdown with all the gyms closed, I sort of let myself go for almost a full year. I gained some weight (up to around 190), but lost some through diet before deciding that since the gyms were all closed, I’d do an experiment with bodyweight exercises, but only do one set of each bodypart per day. I never really did calisthenics or bodyweight exercises before, except maybe some pullups / chinups here or there, I only did strictly weight lifting with free weights or machines before.

I started in March 2021 (I’m now 2.5 / two and half months into it and the results are pretty damn amazing).

Here is my routine (no warmup sets either) :

1 Set of Pullups

1 Set of Chinups

1 Set of Pushups

1 Set of Lateral Raises with 20 lb dumbbells

1 Set of Body Squats (with weighted vest)

1 Set of bicycle crunches

In only 2 and a half months, I’ve gone from being able to do

3 pullups or chinups in a row with bodyweight……, to now being able to do 10 in a row, and 6 in a row with a 25 lbs. weighted vest.

20 pushups bodyweight only before my arms gave out….., to now being able to do over 50+ without stopping bodyweight and…., easily 30 in a row with the 25 lbs weighted vest.

All the other exercises I’m doing have become much easier too. And like I said, I’m only doing 1 set, per exercise, per body part, per day, no warmups, so you can build strength and muscle with just one set full body per day.

Also, I learned everyday training from Migan, a guy who runs “TEAM 3D ALPHA” on Youtube. He explains how mTOR and Nucleus Overload work.

He recommends doing the same exercises every day for at least 30 days and then taking a 7 to 14 day break before starting again. In between the last two months, I’ve taken 7 days off the after the first month and 8 days off after the second month. This is supposed to reset your mTOR so you will continue building muscle much quickly at the onset of each new round.

If I can do this workout (which takes me no longer than 10 minutes) then anyone can. I wouldn’t have believed you could gain any strength or muscle from one set per day, had I not been seeing the results for myself. And you don’t even need a gym. For the 20 lbs dumbbells I use to do lateral raises, you can literally just use one of your wooden or metal chairs at home. There are ways to get the same weight for lifting with household items.

Also as to my diet…..,

I’ve been pretty much vegetarian 99% of the time, with an occasional Tandoori Chicken Pizza. I make chili every single day and put the leftovers in the fridge which lasts me a week. My chili consists of ….

3 to 4 cans of beans (I use three kinds, Kidney, Black and Pinto)

Black Lentils

Quinoa (I buy Quinta Canadian Quinoa which has 10g of protein per serving instead of only 6g)

Daiya Cheese

Pasta Sauce (Rao brand)

I also pour Olive Oil, Turmeric, Black Pepper and Ground Ginger over it and then have Lentil Chips and/or Quinoa chips to dip with, which gives extra calories. I typically eat at least a half a bag which is around 300 extra calories. Altogether this is probably a 1250 to 1500 calorie meal.

Then I have a protein shake with about 75 to 80g of protein (Plant Proteins) with banana, almond butter / peanut butter and almond milk / coconut milk / walnut milk. This shake is most likely around 1,000 cals.

I drink at least a half gallon water per day along with Oxylent Vitamins. And end the night with 16 oz of water with ACV Apple Cider Vinegar for good digestion. I also do intermittent fasting / OMAD / Warrior Diet (the Chili and Protein shake are taken together and/or one right after the other), so my window for eating is only 4 hours, and I fast for 20 hours everyday.

Overall I think I am eating around 2000 to 3000 calories per day. I will update along with pictures later on in the year.

Gematria : (5/19) May 19 2021 BitCoin Cryptocurrency Crash and “9/11 Ritual” 8 months and 8 days after 9/11 – Hopsin “Be11a Ciao” and Donald Trump (Trump equals 88)

This current STAGED Crypto Correction was a ritual by the Elites. We already went through a ton of decodes previously on how “Trump” equaled ’88’ and how he was the perfect TRUMP Card for the Illuminati Agenda (which you can see here

Now let’s look a bit deeper into this crash in the BTC markets today, which is literally 8 months and 8 days after 9/11. Also notice that at 9:11AM NYC time today May 19th 2021, that’s when BTC reached it’s bottom before jumping back up.

We started off TAURUS (the Bull which symbolizes a BULL MARKET) with a sacrifice of Scottie Pippen’s son. Well the last day of Taurus was the last day of the BULL RUN (May 19th – next day was start of Gemini) and that was when the market crashed.

4/5 (April 5th, 2021) we had the NCAA College final, between the Baylor BEARS Bears who won against Gonzaga BULL-dogs (Bears beat Bulls like a Bear Market over-taking a Bull Market).

I have called at that time that this may point on Bear market very soon.

Same date, 4/5 is “birthday” of Bitcoin founder, Satoshi Nakamoto.

This day is 44 days(45 days end) span of that game and he’s birthday, tomorrow is 45.

45 days (end) ago were game where Bears won against Bulls

45 days(end) ago was Satoshi Nakamoto ” birthday”

Nakamoto=45 (Reverse Full Reduction)
(Reverse Full Reduction)
Market Crash=45 (Full Reduction)
May 19= 49 (EO), 22 (Full Reduction)
Crash=49 EO, 22 (Full Reduction)
Crash=29 (Jewish Reduction)
Crypto=29 (Reverse Full Reduction), 65 RO

139 DOY
139=34 prime
Bull Run=34 FR, 115 EO
Game where Bears won Bulls, has span of 11w 5d end=115
Murder=34 FR

4/5 this year 2021, was the “88th” anniversary of FDR’s executive order 6102 which forbade hoarding Gold.



The phrase “Bella Ciao” means “Goodbye Beautiful” which is an obvious LATIN / ITALIAN phrase (Jesuit / Catholic fingerprints). Same with the Red and Black Colors.

Notice the L’s are replaced as 1s and there are two of them.

TWO DAYS (1+1=2) after this video was released, the crypto market crashed.

Hopsin (and his crew) are on a heist, robbing a bank, which seems to tie into the heist going on with the rigged crypto markets. There is actually a new season of “MONEY HEIST” which came out recently too.

Money Heist (Spanish : La casa de papel, “The House of Paper”) is a Spanish Heist Crime Drama television series created by Alex Pina.

Hopsin even mentions ELON MUSK in this song, and we know that Elon Musk is heavily tied to crypto, especially DOGE Doge Coin.

After Hopsin says “I believe I’m just the Elon Musk of rap” … he says
“Yes indeed I must be, read on up, I’m breaking through like ÆonFlux.”

Aeon Flux is a film from December 2, 2005

“The plot begins in the 25th century, the Earth’s population has dwindled to a surviving five million following a devastating virus that almost resulted in the extinction of all human life 400 years earlier. Confined to one city-state, a group of rebels, led by Handler (Frances McDormand), seeks to destroy the oppressive government — first, by assassinating a high-ranking chairman (Marton Csokas). Tasked with this mission, Aeon Flux (Charlize Theron) must integrate herself in a world of deceit and mystery.”

Since Blockchain Cryptos are connected with the MOON (everyone wants their fave crypto to MOON or go to the moon), a comedian on the Dave Chappelle Show named Paul MOONEY died at age 79 (and his name looks like MOON and MONEY put together).

Go to 2 Hours and 44 minutes in this video below

Also Total Lunar Eclipse (Blood Moon) is supposed to happen on May 26, 2021

I’m sure there is much more I’m missing and will be UPDATING if I find more.

GNOSTIC CHRISTIAN CREATION STORY – Christ / Logos Comes to Reawaken Sophia Within Mankind – Christ was the Serpent in the Garden Freeing Men from the False God Demiurge


Within the last 60 to 70 years, we’ve found two sets of amazing discoveries (Nag Hammadi Library in Egypt and Dead Sea Scrolls in the Qumran Caves of Israel). You notice that Christians don’t use them in arguments (even though they were excited at first), because they found many Christian and Gnostic Christian texts that counter-act and share entirely different narratives than the Bibles they have today.

Before these discoveries around 1947, we could only reconstruct the Gnostic Christian texts from early Christian apologist opponents such as Irenaeus and Tertullian who wrote books refuting these Gnostic Christians and Pagans. The reason we didn’t have any original copies of the Gnostic Christian texts, is because the Roman Catholic Church was burning entire libraries and even burning pagans and Gnostics at the stake (Jesus said that the Jews’ forefathers were murderers, the same could be said of the Catholics and Protestants of today – i.e. their Catholic and Protestant forefathers killing pagans, Gnostics and even each other, starting in 4th Century, then the Crusades, Inquisition, etc..), but now, we have entire books that were preserved wholly for us to read.

Many verses in the Bible you hold, have gnostic allusions as well. The Kingdom of heaven does not come with physical observation, for the kingdom of heaven is within YOU (Luke 17). It says in Matthew 13:1-23 ; Mark 4:34 that Jesus spoke to them using nothing but ‘METAPHORS / ANALOGIES’. The baptismal rituals (Matthew 3:11 ; water and fire) and the Passover ritual of drinking the blood (wine) and eating the flesh (unleavened bread or crackers) was very Shamanic in nature (Matt 26:26-28 ; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26). And it was this very allusive metaphor that Jesus used in John 6, which caused many of his disciples to leave and stop following him because they thought he had gone crazy.

The RCC obviously had something to hide when they destroyed their Gnostic rivals’ books, and now these books have ‘risen from the dead’, just before the internet age, to give us an inside look at why the Catholics and Protestants were so adamant about getting rid of them. The Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls put a wrench in the gears of this form of mainline Christianity we have on the earth today. Here is an introduction to some of the mainstream Gnostic Christian beliefs :



There were tons of differing Gnostic Christian sects in early Christianity (Valentinians, Priscillians, Basilideans, Sethians, Mandaeans, Naassenes, Ophites, Simonians, Cainites, Carpocratians, Borborites, Docetists, Marcionists and Serpentarians, just to name a few). All of them had slightly different flavors of beliefs, but they all had a common idea about the creation of the world. You can read all about this in the “Apocrypha of John” (which is found in the Nag Hammadi). As I unravel their story, things may ‘click’ for you when you look around the world today. Whether this is mythology or not, is to be determined by YOU, the reader, but it does give good possible answers to why the world is the way it is.



They believe there is one invisible spirit known as Bythos. He is pure, holy and immaculate. This ineffable “One” emanating pure, immeasurable light. He is indestructible and eternal. Jesus reveals Him in the New Testament as the First Aeon and God. Surrounding him is the darkness known as Sige (Feminine counterpart). Through the power of his ‘thought’ he brings forth (or EMANATES) a feminine spirit named Barbelo. You’ll see that as the emanations go down in gradations, that they are always in pairs of male-female, until the last one.



Pure light radiates between the Bythos and Barbelo. A spark ignites from this light, resulting in yet another pale light. This is the “only begotten child”, named Autogenes, the aeon Christ, the Anointed One. This is how the Gnostic Trinity is born. There is the Father, Mother and Son. Each is a perfect aeon. Barbēlō is described as “the first power, the glory, the perfect glory in the aeons, the glory of the revelation”. All subsequent acts of creation within the divine sphere occurs through her coaction with God. The Autogenes is androgynous, like his Father and Mother. Despite their masculine and feminine names (Father, Mother), each Perfect aeon is a dyad of gender. The text describes Barbelo as thus:

“This is the first thought, his image; she became the womb of everything, for it is she who is prior to them all, the Mother-Father, the first man (Anthropos), the holy Spirit, the thrice-male, the thrice-powerful, the thrice-named androgynous one, and the eternal aeon among the invisible ones, and the first to come forth.”

Barbēlō is found in other Nag Hammadi writings:

1. Allogenes makes reference to a Triple Powerful Invisible Spirit, a masculine female virgin, who is the Barbēlō.

2. The Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit refers to a divine emanation called ‘Mother’, who is also identified as the Barbēlō.

3. The Gospel of Judas – Judas Iscariot says to Jesus that he knows that Jesus is from the immortal realm of Barbēlō.

4. Marsanes – several places.

5. Melchizedek – twice, the second time in a prayer of Melchizedek: “Holy are you, Holy are you, Holy are you, Mother of the aeons, Barbelo, for ever and ever, Amen.”

6. The Three Steles of Seth offers a description of “the first aeon, male virginal Barbelo, the first glory of the invisible Father, she who is called ‘perfect’.”

7. Trimorphic Protennoia (‘First Thought in Three Forms’), even in the first person: “He perpetuated the Father of all Aeons, who am I, the Thought of the Father, Protennoia, that is, Barbelo, the perfect Glory, and the immeasurable Invisible One who is hidden. I am the Image of the Invisible Spirit, and it is through me that the All took shape, and (I am) the Mother (as well as) the Light which she appointed as Virgin, she who is called ‘Meirothea’, the incomprehensible Womb, the unrestrainable and immeasurable Voice.”

8. Zostrianos – the aeon Barbēlō is referred to in many places.



Together with his Father, Autogenes produces four more aeons named Harmozel, Oroiael, Daveithai and Eleleth. The four aeons are helpers for Autogenes. Each of the four aeon helpers creates three more aeons. Harmozel emanates Grace, Truth and Form. Oroiael emanates Conception, Perception and Memory. Daveithai emanates Understanding, Love and Idea. Eleleth emanates Perfection, Peace and Wisdom – also named Sophia.

All four light aeons and their three serve Autogenes. These are the original aeons, the angels. In addition, four other beings dwelt with the luminaries (the aeons/angels). Pigera (or Adamas, the perfect being or Cosmic Man) lived with Harmozel. Seth (the son of Adamas) lived with Oroiael. Posterity of Seth (the souls of holy people – the Sethian Gnostic sect, revered Seth, the son of Adam and Eve) lived with Daveithai. Finally, the Souls (those that have yet to attain gnosis) lived with Eleleth.



Sophia (Wisdom ; Afterthought – since she was the youngest emanation from Bythos) should not be confused with Barbelo who is Forethought. Here we see the text is influenced with these names (Forethought / Afterthought), which can be found in Greek mythology, where the Titan Prometheus was known as Forethought of Zeus and hero of mankind. Prometheus was different from his brother Epimetheus who was Afterthought, and who married Pandora (the first woman who brought suffering to mankind), ending the Golden Age.

Sophia decides to emulate the Father Bythos by procreating an emanation of herself, by herself. This is out of balance, as she is not procreating or emanating with her male counterpart The Logos (Word). This creates an ugly creation they call Yaldabaoth (Samael and Saklas), a lion-faced serpent with eyes of fire. Sophia casts Yaldabaoth out of the pleroma (heavenly realm) and hides him in a cloud, but he somehow manages to steal her power and puts his mother Sophia in the cloud. He creates the material world and then creates archons (demon like beings) to help him manage what he created. 

In his arrogance, Yaldabaoth boasted to the other archons that:

“I am God and there is no other God beside me!”
– The Apocryphon of John (II 11:20)

Yaldabaoth was weak and ignorant, because he didn’t realize there were powers greater than him. He thought he was the First. Yaldabaoth had sinned for saying these words, which was why he was called Samael – “the blind god”. He has another name – Saklas, a name usually assigned to Satan.
According to The Hypostasis of the Archons and On the Origin of the World, it was Sophia, who rebuked him and gave him this name, Samael.

“You are mistaken, Samael”
– The Hypostasis of the Archons (II 87:2)

According to The Hypostasis of the Archons, after this boast, he challenged the voice:

“If any other thing exists before me, let it be shown forth to me!”
– The Hypostasis of the Archons (II 94:25)

So Sophia stretch forth her finger and brought limitless light into matter and the region of chaos. The chief archon trembled in fear. When Yaldabaoth and the other archons heard the voice. They sought this voice and traced the voice to the abyss, where the chief archon saw the reflection of his mother in the water. They want take hold of the image but could not. They were ignorant and weak, because they didn’t understand that the image was reflected from above.

“I am a jealous God, and there is no other God beside me.” 
– The Apocryphon of John (II 13:9-12)

But by announcing this he indicated to the angels who attended him that there exists another God. For if there were no other one, of whom would he be jealous? It was at this point that Sophia realized what she had done, and repented. She prayed to her Father for her deliverance, and the restoration of the power that her son (Yaldabaoth) had stolen from her. Her light was diminishing, since the theft of her power. She was moving about, back and forth. It was at this point that the voice of the invisible Spirit was heard, rebuking Yaldabaoth and the archons. They trembled in fear, and saw reflected on the water, the image of God (Spirit), in human form.



The Arrogant One (Yaldabaoth aka Demiurge) wanted to recreate the image of God (Spirit) from the reflection of the water, and many archons and angels were involved in the creation of this image. Yaldabaoth tried to create a being in the likeness of the First Man, whom he called Adam or Adama, so he could steal the light (spirit). But his creation was lifeless and without a soul. To regain her power, Sophia asked the Spirit Bythos and Barbelo to aid her. They come up with a plan to regain all the ‘divine sparks’ that Yaldabaoth had stolen from his mother Sophia. They all counsel Yaldabaoth to blow the spirit into the face of Adama, so that the body would waken. Yaldabaoth ignorantly blew on the face, so that the spirit and the power of his mother (Sophia) left Yaldabaoth’s own body and entered into the body he had created: Adam became alive.
(Though, according to the The Hypostasis of the Archons and On the Origin of the World, Yaldabaoth blew and blew, and blew his breath into the body, but the body wouldn’t rise. The purpose was to put the image (soul) of God into physical body so that they can capture it.)

Yaldabaoth immediately became jealous, because his creation was more powerful and intelligent than him and the other archons. When they brought all sort of animals to Adam, he was able to name each species by their proper names. When they saw that Adam was also luminous and free of evil, they cast him into the lowest plane of existence (Earth). But Barbelo sent Adam a helper, Epinoia, who was also known as Life (Zoe), so that Epinoia can help Sophia regain her power and place. Eponoia was hidden within Adam’s body. Epinoia secretly gave him the knowledge of how he was created, and taught Adam of how to ascend back to the Pleroma, or the true home of the light (human spirit).

The archons want to confine Adam, so they imprisoned his soul in flesh, and the material body was made mortal. They placed Adam in the earthly paradise (the Garden of Eden), and bound Adam in sleep and place the bond of forgetfulness upon him. In Adam’s sleep, Yaldabaoth tried to bring Epinoia out of Adam’s body from the rib. However, Epinoia escaped, and the chief archon created another body from the image of the likeness of Epinoia. The new body was a woman (she didn’t come from Adam’s rib bone like in the book of Genesis). Epinoia enter the newly created body.
The woman woke first, and saw Adam lying beside her. She spoke with the voice of power “Arise, Adam.”, and Adam woke. Since Yaldabaoth had placed spell of ignorant upon Adam when he was sleeping, so that he would not know the gnosis. The moment Adam woke from the unnatural slumber, he thought that the woman had given him life; he said to the woman:

“It is you who have given me life; you will be called ‘mother of the living’.”
– The Hypostasis of the Archons

When Adam woke from his sleep, he saw the woman; he thought. Her real name was Zoe, which means “Life”, but as we all know her in the Genesis, Adam called her Eve.



The chief archon wanted Adam and Eve to remain ignorant, putting them in the false paradise, hoping to keep them as his slaves and worship him. So Yaldabaoth told Adam that he may eat any fruit in the garden, but warning him not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. Yaldabaoth’s plan was thwarted. The fruit of knowledge would allow them to see the truth Jesus told John (Son of Zebedee, who is writing the Apocryphon of John), that it was he (Jesus) who told them to eat the fruit of knowledge of good and evil, through entering the serpent. The archons placed a curse upon the snake, as well as on Adam and Eve for disobeying them.

Angry with their disobedience, Yaldabaoth put them out of the Garden of Eden. Yaldabaoth saw that Epinoia was within Eve, so that she was luminous. When Yaldabaoth saw that Eve was faithful to Adam, the archon snatched Eve. But Epinoia escaped again, leaving Eve’s physical body before Yaldabaoth raped Eve, and begot two sons upon her. The sons of Yaldabaoth and Eve were named Eloim and Yave, whom we know by their names as Cain and Abel. But in the other Gnostic texts, only Cain was Yaldabaoth’s son, while Abel was Adam’s. The results of the rape, Yaldabaoth planted sexual desire into the human race, so that he would have more people to have his counterfeit spirit, who were susceptible to his blandishment and fall into sins and wickedness.

According to the The Hypostasis of the Archons, Yaldabaoth had raped Eve, before Adam and Eve ate the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge. When Epinoia left Eve’s body before ravishment, the spirit (Epinoia) entered the snake, who encouraged Eve and Adam to eat the forbidden fruits. Like in the Genesis, Cain killed his brother Abel, and God cursed Cain for the murderous deed. Adam’s real son was Seth, the son of man. Eve said, :

“I have borne another man through God, in place of Abel.”
– The Hypostasis of the Archons

It is from Seth’s descendants who would possess the gnosis. The Apocryphon of John went on to say, Sophia prepared a place for the souls in heaven, where Jesus, the incarnation of the aeon Christ would disclose the true knowledge of how to return to their true home in with the Spirit (in pleroma), where they would ascend past the rulers (archons) and be healed of all deficiency and become holy and faultless. In some Gnostic literature, Seth played a major role. Here, The Apocryphon of John ended, but The Hypostasis of the Archons continued. The Hypostasis of the Archons is actually quite different in detail, and can be supplemented with another longer text, known as On the Origin of the World.


Seth was a son of Adam and Eve, and he would be ancestor of holy men, before the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Seth was a good man, and faithful follower of the gnosis. Seth has a sister, named Norea, who was even wiser than him. At Norea’s birth, Eve said, :

“He has begotten on me a virgin as an assistance for many generations of mankind.”
– The Hypostasis of the Archons

After generations have passed, the archons decided to destroy mankind with the deluge, but save only Noah. Noah was instructed to build an ark. When Norea arrived, Noah refused to allow Norea aboard his ark. Norea blew on the ark, and the flame destroyed the vessel. Noah was forced to build a second ark. The archons seeing her power decided to use Norea. Norea, however, defiantly rebuked them, when they claimed that her mother belong to him, as she would be too. Norea claimed that he (Yaldabaoth) was not her God, but a creature of darkness. In anger, Yaldabaoth would have rape her, but she cried out to the True God for help. The evil archons withdrew when the angel (aeon) Eleleth appeared before her.

Eleleth told her that he was here not only to save her, but to teach her about her origin, and the nature of the Enemy (Yaldabaoth). Eleleth told her that she actually has more power than Yaldabaoth. He also described Yaldabaoth’s origin, which is slightly different in details from what I wrote in Sophia and the Demiurge. Again, he boasted before his offspring that he was the god of entirety. This time, it was Zoe (Life), daughter of Sophia, who rebuked the chief archon. Zoe called him Sakla, and she breathed on him. The breath became a fiery angel, who bound Yaldabaoth and hurled him into Tartarus, which is below the abyss. One of Yaldabaoth’s offspring witnessed the power of the aeon, repented and changed allegiance. His name was Sabaoth. Sophia and Zoe rewarded Sabaoth, by making ruler of the seventh heaven. On his throne, Zoe sat on his right, to teach Sabaoth about the eighth heaven. On his left, sat the angel of wrath.

Ialdaboth seeing the splendour that his son was given, and the chief archon envy Sabaoth. Ialdaboth was the first to create envy, and from envy he created death. Death engendered countless other offspring. Yaldabaoth placed these beings to rule his seven heavens of chaos. It is Yaldabaoth who brought death to mankind. Eleleth also prophesied when mankind is release from the hold of the archons, and the spirits of men will return to its true home (pleroma). It would happen at the time of the true man (Jesus), who will reveal the word of truth (gnosis).

P.S. One of the most interesting things about the Gnostic texts is the roles of feminine principles and women, particularly Barbelo and Sophia, and then Eve, Norea, the Virgin Mary and Mary Magdalene. Eve played a far more important role than Adam in the Gnostic creation.



From Bythos, came syzygy (female-male pairs) emanations, all the way down to the lowest of the aeons, The Logos and Sophia. Through Sophia came the Demiurge who captured sparks of her divinity and ultimately trapped them inside the human body. She made a mistake and Christ / Logos comes to correct the mistake by awakening Adam and Eve first who they are by entering the serpent and telling them to eat from the knowledge of good and evil. They eat and immediately realize that the Yaldabaoth God is a false one, and there is a supreme God above him. He makes them drink of ignorance and forgetfulness so they don’t know who they are. 

Christ still loves Sophia and wants her to return to the fullness and brightness of her true divine self as his bride. But he doesn’t just whisk her away or take those pieces out of humanity and simply reconstruct Sophia, instead, he gives her (each person’s consciousness is a divine spark of Sophia’s divinity) light power to rise above the chaos and become more conscious of who she is in her own power. The sparks of Sophia’s divinity within each person, can remain ignorant or they can awaken and remember who they are. Those who awaken will form to become the ‘Bride of Christ’ as they are reintegrated into the wholeness of Sophia’s divinity. 

We find these same allusions in the NT those who were infused with the Holy Spirit constituted the body of God. In the “Gospel According to the Hebrews” Jesus calls the Holy Spirit His mother, and in the “Gospel of Thomas” Saying 22,  He said the righteous will enter the kingdom when the female and male merged back into each other as one, this condition was called Perfection (cf. 1 Cor. 13:10) and brings Eve back into Adam reconstituting the original Androgynous man. Notice too that the body of believers were called the bride of Christ, but were also called His body. Prophecy and other charismata were considered female, so when the female and male re-immerge into each other, the Charismata ends, that is what’s behind Paul’s teaching in that passage.

Gospel of Thomas Saying 22:27 Jesus saw some children who were taking the breast: he said to his disciples: “These little ones who suck are like those who enter the Kingdom.” They said to him: “If we are little, shall we enter the Kingdom?” Jesus says to them: “When you make the two <become> one, and when you make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the upper like the lower! And if you make the male and female one, so that the male is no longer male and the female no longer female, and when you put eyes in the place of an eye, and a hand in the place of a hand, and a foot in the place of a foot, and an image in the place of an image, then you will enter [the Kingdom!”]

R. McL. Wilson writes: “The idea that only the childlike can enter the Kingdom of God is, of course, familiar from the canonical Gospels. It may be added that this saying is one of the few which have anything in the nature of a narrative setting, although whether the words which introduce the saying derive from genuine tradition or were constructed for the purpose is matter for debate. Certainly all that follows the disciples’ question is far removed from the canonical portrait of Jesus. Yet even here there is a basis in the New Testament: as Grant and Freedman note, listing passages cited by Doresse, the unity of believers in the body of Christ is based on New Testament teaching. They also quote Paul’s words in Galatians iii.8: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. Such a passage as this must serve to confirm the view that one element at least in the development of Gnosticism is a re-interpretation of Christian teaching.”
– (Studies in the Gospel of Thomas, p. 31)

F. F. Bruce writes: “This is an expansion of the canonical saying: ‘whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it’ (Luke 18.17; cf. Matthew 18.3). But the expansion suggests the abolition of sex distinction (cf. Sayings 4, 11, 106): as infants are devoid of sex awareness or shame, so should the disciples be. In the Gospel according to the Egyptians words like these are spoken by Jesus to Salome. We may recognize a Gnostic interpretation of Paul’s words: ‘there can be no male and female’ (Galatians 3.28). The replacement of physical eyes, hand and foot by corresponding spiritual members is probably a gloss on the saying in Mark 9.43-48 (cf. Matthew 5.29 f.; 18.8 f.), which similarly follows words about children.”
(Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament, p. 123-124)



The emanations from the All Powerful God Bythos, came down in female-male pairs of ‘twin flame souls’. There is a Platonic theory that the Demiurge aka Yaldaboath does not want the twin souls to unite on earth because they are too powerful as one. Originally, it was believed that men were created with 2 faces, 4 arms and 4 legs, but fearing their power, the false god separated them. 
The Twin Flame Souls are given a fair chance at being introduced to each other but he (and his evil archon forces) will cause one twin to run from the other. Then, just as Christ could only remind ‘Sophia’ (the sparks within each of us) who we are and give her the light back home to the Pleroma, so too, the enlightened Twin Soul can only sit back and allow the other Twin Soul (who doesn’t remember who they are) to grow on their own, until the frequencies match and they can come together and ascend back to the pleroma (heavenly realm) again. 

The inner alchemy happens for both along the way, while the one twin is waiting for the other to raise their awareness, so the separation period is necessary before the sacred union can occur. This whole process of reunifying the twin souls on earth is so that the Logos can enter the aspects of Sophia buried deep within us as individuals first, and then, as a magnet, attract the other half of our syzygy twin soul, and return home.

P.S. you’ll notice reading most all the Gnostic Christian narratives (including the Gnostic sect known as the Marcionists – headed by the first Christian to put a New Testament Canon together in 140AD – Marcion) that they denounced the Old Testament god as a crazy, cruel and blind deity who thought he was the only god, not realizing there was an even more supreme god above him. Marcion wanted nothing to do with the Jewish God so he completely detached the first New Testament Canon (which only had a portion of Luke and 10 Pauline Epistles) from the Old Testament completely. This sentiment was shared by most all Gnostic sects and it’s undoubtedly where Christians afterwards adopted an antisemitic undertone.

”EUHEMERISM” and “VATICINUM EX EVENTU” – Deceptive Literary Tactics Employed by the Authors, Historians, Tragedians, Playwrights and Poets

In Matthew 23 (Luke 13), Jesus is in the Temple, reaming out the Sanhedrin and Pharisees for their hypocrisy, calling them every pejorative in the Thesaurus. He ends by saying this in Matthew 23:37-38,

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were unwilling! Look, your house (Temple) is left to you desolate.”

The temple would’ve clearly still been standing in Matthew 23, yet, here Jesus is telling them to behold their ‘desolate temple’. When you dig deeper, you find out that much of what was written about Jesus was actually referring to Roman General Titus who was sent by his FATHER (Emperor Vespasian) to besiege Jerusalem and the Temple. Titus being the son, sent by the Father is another allusion to Jesus and his ‘father in heaven’.

And in Matthew 24, the very first thing Jesus tells his disciples is that the temple would not have one stone standing upon another (it would be destroyed). There was a deceptive Literary Tactic (already being used by authors, poets, tragedians, etc. long before Christianity came on the scene) called “VATICINIUM EX EVENTU” or “POST-EVENTUM” which is where they wrote prophecies about events that had already occurred, as if they were being prophesied about BEFOREHAND. This is clearly what was going on here with the destruction of the Temple. They made it seem as if Jesus was prophesying about the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple before it happened, when really, it was written after the Roman Siege on Jerusalem (66-73AD).

Also, there was another literary tactic known as “Euhemerism” which posits that myths were based on real historical personages or events that were then exaggerated, embellished and amplified in their re-telling. In a nutshell, it was real people and/or events that were then wrapped in mythology. That scene in Matthew 23, where Jesus is telling them how much he wished to gather them like chicks under a hens wings, but they were unwilling and then to behold their temple (house) being desolate, etc.. is a euhemeristic tactic, speaking of Titus (being cloaked as Jesus in the New Testament), who goes on a long spiel about how benevolent the Romans had been to the Jews, yet the Jews were unwilling to cooperate with the Romans and even fought against them. It was Titus beholding the ‘desolation’ of the Temple.

As a matter of fact, Roman General Titus (and his father Vespasian) were cloaked as Jesus many times, and in other instances, Josephus is cloaked as the Apostle Paul (as well as other writers in the NT). SEE BELOW : 


Matthew 23:37-38 Jesus says, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. Look, your house is left to you desolate.” (Notice : Jesus says their house (Jewish Temple) had been left desolate even though it was still supposedly standing when Jesus was alive. It’s supposed to be a ‘hint’ of who is really speaking here, not Jesus, but Titus in Josephus ‘Wars’ CLOAKED as Jesus in the Bible, as it was Titus standing there beholding the city and Jewish Temple completely destroyed in 70AD) 

COMPARE TO TITUS SPEAKING BELOW (Josephus ‘Wars’ 6.6.2 and 6.6.3) 

“I then came to this city [Jerusalem], as unwillingly sent by my father [Vespasian] and received melancholy injunctions from him. When I heard that the people were disposed to peace, I rejoiced at it. I exhorted you to leave off these proceedings before I began this war. I spared you, even when you had fought against me a great while. I gave my right hand, as security to the deserters. I observed what I had promised faithfully. When they fled to me, I had compassion on many of those I had taken captive. I tortured those that were eager for war, in order to restrain them. It was unwillingly that I brought my engines of war against your walls. I always prohibited my soldiers when they were set upon your slaughter, from their severity against you. After every victory I persuaded you to peace: as though I had been my self conquered. When I came near your temple, I again departed from the laws of war, and exhorted you to spare your own sanctuary, and to preserve your holy house to yourselves.

I allowed you a quiet exit out of it: and security for your preservation. Nay, if you had a mind, I gave you leave to fight in another place. Yet have you still despised every one of my proposals: and have set fire to your holy house with your own hands. And now, vile wretches, do you desire to treat with me by word of mouth? To what purpose is it that you would save such an holy house as this was, which is now destroyed? What preservation can you now desire, after the destruction of your temple? Yet do you stand still at this very time in your armour. Nor can you bring yourselves so much as to pretend to be supplicants, even in this your utmost extremity. O miserable creatures! what is it you depend on? Are not your people dead? Is not your holy house gone? Is not your city in my power? And are not your own very lives in my hands? And do you still deem it a part of valour to die?

However, I will not imitate your madness. If you throw down your arms, and deliver up your bodies to me, I grant you your lives. And I will act like a mild master of a family: what cannot be healed shall be punished: and the rest I will preserve for my own use. To that offer of Titus’s they made this reply: that,

“They could not accept of it, because they had sworn never to do so. But they desired they might have leave to go through the wall that had been made about them, with their wives, and children. For that they would go into the desert, and leave the city to him.”

At this Titus had great indignation: that when they were in the case of men already taken captives, they should pretend to make their own terms with him, as if they had been conquerors. So he ordered this proclamation to be made to them: that,

“They should no more come out to him as deserters, nor hope for any farther security. For that he would henceforth spare no body: but fight them with his whole army: and that they must save themselves as well as they could. For that he would from henceforth treat them according to the laws of war.” So he gave orders to the soldiers both to burn, and to plunder the city. Who did nothing indeed that day: but on the next day they set fire to the repository of the archives, to Acra, to the council house, and to the place called Ophlas: at which time the fire proceeded as far as the palace of queen Helena, which was in the middle of Acra. The lanes also were burnt down; as were also those houses that were full of the dead bodies of such as were destroyed by famine.”

(Josephus ‘Wars’ 6.6.2 and 6.6.3 compared to Matthew 23:37-38)

Clearly, Matthew 23:37-38 about Jesus’s plea to the Jews about how benevolent and eager he (and his father in heaven) was to care and protect them like a mother hen over her chicks, was Euhemerism being employed here by the author of Matthew, about Titus extending his hand of ‘grace’ to the Jews and wishing to spare they and their city and their temple. Yet they fought and destroyed / murdered many of the Roman soldiers (just as Jesus says there that Jerusalem had destroyed / murdered all the prophets that had been sent to them). They were taking real events from the Roman Jewish War and wrapping them in MYTHOLOGY.

There are other instances of Euhemerism which I’m going to show you below. Roman General Titus (and his father Vespasian) were cloaked as Jesus and in other instances, Jewish Historian Josephus (37-100 AD) is cloaked as the Apostle Paul (as well as other writers in the NT). SEE THOSE BELOW:


During the Roman-Jewish War (66-73AD) Josephus pleads with the Jews (with weeping for his people the Jews, just like Paul wrote his letters with tears to the churches – 2 Cor 12:4), Josephus ends his long spiel in ‘Wars 5.9.4’ by saying, “…take my own blood, as a reward, if it may but procure your preservation. For I am ready to die; in case you [Jews] will but return to a sound mind after my death.”


Apostle Paul said in Romans 9:3, “…for I wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race [Jews],”. P.S. It should also be noted that Paul was supposedly born in Rome, yet he is a Jew, making him a Jew and also a Roman citizen, which seems to be a cloaked reference to Josephus, who was a Jew and defected to Rome during the war, becoming a Roman citizen.


Many places in the gospels, the Sanhedrin is trying to corner Jesus and kill him, yet time and time again he walks through the midst of them somehow like a ninja (Luke 4:29-30 ; also see John 7:30 ; John 8:59 ; John 10:39).


Josephus (Jewish Historian) wrote about Roman General Titus during the Roman Jewish war of 66-73AD below in ‘Wars 5.2.2’ :

“Now so long as he rode along the straight road which led to the wall of the city, no body appeared out of the gates. But when he went out of that road, and declined towards the tower Psephinos and led the band of horsemen obliquely; an immense number of the Jews leaped out suddenly… They intercepted Titus also, with a few others…, and to return back to his own men he saw it was also impossible; by reason of the multitude of the enemies [Jews] that lay between them. So he [Titus] perceived that his preservation must be wholly owing to his own courage, and turned his horse about, and cried out aloud to those that were about him to follow him; and ran with violence into the midst of his enemies; in order to force his way through them to his own men…

And hence we may principally learn that both the success of wars, and the dangers that kings are in, are under the providence of God. For while such a number of darts were thrown at Titus, when he had neither his head-piece on, nor his breast-plate: (for, as I told you, he went out not to fight, but to view the city:) none of the darts touched his body, but went aside without hurting him. As if all of them missed him on purpose; and only made a noise as they passed by him. So he diverted those perpetually with his sword that came on his side, and overturned many of those that directly met him; and made his horse ride over those that were overthrown.”

(end quote)



James 5:16 and 1 John 1:9 say that if you confess your sins you will be healed and forgiven.


“However, there is a place left for your preservation, if you be willing to accept of it: and God is easily reconciled to those that confess their faults, and repent of them.”


Paul says in 1 Corinthians 5:1-2 that there was a type of sin reported among them not even reported among the gentiles and that they are proud of this instead of feeling shame and mourning.


“For you shew your transgressions after a pompous manner; and contend one with another which of you shall be more wicked than another: and you make a publick demonstration of your injustice; as if it were virtue.”


Excerpt from Plato’s Dialogue known as ‘Phaedo’ (c. 380BC) says :
“Whence come wars, and fightings, and factions? Whence but from the body and the lusts of the body? Wars are occasioned by the love of money, and money has to be acquired for the sake and in the service of the body.”


James 4:1-2 “From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain.”


Tiberius Gracchus (150BC; Roman Politician) said this : “The wild beasts that roam over Italy have their dens and holes to lurk in, but the men who fight and die for our country enjoy the common air and light and nothing else. It is their lot to wander with their wives and children, houseless and homeless, over the face of the earth….”


Matthew 8:20 Jesus replied, “Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.”



We all know the crucifixion narrative of Jesus in the middle with two thieves on either side (Matt 27 and Luke 23)


“And when I was sent by Titus Caesar with Cerealins, and a thousand horsemen, to a certain village called Thecoa, in order to know whether it were a place fit for a camp, as I came back, I saw many captives crucified, and remembered three of them as my former acquaintance. I was very sorry at this in my mind, and went with tears in my eyes to Titus, and told him of them; so he immediately commanded them to be taken down, and to have the greatest care taken of them, in order to their recovery; yet two of them died under the physician’s hands, while the third recovered.”

So you see here, during the Roman-Jewish War (66-73AD) Josephus wrote about three of his friends being crucified and asks Titus to spare them, he takes them all down, two die and one RECOVERS (sound familiar?). And remember, not one book in the NT was written until AFTER the Roman-Jewish War from 66-73AD.

*BTW, There’s also what’s known as “CENTO POETRY” where you would rearrange lines from the poetry of Greek Poet Homer (800 BC) and create a new piece of poetry. Christians all over were doing this with Homer’s works as well turning them into ‘gospels’ about Jesus. All of this research brought me back to the writings of Josephus especially and I noticed that there were quotes in his writings that were basically word for word verbatim of verses in the New Testament. These are only a few of the places where the Biblical authors were borrowing from. And keep in mind, the Romans were notorious for stealing other religions and implementing or incorporating them into their own. They stole the entire Greek Pantheon of Gods and Goddesses and gave them ROMAN NAMES (except for Janus, who they claimed was uniquely a Roman God). With that in mind, it wouldn’t be a stretch for them to steal the Jewish religion and create a Romanized version of it (i.e. Christianity).*


The Bible contradicts itself in many areas especially the 4 Gospels and in KEY AREAS to boot!*

There were tons of ‘gospels’ floating around in the late 1st into early 2nd century (including the Gnostic Christian Gospels). It was until Nicea when the Roman Emperor Constantine favored Bishop Alexander over Arius (Arianism was then outlawed in favor of Homoousian Theology), and St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate was the ‘official canon’, which had 76 books. The Catholics then reduced it to 73 books and then the Protestants reduced it to 66 books. But both the Catholic and Protestant Bibles are founded in St. Jerome’s Vulgate, just with fewer books. But even in these books alone, we find tons of contradictions including the key areas of Christ’s birth narrative and in Christ’s resurrection narratives.


In Luke chapter 1, it says that a Census went out into all the world under Caesar Augustus, and was taken by the Roman Governor of Syria named Quirinius. This Census took place in 6AD. That seems to be a precise date, but in Luke 2, it says that Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod The Great (King of Judea), who died in 4 BC. This means the gospel writer of Luke is not consistent with the actual historical evidence! Luke 2:1-7 is not realistic. Also, the Census would not cause anyone to move from one place to another, in order to be registered for tax purposes. It would be the tax officials who would travel, to link property to it’s owners. So Joseph (and Mary) as residents of Nazareth, (Galilee) rather than Bethlehem (Judea), wouldn’t have been affected by this census in the first place!

Another contradiction is between Matthew and Luke. Matthew said that Mary and Joseph lived in Bethlehem, fled to Egypt, then returned to Bethlehem and finally, fled to Galilee. According to Luke on the other hand, said that they lived in Galilee, went to Bethlehem only because of the Census, and returned immediately to Nazareth to be presented at the temple a month later (40 days later to be exact) for the Jewish ceremony of purification, which they all did for the redemption of the firstborn son (Leviticus 12 ; Exodus 13). Here they meet Simeon (a just man) and the prophetess Anna. Luke makes no mention of a flight to Egypt, nor was there even a need to flee in his account. The only thing Luke and Matthew agree on is that he was born in Bethlehem to fulfill the prophecy found in Micah 5:2.


  1. Matthew’s account of Resurrection = 3 at the tomb (Mary Magdalene, other Mary and angel sitting atop the rolled away stone)
  2. Mark’s account of Resurrection = 4 at the tomb (Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of Jesus, Salome and a young man wearing white sitting inside tomb)
  3. Luke’s account of Resurrection = 5 at the tomb (Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary mother of James and 2 men in shining white apparel. The only disciple to return to tomb was Peter).
  4. John’s account of Resurrection = 1 at the tomb (Mary Magdalene, who sees nothing but an empty tomb. She then brings Peter and John back, where they see two angels shining brightly, one at the head of where Jesus had lain and one at his feet where Jesus had lain).

In essence, they worship that book, even though it’s been heavily redacted thousands of times, with errors, contradictions, anachronisms, discrepancies, insertions, omissions, etc.. This proves that there is no real inner working or relationship of (or to) a spiritual deity. It’s all dependent upon what ‘MEN’ have put inside of their book. The supposed ‘spirit’ (and their ‘PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP’ with that spirit), is not leading these people to discern FACT FROM FICTION. If it’s a real relationship with a true spiritual entity, then that spiritual entity should be telling these people when they are seeing error, especially when it’s in their own book. But that’s just not the case many times, proving there is no real spiritual component to their relationship with a real entity, it’s merely a relationship with a book (and a book that most Christians don’t even understand!).

it was another 40+ years after the Council of Nicea (325AD), before they started working on the canon. The earliest extant list of the books of the NT, in exactly the number and order in which we presently have them, is written by St. Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in his Festal letter #39 of 367AD

382AD = Council of Rome at which Pope Damasus started the process of defining a universal canon for the Church. The New Testament books are listed in their present number and order. Pope Damasus commissions St. Jerome to translate the canon into Latin which became the Latin Vulgate

393AD = The Council of Hippo, which began “arguing it out.” Canon proposed by St. Athanasius.

397AD = The Council of Carthage, which refined the canon for the Western Church, sending it back to Pope Innocent for ratification. In the East, the canonical process was hampered by a number of schisms (esp. within the Church of Antioch).

1545AD = Council of Trent, Accepting the canon currently used by the Catholic Church was made mandatory at this council. Prior to that it was up to the individual whether you accepted the Deuterocanonicals (seven books : Baruch, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Sirach, Tobit and Wisdom ; also certain additions to Esther and Daniel), as part of the Bible or not. Even at Trent there was a lot of disagreement. (end)

So the fact that there has never been any consensus or consistency as to what books are ‘divinely inspired’, is a HUGE RED FLAG that none of this was handed down by a Supernatural Being.



You’re right about the earliest fragment of the New Testament* You’re right that all authors of the gospels (and Acts) are anonymous (with given names by later Christian authors). And there is nothing in the entire Bible that is extant, meaning everything is a copy. THE ENTIRE BIBLE, NOT ONE ORIGINAL COPY. But the earliest fragment we have is from the 2nd century. It’s from the book of John and it’s the “Rylands Library Papyrus P52”. But really, you can play on THEIR FIELD, THEIR RULES, THEIR REFS AND THEIR MOVING GOAL-POSTS and still whip their Azz. Use their own book against them. Their Master said that they would not only do what he did but even GREATER things shall they do (John 14:12-14). Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary Evidence. Jesus also sent them out with the Great Commission in Mark 16 and in the latter half of that chapter it says that the disciples were not only preaching the ‘word’ but they had SIGNS AND MIRACLES to confirm what they were preaching about. Jesus says in Matthew 17:20 that the faith of a mustard seed (implying the smallest amount of faith) can move mountains.

In Acts chapter 5, the Apostles were out doing so many miracles in the STREETS (not behind closed doors where it was FAKE) that people caught wind of it and people from OTHER CITIES / TOWNS were bringing their sick, maimed, injured, etc.. into the streets of Jerusalem to be healed by the apostles as well (again, not behind close doors where they can FAKE IT like Benny Hinn). Where do you see this type of faith in today’s Christian circles? Where are they clearing out hospitals like the Apostles did in Acts 5? According to their own book, and their own standards, do these Christians even have faith themselves? They want us to believe in something that they themselves don’t believe in! Their ACTIONS BETRAY THEIR SPEECH!

And here’s the one that seals the deal. In John chapter 17, Jesus prays an epic prayer that not only would his 12 be one as he and his father were one, but that all those who believe on their message, that they too would become one as they are all one. Jesus’s own prayer was not answered!! From the beginning of Christendom, there has never been a time when all the believers in Christ were ‘ONE’. There have always been many factions and divisions and denominations. If this god didn’t even answer the prayer of his only begotten son, why pray to him at all?! He’s clearly not going to hear it or answer it.

And Jesus also said that where two or three are gathered in his name, he is there in the midst of them and if any 2 people should agree as in touching one thing on earth (in his name), it shall be done (Matthew 18:19-20). This is proven FALSE every single day when whole groups of people pray together and it is not answered. They have blind faith in a sky-daddy / sky-wizard that does not come through on his promises. Sounds a bit like the political world where people worship these BIG DADDY Politicians who sell them lies, and give them slogans that they will never follow through on or fulfill, but the people still worship these politicians no matter how much they deceive their constituents.



You’ll clearly hear this from Bart Ehrmann and he is correct. And there were several authors in the first century who would’ve surely noticed Jesus and wrote about him. Many NT texts even state that Jesus’ fame went far and wide. And who wouldn’t notice all the miracles that he (and his disciples / apostles) were doing?! John 20:30 and John 21:25 << in these two passages it basically says that Jesus did so many miracles that if you were to write them all down, the world couldn’t contain all the books written about them. How would no other contemporary author write about any of this?!

THE SILENCE THAT SCREAMS! The only citation we supposedly have of Jesus in the first century was from Josephus (37-100AD ; Jewish General / Leader who defected from Israel to Rome during the Roman-Jewish War 66-73AD and became the personal historian of the Flavian Caesars). It was known as the “Testimonium Flavianum”. But this was clearly a fabrication by a later Christian author (most likely Eusebius, the Christian historian for Emperor Constantine), because none of the Christian Fathers from the 1st to 3rd Centuries cited it (and some of them pored over the writings of Josephus, yet never once mention the Testimonium Flavianum), it wasn’t ‘discovered’ until Eusebius in the 4th Century.

And BTW, there were tons of other forgeries being written around this same time period as well, such as the Epistle of Seneca [the Younger]. Seneca The Younger lived during the first century and was the tutor for Nero Caesar. Some Christian author in the 4th century fabricated 14 letters being written back and forth between Seneca and the Apostle Paul, yet nowhere else do you find that Paul or Seneca knew each other. And many statements made by Christians such as Tertullian, made it clear that Seneca had never been introduced to the gospel of Christ and that had he known about the gospel message, he surely would’ve been a Christian.

You’ll also find that they also slip in the ‘Christians being tortured, lit as candles in Caesar’s gardens, thrown to lions, etc..’ into the letter, and the only other place you’ll find this (which is highly suspicious) are in the writings of Roman Historian Tacitus from the 2nd Century. No other Historian wrote about Nero throwing Christians to lions, being burnt as candles in his gardens, tortured, etc.. and surely, Josephus and another Roman Historian named Suetonius would’ve said that Nero blamed Christians for the fire at Rome (and subsequently chastised by Nero for this), but they never do. They place the blame squarely on Nero. So this portion of the historical narrative about Christians being targeted and tortured by Nero as punishment for the fire at Rome, also seems to be a later Christian interpolation into the historical annals.


The book of Acts was written in the 2nd Century (see link)

*The Pauline Epistles never came to society until Marcion revealed them in the 2nd Century (see link)*

*More on Marcion in the three links below*
LINK 1 :

LINK 2 :

LINK 3 :

P.S. Also look into these :

  1. Richard Carrier
  2. Bob Price
  3. Ken Humphreys (Jesusneverexisted . com)
  4. Dennis MacDonald (I highly recommend a vid series based on his books entitled, “EXCAVATING THE EMPTY TOMB” by TruthSurge on YT)
  5. Joseph Atwill (Caesar’s Messiah)
  6. Francesco Carotta (Jesus was Caesar)
  7. Dorothy Milne Murdock (better known by her pen names Acharya S and D. M. Murdock)



The Gnostics and the Gnostic Christians (who were actually the original Christians) believed that this 3D realm was created by an evil deity known as the Demiurge (Yaldabaoth ; Samael ; Saklas). The first Christian Bible was compiled by Marcion (around c. 140AD) and his Bible only consisted of 2/3rds the book of Luke and Ten Pauline Epistles (there was no OT and no other NT books). Marcion was a Docetist / Marcionist Gnostic who believed the god of the Old Testament was this Demiurge figure. He (and many early Christians like him) believed that the serpent in the garden was actually CHRIST who was trying to free mankind from being ignorant, and free them from control of the Demiurge deity in the Old Testament.

And the way to ‘salvation’ was not through believing in Jesus dying on the cross, but rather, it was through ‘gnosis’ or a knowledge of who you are (remembering that you are a fragment of Goddess Sophia). Sophia was the mother of the Demiurge who ’emanated’ or procreated on her own, without her male counterpart (who was the Logos or the Christ). That’s why the Demiurge was so messed up. She tried to reprimand him for believing that he was the only god and the god above all other gods. So the Demiurge locked her up and took his mothers divinity. He then created human beings and put fragments of her divinity within each human being (in a rib-CAGE << caging his mother metaphor).

They believed that procreation was evil, since you were just bounding Sophia’s consciousness (divine soul) up inside another human and their only was out was to remember who they were, as a small piece of Sophia’s Divinity. Once you had this ‘gnosis’ or knowledge of who you were (which is what the Logos or Christ was sent to remind us of), then you can ascend back to the Pleroma (gnostic term for ‘Heaven’). The point here is that many early spiritualists and even Christians believed that the god of this world (the one who created it) was an evil force.



In Suetonius’s “Lives of the Twelve Caesars” he writes about a couple miracles supposedly done by Emperor Vespasian when he was in Egypt. Vespasian goes to the Temple of Serapis where he is met by two men, one was lame and the other blind. These two men were told in a dream that Vespasian would be there to heal them and he does so. The way he healed the blind man is by spitting on his hands and rubbing it in his eyes and for the lame man, he touches his heel. The healing of the blind man is the exact miracle we find about Jesus in Mark 8 and John 9.

The first supposed miracle of Jesus was him turning water into wine. This was clearly an occultic ‘hint’ at the god Dionysus from Greek Mythology who was the god of wine. And if you read the stories of Dionysus (particularly in the story written by Greek Poet Euripides called “The Bacchae” which won the Dionysus Festival in 405BC) you’ll find that there are many narratives surrounding Dionysus that not only fit Jesus, but also fit Paul. Dionysus comes to Thebes and his cousin King Pentheus is in charge. Pentheus puts Dionysus in prison for trying to proselytize himself onto the people there. The way the people were given to the spirit of Dionysus was to get drunk on wine (this is very similar to Christians being in the holy ghost or holy spirit, and they speak in other tongues or dance around in a frenzy). Pentheus does not know that he has arrested Dionysus, he just thinks this is a mere follower of Dionysus, and before he’s put in jail, Dionysus (in disguise) says that AS MUCH AS YOU ARE DOING THIS TO ME, YOU ARE ALSO DOING THIS TO DIONYSUS HIMSELF.

This plays into two Christian motifs, Jesus said that he is the vine and his disciples are the branches (implying they are one through him), which is also another referential ‘hint’ at where this notion is coming from, since Dionysus was the god of the ‘vine’ and ‘wine’ (John 15). Another is in Matthew 25, where Jesus judges two sets of people. One set helped Jesus when he was poor, hungry, thirsty, in jail, etc.. and the other did not. They ask Jesus when they saw him and did (or did not) do those things for him. Jesus says that AS MUCH AS YE HAVE DONE THIS TO THE LEAST OF THESE MY BRETHREN, YE HAVE DONE IT UNTO ME. This notion of being ONE with his disciples, was copied or plagiarized from the poetic myths of Dionysus who made himself ONE with his disciples.

Dionysus causes a huge earthquake to happen which allows himself to go free from the prison cell. This is clearly where the Biblical author for Acts was drawing from in Acts chapter 16 when Paul and Silas were thrown in prison and a huge earthquake happens that releases them and all the other prisoners.

Also, Dionysus was known as the TWICE BORN (Born Again Motif). In Orphic Mystery tradition (6th Century BC), Dionysus (Zagreus) was born firstly by the god Zeus and virgin goddess Persephone (Queen of the Underworld). Zeus gives Dionysus the right to become his successor (as the 5th ruler on the throne in heaven over the entire universe). The jealous Hera (wife of Zeus) has the Titans rip the boy in shreds and eat him, but the heart is saved by goddess Athena.

Dionysus tried to elude their attacks by transforming into Zeus, Chronos, a young man, a lion, a horse, a serpent and finally a bull, the form in which he was torn apart. Zeus then hurls a lightning bolt at the Titans, and destroys them. Out of the ashes, humans are created with dual nature (one part from wicked sons of the earth – the Titans and the other part, a soul that is divine through the Titans’ eating the son of a god – Dionysus). Thus, when we find that followers of Dionysus follow the cult ritual of dividing up a bull and eating its raw flesh, and drinking wine in thanksgiving and remembrance of their god, it is not a stretch to argue that they believed they were eating the body and blood of their savior in order to reach a spiritual communion.

Dionysus was then born again from a mortal woman, Princess Semele, Daughter of the King of Thebes (Cadmus) and Zeus. Hera planted seeds of doubt in Semele’s mind that she had actually been impregnated by Zeus, so Semele demanded that Zeus make an oath on the River Styx that he reveal himself in all his glory. However, as no mortal can stand the sight of Zeus without dying, she was burnt up by his firebolts. Zeus rescued the child Dionysus from her womb and sewed him up in his thigh until he was ready to be born. Through this, he is called ‘THE TWICE-BORN’, being killed once, resurrected and born a second time, which spilled over to identify the initiates into the Dionysian cult, as they were said to be ‘BORN AGAIN.’

The Christians (as many of the ANE [Ancient Near East] religions, were notorious for copying each other) used the story of Dionysus as the blueprint for Jesus in many ways. Read “The Bacchae” by Euripides’ (Greek Poet from 5th Century BC) which is all about the demigod Dionysus, written in 410 BC and won first prize at the Dionysia Festival in 405 BC. The trial Dionysus has before King Pentheus is very reminiscent of the trial Jesus supposedly had before Pilate. The earthquake scene that allows Dionysus to walk free from prison, is very reminiscent of what happened when Paul and Silas were praying in the jail cell at midnight in the book of Acts chapter 16.

Dionysus was called THE TWICE-BORN, because according to the Orphic tradition (Orpheus was a Greek Poet, who supposedly existed before the 6th Century BC, and Orphism is traced back to the 5th Century BC) he was first born from Virgin Goddess Persephone (having sex with Zeus), then was killed by the Titans, the heart was saved by Zeus and then put into a mortal female’s womb (Princess Semele’ of Thebes). While he was still in Princess Semele’s womb, she was struck with lightning by beholding Zeus in all of his glory (no one could look at Zeus and survive). Then Zeus sewed Dionysus up in his thigh, until he was ready to be born, hence the moniker ‘TWICE-BORN’ (Two mothers – One mother a VIRGIN the other mother a MORTAL. He was born once, died, resurrected and born again, which is very similar to Jesus proclaiming that one must be BORN AGAIN or BORN A SECOND TIME).

The basic plot-line of the story goes like this, Zeus impregnates the VIRGIN GODDESS Persephone. Dionysus is born but Hera (jealous wife of Zeus) gets revenge by sending the Titans to devour Dionysus. The Goddess Athena saves Dionysus’ heart, and Zeus strikes the Titans with a lightning-bolt, which, out of the ashes, creates humans (part divine with a soul through the ashes of Dionysus – who was a SON OF GOD and the other part – part carnal flesh – through the ashes of the Titans). He was then crowned by Zeus with a crown of snakes (similar to crown of thorns). The whole plot-line of the Dionysus story is that after traveling the world teaching people his Dionysian mysteries and teaching people how to grow vineyards and make wine, he is now back in Thebes to enact (exact) vengeance upon his extended family for spreading the rumor that his mother lied about being impregnated by Zeus and mostly for not believing that he (Dionysus) was indeed, THE SON OF GOD (Son of Zeus).

Young man, two are the forces most precious to mankind. The first is Demeter, the Goddess. She is the Earth — or any name you wish to call her — and she sustains humanity with solid food. Next came Dionysus, the son of the virgin, bringing the counterpart to bread: wine and the blessings of life’s flowing juices. His blood, the blood of the grape, lightens the burden of our mortal misery. Though himself a God, it is his blood we pour out to offer thanks to the Gods. And through him, we are blessed.”
― Quote by Euripides, The Bacchae Dionysus with satyrs. Interior of a cup painted by the Brygos Painter, Cabinet des Médailles.


BTW, I forgot to mention that you should also look into the god “Serapis” who was a main blue-print for the composite character “Jesus” in the gospels. Also ties in to Vespasian doing MIRACLES in the temple of Serapis during his campaign in Egypt. Serapis himself was also a composite deity and each part of him, is very similar to the pieces that make up Jesus. After Alexander the Great died, the Greek Empire was split into 4 parts. Ptolemy I Soter was in charge of the region encompassing Egypt (especially Alexandria). He now had Greeks and Egyptians under his auspices. He created Serapis as a way to unify the Greeks and Egyptians under one god and one set of laws. This is similar to the Biblical reference of how Jesus became the god of the Jews and Gentiles (you’ll see this concept all throughout the book of Ephesians). Serapis was a syncretic composite god character of Greek gods and Egyptian gods. See below :


  1. Osiris (God of resurrection ; God of the dead ; Judge in the Afterlife ; Jesus is the ‘resurrection’ and the judge of the dead)
  2. Apis (Sacrificial Bull Deity just like Jesus was the sacrificial Lamb; this was the divine bull of the Egyptian capital Memphis, a manifestation of the god Ptah. Statuette of an Apis bull. Already in the most ancient times, the Egyptians venerated bulls, animals that represented fertility. “Strong bull” was a common title for creator gods and kings.)


  1. Zeus (Father god above all gods ; Jesus said he and his father are ONE)
  2. Helios (the Sun God ; Jesus was the Sun of God)
  3. Asclepius (he was the god of healing and medicine ; this is where the miracle healings aspect comes from)
  4. Dionysus (God of the Vine and Wine ; Jesus was the vine and turned water into wine as his first miracle).
  5. Hades (God of the Underworld)

So you see here, all these composite characters not only comprise the characteristics of Serapis but also of Jesus. Ptolemy I Soter lived in the 4th Century BC. He took it further and declared that he himself was this Serapis god IN THE FLESH (via being the Pharaoh), and gave himself the title “Soter” which in Greek meant “Savior.” (Any of this sound familiar?) The goal? Ptolemy wanted to unify the Greeks and Egyptians under one god (himself via Serapis) and under one set of laws through this ‘made-up / fake’ god called Serapis. Just like he used Serapis to unify the Greeks and Egyptians, this is the very same blueprint that the Romans used in creating Jesus Christ to unify the Jews and Gentiles under one god and one set of laws. Catch it yet?

The Romans and Greeks adorned and worshiped ‘phallus deities’ as well

The pen!s represented fertility and was a sign of good luck. The longest running superstition is that of the EVIL EYE, where if someone is looking at you with contempt or even envy, it can have power to disrupt your life, so the way to combat this was to use an evil eye emblem or relic around your neck (Khamsa / Hamsa and the other was a Nazar). The other ways to ward of this ‘evil’ was to wear a flying pen!s amulet which represented the god known as Fascinus or Fascinum. They specifically put flying pen!s amulets around the necks of babies and children who they believed were the most susceptible to the EVIL EYE.

Other phallic gods were also used to ward off evil such as Priapus (they put statues of Priapus in gardens as a way to garner a lucky harvest). The Romans would actually wheel a large Fascinus Pen!s around the countryside during harvest time to bring an abundant harvest season to their fields. Another the Tinntinabulum, which was a wind chime or assemblage of bells. A tintinnabulum often took the form of a bronze ithyphallic figure or of a fascinum, a magico-religious phallus thought to ward off the evil eye and bring good fortune and prosperity.

There was another which was a Phallic Marriage Deity known as Mutunus Tutunus. They had a statue of him during weddings and the new bride would straddle him and ride him as a way to prepare herself for intercourse with her husband. But the point here is that they were using these charms, medallions, relics, etc.. (in the shape of pen!s deities) to ward off ‘evil’ similar to the way Christians use the Cross (looks like a pen!s and two balls) to ward off ‘evil’



Pausanias claimed to find the kneecap of the Giant Ajax who was a Greek Hero in the Mythical Trojan War Pausanias (Greek Traveler and Historian ; 2nd Century AD) believed the Greek mythologies were legit, including creatures such as griffins, giants and satyrs, but he made practical interpretations of organic remains, arguing that the skeletons of supposed giants he encountered had belonged to mortals, not deities. Pausanias once interviewed a man who lived along the banks of the Hellespont, in what is now Dardanelles, Turkey, and who had seen what he believed to be the giant skeleton of the Greek champion Ajax. Pausanias recounted the man’s description of the hero’s kneecap as “exactly the size of a discus for the boy’s pentathlon.” Considering discuses thrown by adult athletes range from 6.5 to 9 inches, this would put the size of Ajax’s kneecap at 5 to 6 inches across. Two things about this description are important. One is that it’s about the same size as the patella of a Miocene mastodon or rhinoceros. The other is that it’s not exactly the estimate you would make for a hero’s kneecap if you were trying to impress with hyperbole.


I never had ‘faith’ you say?! Think hard about yourself and all your Christian buddies and pals. Who of you has literally left everything (house, job, family, etc.) to live with a pastor and then literally preach and teach homeless on the streets? Which of you or your Christian buddies have even attempted to go do what your Master taught by trying to raise the dead, heal the sick, make the blind see, make the lame walk, etc.?

I’ve done all these things ( in accordance with Matthew 6:19-34 and Luke 12:22-34 as well as Matthew 19:16-30 ; Mark 10:17-31 and Luke 18:18-30 ) just as Jesus told the rich young ruler that if he gave up all his wealth, gave to the poor and followed him, he would be made ‘perfect’. I took that Christian thing to the limit, no one could do anything but MATCH. So if I had NO FAITH, then what does that say about YOURS? Because I know you dammn sure haven’t gone as far as I did.

You Christians are trying to get others to believe in something that you yourselves don’t even believe in!!!!!

Faith without works is DEAD (that’s what your book says). Your master said that you would do what he did and even GREATER THINGS shall ye do (John 14:12-14). In Mark 16 your master sent them out to preach the word and then it says that there were signs and miracles to CONFIRM the words they were preaching. Your master said the faith of a Mustard Seed (smallest amount of faith) could move mountains. According to that standard, do you Christians have ANY FAITH AT ALL?!

In Acts chapter 5, the apostles were doing so many miracles in the STREETS (not behind closed doors where it’s faked like Benny Hinn), that people from other towns were bringing their sick, maimed, injured, etc. into the STREETS to be healed too. Essentially, the Disciples in Acts 5 were CLEARING OUT HOSPITALS (not only in their own town but other towns as well). Why are you not out there doing these things like your Book and Master teaches?!

Your master would be right here asking you to get the beam out of your own eye before you reprimand anyone else (especially a dude like ME who has taken that Christian thing farther than you EVER WILL) about not having any faith. He’d ask you WHY DO YOU CALL ME LORD LORD AND NOT DO WHAT I SAID?! You have no faith!

You have no faith, you read words in a book that you yourselves don’t even understand. That’s why you’ve always had tons of denominations and you’ve always had division. You have a relationship with a book and it’s dependent upon your own flaky and flimsy interpretation of that book. There’s no real spiritual communication at all with any supernatural being. You can’t prove anything you preach or teach. Not even to YOURSELVES!

You can’t even heal your own self of the common cold, let alone go heal the sick and raise the dead like your master said you would be doing. Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary evidence. Christians have actually deceived their own selves into thinking that they really believe in that book, when all their ACTIONS prove otherwise. They have no more faith in that book than an atheist. Their ACTIONS prove it! So until you yourself have any faith in that book to go do even HALF of what I attempted, come holla at me.


Christians are part and parcel, in league with the N W O Tyrants. They don’t understand their own book, so they make these flimsy predictions about the ‘end times’ (when those clearly already took place as I’ve mentioned in a previous comment). So not only are they anticipating and expecting all these bad things to happen (based on faulty exegesis / interpretations of the eschatological portions of their Bibles), but they are actually HOPING it gets worse, thinking it will cause their sky-wizard to crack the clouds and come save them. And what’s crazy is, they have major cognitive dissonance, so on one hand, they say all this is supposed to happen and the Lord is allowing it to happen to fulfill prophecy and then they turn right around and say it’s evil and we must stop it !

They don’t know whether they’re coming or going! They are allowing all of this mischief and outright destruction to occur, thinking this is God at work. And look at all of the laws they’d wish to foist upon society. We already tried that CHRISTIAN WORLD ORDER for 1500+ years, with folk being tortured down in Castle Dungeons, drowning of witches (who were nothing more than Herbal Healers or Midwives), and burning people (and books) at the stake for petty crimes like Denying the Trinity. And you can be assured that if these Christians had the opportunity, they would do all these things again! They are Mini-Tyrants just like the N W O. They don’t truly believe in ‘freedom’. They want their draconian, ‘spiritually based’ Laws imposed on the world with an iron fist. They’ve already proven that! And their acquiescence to everything happening (as if it’s God’s doing) shows that they are just as much an enemy to the cause of freedom as anyone (or anything) else.

The Matrix Red Pill / Blue Pill of Human Relationship Dynamics (Monogamy was Designed to Fail)

The real RED PILL in the area of human relational dynamics is that….. wait for it… the failure rate of monogamy is not any particular issue regarding men or any issue regarding women, it’s that MONOGAMY IS NOT NATURAL FOR US.

You heard me right, the institution of MONOGAMY was designed to fail. And it’s been an outright failure for thousands of years. We are Primate Mammalians and only 3% of mammalians are monogamous with noted incidences of polyamory even in those 3%. Our closest animal relatives are the Bonobos and Chimps who share 98% the same DNA as humans, and they are nowhere close to being monogamous. It can be proven in a lab, that whether you’re human or any other primate, if you’re with one partner for a long time, your sexual attraction to each other degrades over-time until you don’t do it at all, BUT…. if you introduce a new mate to the man or the woman, VOILA, the sex drive you ‘thought’ you lost, comes roaring back. You can try to go against your nature and try to be with one person for life, but MOST people will fail, hence the high infidelity rates and high divorce rates. No one has ever told you this, which is why people jump from one relationship or marriage to the next, thinking they’ve not found the ONE.

Folk have been deluded by all of this since they came out the womb :

  1. Media
  2. Music (99% of songs are about monogamous romance)
  3. Cartoons (Beauty and Beast / Prince and Princess ride off into the sunset, etc.. etc..)
  4. Movies and Books (i.e. Romance Novels)
  5. Politics (outlawing Polyamorous Marriage)
  6. Religion (you’ll fry in hell for eternity if you have sex outside the marriage bed, etc..)

So even with all of this brainwashing to be monogamous, people STILL can’t stay together. In Ancient Greece, they considered ‘Romantic Love’ to be a mental disorder. And it really is true. People become obsessed, and even turn into psychotic control freaks over that ‘one person’ they claim to ‘love’. Yet they end up displaying behaviors that they are anything but loving towards their partner, with major jealousy issues, making mountains out of mole-hills, refusing to allow their partner to see friends of the opposite sex, etc.. You begin to start thinking and acting in ways which you otherwise wouldn’t if you were in the right state of mind.

Statistics show that over a 40 year period, 67% of first marriages will end in divorce, with most not reaching their 8th year anniversary. That’s 2 out of 3 first marriages! And these are the stats for FIRST Marriages, the number is even higher if you are remarried, so really, your best chance is to stick with the first person you marry. These are also just the tip of the iceberg, because these are the ‘official’ numbers, but how many in that remaining 33% are in miserable relationships or marriages, wanting to divorce but can’t because of social stigma or because they’re staying together for the children’s sake, etc.. while they have extra-marital affairs on the side?

So when you put all that into consideration, you have maybe a good 10 to 15% success rate for the long-haul! Any economist would tell you that this risky investment is not worth the hassle of whatever ‘good’ or whatever ‘benefits’ you may get out of it. So you see here that the polyamory is playing out in a more subtle way, with people being ‘Serial Monogamists’ (jumping around from relationship to relationship or marriage to marriage or having affairs, etc..). This is an area where most of society is still caught in the Matrix.

Before the European, Christian, Pilgrim INVADERS came to the Americas, virtually ALL Native American Tribes were Polyamorous. This was something very foreign to the Europeans and it was one of the reasons for torturing and ‘Offing’ the Natives. They thought they were demonic for being so openly sexual, especially the Native women who had more sexual autonomy than your modern Feminist. Their culture of polyamory worked much better for child-rearing especially, since each child had many fathers, many mothers, many sisters, brothers, aunts, cousins, etc.. etc.. So even if the primary, biological parents weren’t ‘together’ anymore, it did not affect the care and support of the child, since there were so many older adults to fill that role. The old adage “It’s the village that raises the child” which comes to mind here.

Until people face biological, scientific, evolutionary and anthropological FACTS that I’ve laid out here, they are gonna continue to be miserable in their human relationship dynamics. The marriage industry gets rich off suckers (engagement rings, weddings, honeymoons, etc..) and then the divorce industry gets even more rich off these same suckers. You are not evolved to be with one person for life. It is antithetical to everything that makes you a primate mammalian species. This is why only a small handful can stay married to one person for 50+ or 60+ years. It’s just not biologically natural for us and our genetic / epigenetic makeup.




Government Using Unwitting Test Subjects for Nefarious, Non-Consensual Experiments


  1. OPERATION MIDNIGHT CLIMAX – This was one of the MK-Ultra sub-projects. The CIA set up unsuspecting / unwitting men by luring them into safehouses (and brothels) where they dosed them (without their knowledge) with drugs such as LSD to see what would happen to them. A few of the men died from this.

  2. TUSKEGEE EXPERIMENT – The Tuskegee Experiment lasted from 1932 to 1972 where impoverished black airmen were UNAWARE they were being experimented on with syphilis to see what would happen to them. For 40 whole years they were in the dark about this! By 1947, penicillin was available but the doctors (numerous doctors everywhere they went) were denied this drug to treat their syphilis, because they wanted to see how syphilis progressed. They ended up infecting their wives and children as well. All test subjects were unaware they were being tested on. Also, from 1950 to 1972, disabled children in New York and Pennsylvania were infected purposely with viral hepatitis. The parents of these children were tricked by signing a consent form to give their disabled children simple ‘vacc!nes’. They lied and gave them hepatitis instead by feeding them a feces extract from those who were infected with hepatitis. Also in 1952, prisoners at the Ohio Penitentiary and even 300 healthy women were injected with Live Cancer Cells (HeLa Cells) without their knowledge or consent.

  3. OPERATION SEA-SPRAY – During a 1950s Navy Experiment, they sprayed two bacteria (Serratia Marcescens and Bacillus Globigii) into the fog just off the coast of the San Francisco Bay Area. They concluded that it was just enough for all 800,000 residents to breathe in the two bacteria. People started reporting U.T.I.s and a few of them died from the UTI. Cases of pneumonia increased. Doctors also wondered if this was in connection with the heart-valve infection outbreak at the same time. Declassified that the military never told the populace of San Francisco about this experiment beforehand.

  4. OPERATION LAC (LARGE AREA COVERAGE) & DORSET BIOLOGICAL WARFARE EXPERIMENTS – This leads to the next experiment where the governments of the UK and US were spraying the skies with various chemicals and bacteria from 1953 to 1975. They used agents, chemicals, stimulants and bacteria ranging from Zinc Cadmium Sulfide (cancer-causing agent) to phenol to anthrax. In one experiment, they sprayed zinc cadmium sulfide over Minnesota to see how far it would go, and it reached 1,000 miles away to New York! During the DICE Trials from 1971-1975, they found that just ONE PLANE could spray enough to reach a target 100 miles away, and cover 10,000 square miles of air with biological chemical spraying. Operation LAC was used to test the geographical range and dispersal patterns of biological and/or chemical weapons in the atmosphere. Again, none of the people they were testing on, had any idea what was happening.

  5. GUATEMALA SYPHILIS EXPERIMENTS 1946-1948 – Led by Doctor John Charles Cutler (who also participated in the Tuskegee Experiment), doctors from the US and Guatemala working with the US, infected prostitutes, soldiers, mental patients and prisoners with syphilis as well as other STDs such as gonorrhea. Doctors (CONSPIRING with each other) not only withheld information about their illnesses, but they also withheld the treatments which would have cured them. In one incident, Dr. Cutler used a female psychiatric patient named Berta, where he not only injected syphilis into her arm, but also gonorrheal pus from an infected male into Berta’s eyes, rectum and urethra. She ended up bleeding from her urethra and dying. All of this came out to the public in 2010, where Barak Obama ‘apologized’ for the unethical treatment of unwitting test subjects in Guatemala. Since then, lawsuits have been filed against certain agencies who helped with these experiments such as the Rockefeller Foundation and Johns Hopkins University.

  6. OPERATION BIG ITCH (OPERATIONS BIG BUZZ, DROP KICK & MAYDAY) – In the 1950s, the government used uninfected and infected (yellow fever) mosquitoes over urban populated areas. They dropped the mosquitoes out of airplanes as EW (Entomological Weapons) to see how insects (in this case, mosquitoes) would interrupt supply lines by damaging crops or direct harm by biting human civilians as well as combatants and enemies. Again, the people in these areas they dropped the mosquitoes over, such as big cities in Georgia, did not know, nor did they consent to having this done to them.

  7. PROJECT SHAD (SHIPBOARD HAZARD AND DEFENSE) – From 1963 to 1969, the government sprayed chemical and biological agents upon Military Ships, while thousands of soldiers were aboard the ships. They were dosed with VX and Sarin (both deadly nerve gases) as well as Zinc Cadmium Sulfide and Sulfur Dioxide (and a variety of other biological agents). Again, none of the soldiers were forewarned this was happening and none of them were given any protective clothing.

  8. MANHATTAN PROJECT & RADIATION EXPERIMENTS – During the Manhattan Project after WW2, they did major tests with unwitting subjects and conscientious objectors with radiation. The experiments included,

    (a) feeding radioactive materials to babies and mentally disabled children, as well as orphans being fed irradiated milk

    (b) administering radioactive iron to impoverished pregnant women (keyword, IMPOVERISHED, similar to the Tuskegee experiments, they tested the lowest of people, so don’t think…, ‘Why me? Who am I? I’m nobody! etc…’)

    (c) exposing soldiers and prisoners to high levels of radiation

    (d) irradiating testicles of prisoners, which caused severe health defects

    (e) exhuming bodies from graveyards to test them for radiation (without the consent of the families of the deceased)

In 1994, Bill Clinton apologized for these unethical radiation tests upon unwitting ‘guinea pigs’. These experiments were funded by the United States Department of Defense (DOD), United States Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and United States Public Health Services.

SUMMARY – To deny and/or make light of the fact that the government has been testing on non-consenting test subjects (including the ‘nobodies’ of society) is very naive and this mindset can ONLY come from a lazy thinker or someone with an agenda. This is just a short-list, the cases of your governments (especially the American government) doing shady sh!t like this, even on THEIR OWN PEOPLE is as long and tall as the Statue of Liberty! If they were willing to do all of this then, why is it any different now?

The government is constantly being caught red-handed doing similar things today. They have no problem lying and staging events to take us to war, where they drop thousands of bombs every month on millions of impoverished people (men, women and babies) in the Middle East and Northern Africa. For anyone in the 21st Century to trust their government (especially the American one) with the internet at their fingertips to do a quick 10 minute google search of all their DECLASSIFIED and DOCUMENTED Crimes…, well…, these are the mentally ill people of society and you are the ones who need medicine for outright denying FACTS placed right before your face.



We know things like MK-Ultra torture experiments or COINTELPRO – targeting activists and minorities or HAVANA SYNDROME – Diplomats being targeted with DEWs Directed Energy Weapons, etc.. existed, these are more well-known but there’s a laundry list below of many you’ve not heard of)

  1. Operation LAC (Large Area Coverage) & Dorset Biological Warfare Experiments (especially DICE TRIALS)
  2. Operation Dew
  3. Operation Sea-Spray
  4. Operation Ranch-hand / Operation Trail-Dust / Operation Popeye
  5. Operation Mayday
  6. Operation Big Buzz
  7. Operation Big Itch
  8. Operation Drop Kick
  9. Operation Garden Plot
  10. Project Nile Blue
  11. Project Crimson Mist
  12. Operation Crossroads
  13. Operation Whitecoat
  14. Project Plum Island
  15. Project Chatter
  16. Project Artichoke
  17. MK-Ultra
  18. Project 112
  19. Project Dorset Biological Warfare
  20. Project Edgewood Arsenal
  21. Project Sunshine (Project GABRIEL)
  22. Operation Northwoods
  23. Operation Paperclip
  24. Operation Mockingbird
  25. Project Greek Island
  26. Operation CHAOS
  27. Project Azorian
  28. Operation Gold
  29. Operation Merlin
  30. Project Stargate (Gondola Wish, Grill Flame, Center Lane, Sun Streak and Scanate)
  31. Operation Gladio (and Operation Gladio B)
  32. Operation Wrath of God
  33. Huston Plan
  34. Operation Susannah (Lavon Affair)
  35. Iran-Contra Affair
  36. Operation Cherry (Operation Oak and Operation Pine)
  37. Operation Palace Dog
  38. Operation Cyclone
  39. Project Stormfury (Project Cirrus)
  40. Project Baton
  41. Project Cumulus
  42. Project Alberta Hail
  43. Project Sleeping Beauty
  44. Project Bizarre
  45. Project Seal (Tsunami Bomb)
  46. Operation Dominic
  47. Operation Condor
  48. Operation Garden Plot
  49. Project Pegasus
  50. Tuskegee Experiment
  51. Operation Legend
  52. Operation Werwolf
  53. Project Bizarre
  54. Operation Hardtack I
  55. Operation Hardtack II
  56. Operation Mongoose
  57. Guatemala STD Experiments
  58. Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense)
  59. Project Skyfire
  60. Operation Amalgam Virgo
  61. Pentagon MASCAL
  62. Operation TRUST
  63. Amalgam Virgo
  64. Project Coast

The Truth about HELL / HADES / TARTARUS


Marcus Tullius Cicero (107BC – 43BC ; Roman philosopher, politician, lawyer, orator, political theorist, consul and constitutionalist) said :

“So in the very beginning we must persuade our citizens that the gods are the lords and rulers of all things, and that what is done, is done by their will and authority; that they are likewise great benefactors of man, observing the character of every individual, what he does, of what wrong he is guilty, and with what intentions and with what piety he fulfills his religious duties.” (Cicero, Laws 2)

“What old woman is so stupid now as to tremble at those tales of hell, which were once so firmly believed in?”
– Cicero

The Historian Polybius (200BC – 118BC) said :

“It is a course which perhaps would not have been necessary had it been possible to form a state composed of wise men, but as every multitude is fickle, full of lawless desires, unreasoned passion, and violent anger, the multitude must be held in check by invisible terrors and suchlike pageantry. For this reason I think, not that the ancients acted rashly and at haphazard in introducing among the people notions concerning the gods and beliefs in the terrors of hell, but that the moderns are most rash and foolish in banishing such beliefs.”

Seneca The Younger (4 BC – 65AD ; Adviser to Nero Caesar) says:

“Those things which make the infernal regions terrible, the darkness, the prison, the river of flaming fire, the judgment seat, etc., are all a fable, with which the poets amuse themselves, and by them agitate us with vain terrors.”

Petronius Arbiter (27 – 66AD ; Roman Courtier Adviser to Nero Caesar) said :

“It is fear that first brought gods into the world.”

Roman Philosopher Lucretius (99BC – 55BC ; Roman Philosopher Poet) said this :

“There is no murky pit of hell awaiting anyone … Mind cannot arise alone without body, or apart from sinews and blood … You must admit, therefore, that when then body has perished, there is an end also of the spirit diffused through it. It is surely crazy to couple a mortal object with an eternal…”

Epicurus (Greek Philosopher ; 341BC – 270BC) said :

“…men, believing in myths, will always fear something terrible, everlasting punishment as certain or probable, and are even frightened of the insensibility of death, as if we should be conscious of it; and finally by the fact that, as a result, men base all these fears not on mature opinions, but on irrational fancies, so that they are more disturbed by fear of the unknown than by facing facts. Peace of mind lies in being delivered from all these fears.”

Eusebius (Constantine’s Christian HIstorian ; 263-339AD) said :

“How far it may be proper to use falsehood as a medicine, and for the benefit of those who require to be deceived.”

Strabo (64BC-24AD ; Historian, Geographer) paraphrasing his work entitled, ‘Geographica’ Book I, Chapter II, Verse VIII below

“…the States and Lawgivers sanctioned myths as a tool to teach the young all the way up to maturity. The marvelous and portentous elements excite the senses and allow the multitudes to learn much easier.

When they’re young, we use myths as bait, but when they get older, we teach them the facts. But every illiterate and uneducated man is still a child, and like a child, he still loves these tales found in myth and is persuaded by them.

Not only the pleasing aspects of myth, but also the fear-inspiring elements deter them from wrong-doing. They learn of divine punishments, terrors, and threats, but these were employed to scare the simple-minded.

For the thunderbolt, aegis, trident, torches [of the Furies], snakes, [dragons], thyrsus-lances, arms of the gods, are myths [fables], and so is the entire ancient theology. But now philosophy has come to the front, but it is only for the few, while myths are needed for the majority of society.”

Strabo “Geographica” Book I, Chapter II, Verse VIII in its entirety below :

“In the first place, I remark that the poets were not alone in sanctioning myths, for long before the poets the states and the lawgivers had sanctioned them as a useful expedient, since they had an insight into the natural affections of the reasoning animal; for man is eager to learn, and his fondness for tales is a prelude to this quality. It is fondness for tales, then, that induces children to give their attention to narratives and more and more to take part in them. The reason for this is that myth is a new language to them — a language that tells them, not of things as they are, but of a different set of things.

And what is new is pleasing, and so is what one did not know before; and it is just this that makes men eager to learn. But if you add thereto the marvellous and the portentous, you thereby increase the pleasure, and pleasure acts as a charm to incite to learning. At the beginning we must needs make use of such bait for children, but as the child advances in years we must guide him to the knowledge of facts, when once his intelligence has become strong and no longer needs to be coaxed.

Now every illiterate and uneducated man is, in a sense, a child, and, like a child, he is fond of stories; and for that matter, so is the half-educated man, for his reasoning faculty has not been fully developed, and, besides, the mental habits of his childhood persist in him. Now since the portentous is not only pleasing, but fear-inspiring as well, we can employ both kinds of myth for children, and for grown-up people too. In the case of children we employ the pleasing myths to spur them on, and the fear-inspiring myths to deter them; for instance, Lamia is a myth, and so are the Gorgon, and Ephialtes, and Mormolyce.

Most of those who live in the cities are incited to emulation by the myths that are pleasing, when they hear the poets narrate mythical deeds of heroism, such as the Labours of Heracles or Theseus, or hear of honours bestowed by gods, or, indeed, when they see paintings or primitive images or works of sculpture which suggest any similar happy issue of fortune in mythology; but they are deterred from evil courses when, either through descriptions or through typical representations of objects unseen, they learn of divine punishments, terrors, and threats — or even when they merely believe that men have met with such experiences. For in dealing with a crowd of women, at least, or with any promiscuous mob, a philosopher cannot influence them by reason or exhort them to reverence, piety and faith; nay, there is need of religious fear also, and this cannot be aroused without myths and marvels. For thunderbolt, aegis, trident, torches, snakes, thyrsus-lances, — arms of the gods — are myths, and so is the entire ancient theology.

But the founders of states gave their sanction to these things as bugbears wherewith to scare the simple-minded.Now since this is the nature of mythology, and since it has come to have its place in the social and civil scheme of life as well as in the history of actual facts, the ancients clung to their system of education for children and applied it up to the age of maturity; and by means of poetry they believed that they could satisfactorily discipline every period of life. But now, after a long time, the writing of history and the present-day philosophy have come to the front. Philosophy, however, is for the few, whereas poetry is more useful to the people at large and can draw full houses — and this is exceptionally true of the poetry of Homer. And the early historians and physicists were also writers of myths.”

Aristotle (Greek Philosopher and Scientist ; 384-322 BC) said this :

“It has been handed down in mythical form from earliest times to posterity, that there are gods, and that the divine compasses all nature. All beside this has been added, after the mythical style, for the purpose of persuading the multitude, and for the interests of the laws, and the advantage of the state.”
– Neander’s Church Hist., I, pg. 7

Timaeus Locrus (Greek Philosopher 420BC – 380 BC) said :

“For as we sometimes cure the body with unwholesome remedies, when such as are most wholesome produce no effect, so we restrain those minds with false relations, which will not be persuaded by the truth. There is a necessity, therefore, of instilling the dread of those foreign torments: as that the soul changes its habitation; that the coward is ignominiously thrust into the body of a woman; the murderer imprisoned within the form of a savage beast; the vain and inconstant changed into birds, and the slothful and ignorant into fishes.”

Plato (Greek Philosopher ; 423 BC – 348 BC), in his commentary on Timaeus

He fully endorses what he says respecting the fabulous invention of these foreign torments. And Strabo says that “Plato and the Brahmins of India invented

fables concerning the future judgments of hell” (Hades).

Chrysippus (Greek Philosopher ; 279 BC – 206 BC)

He blames Plato for attempting to deter men from wrong by frightful stories of future punishments. Plato himself is exceedingly inconsistent, sometimes adopting, even in his serious discourses, the fables of the poets, and at other times rejecting them as utterly false, and giving too frightful views of the invisible world. Sometimes, he argues, on social grounds, that they are necessary to restrain bad men from wickedness and crime. But then again he protests against them on political grounds, as intimidating the citizens, and making cowards of the soldiers, who, believing these things, are afraid of death, and do not therefore fight well. But all this shows in what light he regarded them; not as truths, certainly, but as fictions, convenient in some cases, but difficult to manage in others.

Dionysius Halicarnassus (60BC – 7BC ; Greek Historian) treats the whole matter as useful, but not true. Antiq. Rom., B. ii

Dionysios of Halicarnnasus, Roman Antiquities, Book II, Chapter 10 “For both patrons and clients alike it was impious and unlawful to accuse each other in law-suits or to bear witness or to give their votes against each other or to be found in the number of each other’s enemies; and whoever was convicted of doing any of these things was guilty of treason by virtue of the law sanctioned by Romulus, and might lawfully be put to death by any man who so wished as a victim devoted to the Jupiter of the infernal regions. For it was customary among the Romans, whenever they wished to put people to death without incurring any penalty, to devote their persons to some god or other, and particularly to the gods of the lower world; and this was the course what Romulus then adopted.”

Chapter 18

“It is not only these institutions of Romulus that I admire, but also those which I am going to relate. He understood that the good government of cities was due to certain causes which all statesmen prate of but few succeed in making effective: first, the favour of the gods, the enjoyment of which gives success to men’s every enterprise; next, moderation and justice, as a result of which the citizens, being less disposed to injure one another, are more harmonious, and make honour, rather than the most shameful pleasures, the measure of their happiness; and, lastly, bravery in war, which renders the other virtues also useful to their possessors. And he thought that none of these advantages is the effect of chance, but recognized that good laws and the emulation of worthy pursuits render a State pious, temperate, devoted to justice, and brave in war. He took great care, therefore, to encourage these, beginning with the worship of the gods and genii. He established temples, sacred precincts and altars, arranged for the setting up of statues, determined the representations and symbols of the gods, and declared their powers, the beneficent gifts which they have made to mankind, the particular festivals that should be celebrated in honour of each god or genius, the sacrifices with which they delight to be honoured by men, as well as the holidays, festal assemblies, days of rest, and everything alike of that nature, in all of which he followed the best customs in use among the Greeks. 3 But he rejected all the traditional myths concerning the gods that contain blasphemies or calumnies against them, looking upon these as wicked, useless and indecent, and unworthy, not only of the gods, but even of good men; and he accustomed people both to think and to speak the best of the gods and to attribute to them no conduct unworthy of their blessed nature.”

Chapter 20

“Let no one imagine, however, that I am not sensible that some of the Greek myths are useful to mankind, part of them explaining, as they do, the works of Nature by allegories, others being designed as a consolation for human misfortunes, some freeing the mind of its agitations and terrors and clearing away unsound opinions, and others invented for some other useful purpose. 2 But, though I am as well acquainted as anyone with these matters, nevertheless my attitude toward the myths is one of caution, and I am more inclined to accept the theology of the Romans, when I consider that the advantages from the Greek myths are slight and cannot be of profit to many, but only to those who have examined the end for which they are designed; and this philosophic attitude is shared by few. The great multitude, unacquainted with philosophy, are prone to take these stories about the gods in the worse sense and to fall into one of two errors: they either despise the gods as buffeted by many misfortunes, or else refrain from none of the most shameful and lawless deeds when they see them attributed to the gods.”

Publius Papinius Statius (45 – 96 AD ; Roman Poet) said :

“It is for the good of the State, that men should be deluded by religion.”

Marcus Terentius Varro (116BC – 27BC ; Roman Historian and Philosopher) said :

“…concerning the generations of the gods, that the people have inclined to the poets rather than to the natural philosophers; and that therefore their forefathers,–that is, the ancient Romans,–believed both in the sex and the generations of the gods, and settled their marriages; which certainly seems to have been done for no other cause except that it was the business of such men as were prudent and wise to deceive the people in matters of religion, and in that very thing not only to worship, but also to imitate the demons, whose greatest lust is to deceive. For just as the demons cannot possess any but those whom they have deceived with guile, so also men in princely office, not indeed being just, but like demons, have persuaded the people in the name of religion to receive as true those things which they themselves knew to be false; in this way, as it were, binding them up more firmly in civil society, so that they might in like manner possess them as subjects.”
B. iv 32

Xenophanes (Philosopher ; 5th Century BC) said :

“The Ethiopians say their gods are snub-nosed and black. The Thracians say that their gods have red hair and light blue eyes.”

Sextus Empiricus (160AD – 210AD) calls them

“poetic fables of hell.”

Diodorus Siculus (Greek Historian ; 90BC – 30BC) said this :

“The myths about Hades and the gods, though they are pure invention, help to make men virtuous.”

Livy (59BC – 17AD ; Roman Historian)

speaks of it in the same spirit; and he praises the wisdom of Numa, because he invented the fear of the gods, as “a most efficacious means of governing an ignorant and barbarous populace.”
Hist. I 19.

Montesquieu (1689AD – 1755AD ; French Lawyer and Philosopher) states that

“Romulus, Tatius and Numa enslaved the gods to politics, and made religion for the state.”

Edward Plumptre (1821AD – 1891AD ; English Scholar) adds that

“It has been, and is, the creed of the great poets whom we accept as the spokesmen of a nation’s thoughts.”

H.L. Mencken (American journalist 1880-1956AD) said this :

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

Reuven Brenner (born 1947AD ; Romanian Economist) said this :

“Historians and economists {subsidized by governments} are very good at creating and perpetuating myths that justify increasing the power placed in the hands of government.”

Edward Gibbon (18th Century AD ; The History of the Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire) said :

“The various modes of worship, which prevailed in the Roman world, were all considered by the people, as equally true; by the philosopher, as equally false; and by the magistrate, as equally useful.”



1. Before I get started, you’ll see that almost every TV Show, movie or cartoon that deals with “Time Travel” somehow corresponds to Donald Trump (Back to the Future, Donnie Darko, Quantum Leap, Outlander, Highlander, etc.)

2. The 1997 movie “Devil’s Advocate” was mainly filmed in Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue (1997 was the 5758 Hebrew Year too btw). The only one in the movie to mention Donald Trump was a woman named Pam who was played by Debra Monk who was born on February 27th which is the 58th day of the year. The movie came out October 17th which is the 290th day of the year. 58×5=290

3. Trump wins the 58th Presidential Election in 2016

4. Trump married Melania when he was 58

5. Trump Tower has 58 stories / levels

6. Trump’s Mara-lago Resort has 58 rooms

7. Biff in Back to the Future wins millions betting on horse races in 1958 (Biff Tannen character is based on Donald Trump)

8. Marty McFly in BTTF, plays “Johnny B. Goode” by Chuck Berry which came out in 1958 with a Gibson Guitar that was manufactured in 1958.

9. Character portraying Donald Trump makes a cameo in a Quantum Leap episode set on May 10, 1958 (Donald’s mother was born on May 10th also)

10. Melania’s birthday is 58 days after the 58th day of the year (April 26th which is the 116th day of the year and if you flip 116 upside down, you get ‘911’)

11. Trump wins the election, 58 years after 1958.

12. Trump’s mother was born on the 58th parallel in the Isle of Lewis in Scotland (which just so happens to be near ancient ruins and stones that are said to be for ‘Time Travel’. I’m not joking).

13. A 1958 Trackdown episode called “End of the World” has a man named Trump (Dr. Walter Trump) coming to town to build a WALL to save the town from meteor / comet strike.

14. May 8, 1997 (or 5/8 << May 8th which would be 58) Trump appears on Suddenly Susan, where she unveils a Magazine for him and on the lower left hand corner it reads, “OUR NEXT PRESIDENT?”

There are others, I’m very sure, and Trump also ties into the number “88” on many occasions as well, such as in Donnie Darko (28 days, 6 hours, 42 minutes and 12 seconds to end of the world = 88) and Back to the Future (88 mph speed to time travel in DeLorean), as well as this 1988 Grammys. What the 58 means, I don’t fully know yet. But it’s prevalent everywhere you look surrounding Trump.

“Back to the Future 2” (1985) and “Donnie Darko” (2001) have a ton of predictive programming about Donald Trump but this also includes Predictive programming from “Gremlins 2” (1990), “The LEGO Movie” (2014) and a few others including commercials. :


1. Donnie is obviously short for Donald. And there is a lot of predictive programming about Donald Trump and what would happen during his presidency. There’s a scene where they arrest a guy named Jim Cunningham (played by Patrick Swayze) for a child s3x p0rn ring (this is right after a scene where there are young girls dancing at a school event). Go to 1 hour and 10 minutes in Donnie Darko. Which means, this whole narrative of “arresting pedos” was a ruse and was scripted long ago.

2. Donnie Darko sees a bunny rabbit who tells him the world will end in 28 days, 6 hours, 42 minutes and 12 seconds (Donnie writes this down in black marker on his arm). So it says, 28 days to the end of the world starting on October 2nd, 1988. Well, instead of days, look at it in years. 28 years after 1988 is 2016 which was the year Donald Trump won the Election to become POTUS!

3. Also, the number 88 could be seen as a twin number, and here we are in 2020 (a ‘twin number’) when all this sh!t is going down. 28 days = 28 years from 1988 which is 2016 when Trump is elected POTUS The next numbers on Donnie Darko’s arm are 42 and 6 (add those is 48) = 48 months after 2016 is 2020…” :

4. “…The last 9/11 was an attack on the TWIN TOWERS. This 9/11 is an attack on the Twin Numbers (2020). Also, 9+11 = 20 (hinting at 2020)…

5. They released Donnie Darko on January 19, 2001 (which is 1/19 and if you reverse that it’s 911). :

6. Then you have the number 88 prevalent (i.e. 1988, etc..), even in Donald Trump’s name (which I will share with you after you read all this). 8+8=16 (2016 is when Trump is elected POTUS).

7. Then you have the bunny rabbit suit dude telling him 28 days and 6 hours, 42 minutes and 12 seconds = The Bunny Rabbit represents EASTER (Trump recently said this lock down should be ‘over’ by Easter, was he hinting at something else?).

8. Donnie Darko was supposed to be set on October 2nd leading up to Halloween. After 28 on his arm is 6, if you add 6 months to October you get April, and Easter is 4/12 this year. Well on his arm the last two numbers are 42 and 12 (if you leave out that the first 2 in 42, you have 412 = the exact date of Easter this year 2020 = 4/12/2020). It could also be that Easter 2020 would be the start of something for 12 months (the last number on his arm equals 12 months or 1 whole year) until the next Easter 2021.

9. Donnie Darko << notice the last name is Darko (Trump has had the lights go out in some of his speeches, rallies and meetings in the White House and in one rally event he even told the people to turn off the lights, turn them off!!!).

10. Also, go to 19 minutes in Donnie Darko and watch to 21 minutes, the teacher is reading about a book which talks about kids who burn down a house with MONEY INSIDE. The teacher asks Donnie what he thinks it means, and listen to Donnie Darko’s answer.

11. Donnie Darko falls in love with a girl named Gretchen, and she asks him why his name is that because it sounds like a Superhero name. What are all the Trumpers and Q sycophants saying about Trump? That he was here to save the day and arrest the Deep State, like a Superhero!

12. In another scene, Donnie Darko is talking to his counselor and he has a shirt on it that says ‘TRIUMPH.’ The short version of Triumph in the dictionary is TRUMP and his name is Donnie (Donald) << hinting at DONALD TRUMP!

13. At the end of Donnie Darko, a STORM (Tornado it looks like?) appears while his mom and younger sister are on a plane and it causes one of their fuselages to come off and goes through a time warp portal. The fuselage that appears in the alternate universe from the plane in the future (October 30) with the mom and sister on the flight, ends up smashing into their house in the past (October 2) with the mom, sister and rest of Darko’s family in the house (but Darko sleepwalking that night out onto a golf course where he falls asleep, which saves his life from the fuselage slamming into Darko’s house and specifically his room). And in this 2nd timeline, Donnie Darko ends up dying from the fuselage at the beginning (October 2), instead of Donnie Darko living until the end and shooting Frank (the bunny) in the right eye and killing him , for running over Gretchen and killing her with his car on October 30.

The timelines were reversed and switched!



1. Even going back to the late 1800s and early 1900s with the Baron Trump adventure books, with one book called THE LAST PRESIDENT.

2. Then you had the 1950s Old Western movie “Trackdown” where a con-artist named “Trump” comes to town saying he must build a WALL to protect against the end of the world. But it was a scam.

3. Then you have Back to the Future where it shows Biff Tannen being the supreme iconic person on the planet, while there is Martial Law and chaos with tanks rolling through the streets (Marty McFly is in the year 2015 when he sees all this). The creator of Back to the Future said Biff Tannen was indeed based on Donald Trump. The speed at which they were able to make the DeLorean car time travel was 88 miles per hour (mph). If you add up the name Trump it equals 88 by putting the numeric value of each letter of his name.

4. In the 1980s a dude named Stephen Jackson created an “ILLUMINATI CARD GAME”. One card in the deck was the “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH” card. It shows a man with his mouth open. It just so happens Trump does the same thing purposely with his mouth and in numerous speeches since 2016 campaign trail he has said ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Many parts of his inaugural speech was stolen from Bane in Batman : Dark Knight Rises.

5. In 1990, there was a Heavy Metal Magazine with a cartoon in it about Donald Trump and a Populist rising to power who ‘build a wall’ around New York City.

*6. (THIS ONE IS KEY) In Donnie Darko the movie which was first released on 1/19/2001 (notice if you turn that around, it’s 9/11 instead of 1/19), there are numerous references to Donald Trump, including Donnie which is a variant of Donald. The movie is supposed to be set in 1988. The Bunny Rabbit character tells Donnie (on a golf course which we know Donald Trump is known for owning tons of golf courses and playing golf) that the world will end in 28 days, 6 hours, 42 minutes and 12 seconds. If you add those numbers up it comes out to be ’88’. As we saw before, Trump adds up to 88. If you add 28 years from 1988, you get 2016 and if you add up the other two numbers (42+6 = 48) you come up with 48 months which equals 4 years, which would be 2020.

I believe the last number 12 on Donnie Darko’s arm is representing one year (12 months) from 2020 everything would begin to unwind and sure enough, that’s what’s happening. Donnie Darko is also told by his girlfriend Gretchen that his name is odd because it sounds like a Superhero name. Trump is seen as this superhero by his fan-base who is coming to take out the deep state swamp. He even is selling a poster on his Facebook where it shows a cartoon of him flying through the sky like Superman. Another part of the movie shows a man named Jim Cunningham (played by Patrick Swayze) being arrested for s3x kiddie p0rn. This means that this whole ‘ARRESTING PEDOS’ was scripted long ago too. It’s all a fake ruse to divert your attention away from Trump’s own crimes.

7. In 1997, they had an episode of SUDDENLY SUSAN with Kathy Griffin. Donald Trump is on this episode and Kathy Griffin is trying to sell Trump on financing their new Magazine called SKAZZY. She unveils the first cover of the magazine to Donald Trump and on the cover it shows a picture of Trump and it says “OUR NEXT PRESIDENT?”. This was in 1997!

8. In the 1997 movie “Devil’s Advocate”, Lomax and Milton attend a Boxing event with Roy Jones Jr. This was an actual real fight that took place on October 4, 1996. And as I’ve shown in the past, October 4th leaves “88” days left in the year. We see the same thing with the Tower Clock in Back to the Future which was stuck on 10:04 (or 10/4 like October 4th).

9. On October 5, 2017, Trump made comment that this was THE CALM BEFORE THE STORM. If you count 888 days after that, you come to March 11, 2020 which was the day that W.H.O. declared the coronavirus a GLOBAL PANDEMIC. This was all planned out to the DAY! Also, if you look at the four corners of the Illuminati Card “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH” like I showed you in number 4 above, you’ll see that it looks like some ‘virus’ or ‘bacteria’ floating around. Donald Trump has been part of the plan for a long time now. They’ve been showing us in numerous ways!


Trump’s a GEMINI, which played into the George Floyd death too, which happened during the Gemini Zodiac time frame (May 25, 2020)

  • George Floyd and Stephen Jackson looked like Twins
  • It was in the TWIN Cities, Minnesota
  • The baseball team there is the Minnesota TWINS
  • Gemini Man with Will Smith just came out in 2019
  • All took place in the year of the TWIN NUMBERS (2020 = New TWIN Towers event with pandemic)
  • George Floyd and Kobe Bryant’s daughters had TWIN (same) names (Gianna)

Watch more at this link below :


Revelation 20 “Millennium” or “1000 Years” is a RIDDLE

The number “1000” is the Egyptian equivalent of the Mesopotamian “40”. In fact, Revelation 20 is largely Egyptian in character, the Lake of Fire (this concept came from the Egyptian myths of the afterlife underworld), and Binding of Apophis (aka Apep) who was the Egyptian deity that embodied “Chaos” and he opposed Ma’at (the goddess of Truth and “Order”) as well as being the greatest enemy of the god “Ra” (the Solar Deity). Apep (Apophis) was depicted as a giant water snake, almost always shown being pierced by knives or other weapons or under the control of a deity, so his image would not give the demon power.

He was thought by the ancient Egyptians to be over 16m long, with skin as hard as flint. His roar was so loud that it shook the underworld. He was called ‘Evil Lizard’, ‘Opponent of Ra’, ‘Enemy of Ra’, ‘World Encircler’ and ‘Serpent of Rebirth’. Apep was never depicted without being smitten, cut or restrained (the binding or ‘RESTRAINING’ of Satan that old SERPENT [same title as Apep who was a huge Serpent] in Hades for 1000 years in Revelation 20 comes from these myths surrounding the ‘restrained’ Apep in Egyptian Lore).

There were specific rituals performed to keep him out of the way, including “the spell of spitting on Apep”, “the spell of trampling on Apep with the left foot”, “the spell of taking the spear to smite Apep”, “the spell of binding Apep”, “the spell of taking the knife to smite Apep”, and “the spell of setting fire to Apep”. In an annual rite called the Banishing of Chaos, priests would build an effigy of Apep that was thought to contain all of the evil and darkness in Egypt, and burn it to protect everyone from Apep’s evil for another year. (similar to Satan being thrown in the Lake of Fire and burnt). Any of this sound familiar?

The Great White throne judgment and Book of Life, however, come from Sumerian works as Lugal-e. The “1000” number is the hieroglyph for the lotus flower, which symbolically sumberges into the Nun/Abzu, or waters of death, at night with the souls of the dead it swallowed and rises at dawn to disgorge them. Jesus was the Sun on earth, so when he descended that was considered evening and the beginning of the 1000 years. His return would be the sunrise and thus the end of it.

“The number 1,000 in ancient Egyptian numerals is represented by the symbol of the white lotus. The related hieroglyph is:


The ancient Egyptians also extracted perfume from this flower. They also used the white lotus in funerary garlands, temple offerings and female adornment. The white lotus is a candidate for the plant eaten by the Lotophagi of Homer’s Odyssey.”

In the Bible, when the messianic solar character leaves, it’s for 40 days, 40 years etc. The #40 is the number of Ea/Enki, who is the ruler of the Abzu, which is the Sumerian equivalent of the Nun into which the Lily mentioned earlier descends at night. Beginning around the second millennium BCE, Enki was sometimes referred to in writing by the numeric ideogram for “40”, occasionally referred to as his “sacred number”. Both represent transitional periods between Day-ages or eras and journeys symbolizing such transitions. The desert wandering, for example, which Paul says was the prototype for the period between Jesus’ going and coming (1 Corinthians 10).

Also, have you heard of syncretism and how all of those ANE (Ancient Near East) religions were borrowing from each other? In this instance with the millennium, have you read the “Myth of Er” in Plato’s ‘Republic’? In the myth, Er is slain in battle, his soul visits the underworld, and beholds a judgement of the dead. He is later restored to life and tells his tale:

“…the tale of a warrior bold, Er, the son of Armenius, by race a Pamphylian…He said that when his soul went forth from his body he journeyed with a great company and that they came to a mysterious region where there were two openings side by side in the earth, and above them and over against them in the heaven two others, and that judges were sitting between these, and that after every judgement they bade THE RIGHTEOUS JOURNEY TO THE RIGHT and UPWARD through the heaven with tokens attached to them in front of the judgement passed upon them, and THE UNJUST TO TAKE THE ROAD TO THE LEFT and DOWNWARD, they too wearing signs of all that had befallen them…”
(Republic 10.614c-e, p.839, Hamilton)

Er tells us that A THOUSAND YEARS passed for the souls in Heaven as well as in Hell, before they made contact with each other to relate their experiences at a meadow, ON THE EARTH’S SURFACE (the righteous descending to the earth, the unrighteous, ascending from Hell). Er goes on to explain that approximately 100 years is set aside for a human being, and that the reward or punishment for a soul’s good or evil is multiplied ten-fold, thus arriving at a sum of ONE THOUSAND YEARS, before the return to the Earth’s surface by the righteous and unrighteous.

I suspect these Platonic-Greek motifs lie behind the Book of Revelation’s notion of a thousand year reign of the righteous on earth and and the resurrection of the dead at the conclusion of this thousand year period, the so-called “MILLENNIUM” where also the Great Serpent “Satan” would be bound for 1000 years as well. The Early Christians have of course, given a “a new twist” to this ancient myth. Er on the THOUSAND YEARS says they wait before the resurrection of the dead, to the meadow on the Earth’s surface:

“And so he said that here he saw, by each opening of heaven and earth, the souls departing after judgement had been passed upon them, while, by the other pair of openings, there came up from the one in the earth souls full of squalor and dust, and from the second there came down from heaven a second procession of souls clean and pure, and that those which arrived from time to time appeared to have come as it were from a long journey and gladly departed to the meadow and encamped there as at a festival, and acquaintances greeted one another, and those who came from the earth questioned the others about conditions up yonder, and those from heaven asked how it fared with those others. And they told their stories to one another, the one lamenting and wailing as they recalled how many and dreadful things they had suffered and seen in their journey beneath the earth- IT LASTED A THOUSAND YEARS- while those from heaven related their delights and visions of beauty beyond words.

To tell it all, Glaucon, would take all our time, but the sum, he said, was this. For all the wrongs they had ever done to anyone and whom that had severally wronged they had paid the penalty tenfold for each, and the measure of this was by periods of a hundred years each, so that on the assumption that this was the length of human life the punishment might be ten times the crime…and if any had done deeds of kindness and been just and holy men they might receive their due reward in the same measure.”
(Republic 10.614-5, p.839, Hamilton)

As the earth is to be the Messiah’s kingdom in Christian thought, the thousand year reign to be enjoyed as a reward for the righteous, replaces Er’s notion that the righteous are dwelling in Heaven, not on earth. The righteous and unrighteous meeting again on earth in Er’s scenario has been transformed by the Early Christians into the righteous witnessing the destruction of the unrighteous dead in a Lake of Fire. The Er myth stresses punishment for a thousand years and rewards for a thousand years, Christianity apparently took these “dual concepts,” and, reformatting them, made the righteous rule the earth with Christ for a thousand years as their reward, while the dead waited for one thousand years, for their final Judgment.

The Greeks got their notion of “1000” ultimately from the Egyptians. And as I’ve shown, it was also representative of “40” in Mesopotamian Mythology, and all of the ANE (Ancient Near East) cultures were borrowing from each other (including the Jewish Religion(s) in that region).

Zionism 101 & Christianity Dawning of 20th Century C.I. Scofield and John Darby


“Since the 1930s the Scofield Reference Bible has been promoted as THE source for interpreting Revelation and the end times. Almost all the current Dispensationalist theology is derived from his teaching and his Reference Bible. “The doctrines he preached and taught have now taken over fundamentalist churches across the country. “His financial support for the reference Bible came from Zionist & conspiratorial groups out of Boston Massachusetts. Chiefly known as the Secret Six . That group tied to the order of the Illuminati. There was an unusual association Illuminati between Scofield & Zionist Samuel Untermeier.”
– Rev. Nord Davis, Christian Minister.

Two Brands of Premillenialism (dispensational or historic). This doctrine is used to refer specifically to those who adhere to the beliefs in an earthly millennial reign of Christ. It posits that a rapture, would come before (dispensational) or after (historic) the Great Tribulation preceding the Millennium.

This eschatological system was developed in the nineteenth century, popularized by two lawyers turned Bible teachers, the Irish convert to the Brethren Movement, J.N. Darby, and the colorful American Congregationalist, C.I. Scofield. The popularity of Darby’s system is due largely to the popularity of the Scofield Reference Bible, first published in 1909. Despite the popularity of the Darby/Scofield system, it departs, in many respects, from the historical Christian understanding of eschatology, and is totally removed from the actual interpretation which is PRETERISM.

The entire Christian Zionist Movement is based on the Footnotes from the Scofield Bible. The Scofield Bible was financed by the House of Rothschild with the sole purpose of promoting the Zionist Agenda. The Rothschilds are not the Jews of the bible and do not practice Judaism.Mel Gibson would have been correct if he had claimed, The Rothschilds are responsible for all the wars in the world.
The “Labour Leader” newspaper of Britain on December 19, 1891 referred to the Rothschilds when they wrote:

“This blood-sucking crew has been the cause of untold mischief and misery in Europe during the present century, and has piled up its prodigious wealth chiefly through fomenting wars between States which ought never to have quarreled. Wherever there is trouble in Europe, wherever rumors of war circulate and men’s minds are distraught with fear of change and calamity you may be sure that a hook-nosed Rothschild is at his games somewhere near the region of the disturbance (ibid, p. 12).”

Rothschild founded and funded the Zionist movement to further a New World Order agenda. At the first Zionist conference Theodor Herzl, a Rothschild agent (Ragent) makes it clear Rothschildism (RothIsm) is not about saving Jews, It is essential that the sufferings of Jews…. become worse …. this will assist in realization of our plans…, I have an excellent idea…., I shall induce anti-Semites to liquidate Jewish wealth… The anti-Semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-Semites shall be our best friends.

In 2003, 60 Minutes aired a segment about Alexandra Robbins, staff member at the New Yorker. Robbins, a Yale graduate, penetrated the wall of silence around the Skull and Bones, the American branch of Rothschild’s secret society and authored the best seller Secrets of the Tomb: Skull and Bones, the Ivy League, and the Hidden Paths of Power.

Members of the “Skull and Bones” include some of the most powerful men of the 20th century. J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Abraham Kuhn and Solomon Loeb are all connected to the Rothschilds Global financial empire and secret societies. They are members of the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, France, and Germany or, for that matter, any central bank anywhere in the world.

Lord Moyne, the British Secretary of State in Cairo, in 1942 tried to interfere in Baron Edmond’s plan when he declared “the Jews were not the descendants of the ancient Hebrews and that they had no “legitimate claim” on the Holy Land. In favor of limiting Jewish immigration into Palestine, he was accused of being “an implacable enemy of Hebrew independence,” and on November 6, 1944 Lord Moyne was murdered by two members of the Stern Gang (Yitzhak Shamir’s group).

A “Jewish state” is a violation of the teachings of Orthodox Judaism Grand Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, believed RothIsm is “the work of Satan, a sacrilege, a blasphemy” and The Holocaust, he wept, “was a direct result of RothIsm, a punishment from G-d.”

Rothschild was well aware of Jewish history and Jews, according to the Christian New Testament, persecuted and crucified Jesus Christ and most of his early followers. America’s traditional churches in the 19th Century would never stand for a Jewish occupation of Jesus’ homeland.

Rothschild Backed Zionist Jews (RBZJ) and a con artist Cyrus Scofield were used to change America and its religious orientation by the use of the Scofield Reference Bible from Oxford University Press.
Scofield, after being released from prison was introduced to Samuel Untermeyer, the President of the Koren Hayesod, and the RothIsm movement in America.

Untermeyer, an attorney, was instrumental in preparing the Federal Reserve Banking law in 1910, and the financing of Scofield’s Reference bible.

And who was Cyrus Scofield?

As a young con-artist in Kansas after the Civil War, he met up with John J. Ingalls, an aging Jewish lawyer who had been sent to Atchison by the “Secret Six” some thirty years before to work the Abolitionist cause. Pulling strings both in Kansas and with his compatriots back east, Ingalls assisted Scofield in gaining admission to the Bar, and procured his appointment as Federal Attorney for Kansas. Ingalls and Scofield became partners in a railroad scam which led to Cyrus serving time for criminal forgery.

While he was in prison, Scofield began studying the philosophy of John Darby, pioneer of the Plymouth Brethren movement and the “any moment now” rapture doctrine. Upon his release from prison, Scofield deserted his first wife, Leonteen Carry Scofield, and his two daughters Abigail and Helen, and he took as his mistress a young girl from the St. Louis Flower Mission. He later abandoned her for Helen van Ward, whom he eventually married. Following his Illuminati connections to New York, he settled in at the Lotus Club, which he listed as his residence for the next twenty years. It was here that he presented his ideas for a new Christian Bible concordance, and was taken under the wing of Samuel Untermeyer, who later became chairman of the American Jewish Committee, president of the American League of Jewish Patriots, and chairman of the Non-sectarian Anti-Nazi League.

Untermeyer introduced Scofield to numerous Zionist and socialist leaders, including Samuel Gompers, Fiorello LaGuardia, Abraham Straus, Bernard Baruch and Jacob Schiff. These were the people who financed Scofield’s research trips to Oxford and arranged the publication and distribution of his concordance.

It is impossible to overstate the influence of Cyrus Scofield on twentieth-century Christian beliefs. The Scofield Bible is the standard reference work in virtually all Christian ministries and divinity schools. It is singularly responsible for the Christian belief that the Hebrew Prophecies describe the kingdom of Jesus’ Second Coming, and not the Zionist vision of a man-made New World Order.
And it is precisely because Christians persist in this belief that they remain blind to the reality of Zion. Scofield served as the agent by which the Zionists paralyzed Christianity, while they prepared America for our final conquest.”

From Encyclopedia Americana 1954:
“Samuel Untermeyer, American Lawyer, born Lynchburg, Virginia June 6, 1858 – died Palm Springs, California, March 16, 1940. He took his degree at Columbia University, New York to which city the family moved soon after the Civil War and he was admitted to the bar in 1879. He rose rapidly in his profession; became famous as a corporation attorney and was noted for his connection with celebrated cases. He was at times special advisor to the government in the interpretation and enforcement of the income tax law and was active in securing the enforcement of anti-trust legislation. He was a leader of the Jewish people and an advocate of government ownership.”

Encyclopedia Britannica, 1964:
“Samuel Untermeyer, 1858-1940 (excerpted) He was counsel in many celebrated cases, covering almost every phase of corporation, civil, criminal and international law. Untermeyer urged [federal legislative] measures like the compulsory regulation of stock exchanges; reform of the criminal laws and regulation of trusts and combinations. He took part in preparing the Federal Reserve Bank Law, the Creighton Bill, Federal Trade Commission Bill and other legislation curbing trusts.”

The Scofield bible has hundreds of easy-to-read footnotes in the margins and at the bottom of the pages that misleadingly weave parts of the Old and New Testaments together as though the same people wrote them at the same time. The most convincing evidence of RothIsm influence on Scofield are the notes themselves, below are examples taken from the revised 1967 Edition:

“For a nation to commit the sin of anti-Semitism brings inevitable judgment.
God made an unconditional promise of blessings through Abram’s seed to the nation of Israel to inherit a specific territory forever.”

In fact there is no sin of Anti-Semitism in the Bible and Abraham did not bequeath a “specific territory” to his descendants. Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell weave Scofield’s “Jews” into Genesis 12:3, “And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed”.

CHAOS AFTER THE “PEACE” CONFERENCE – Mrs. B.M. Palmer, a very competent writer in the United Kingdom, in an article published on January 13, 1940, said :
“During the chaos which supervened on the Versailles Treaty, the German middle classes were deprived of their savings and small businesses, and came under the control of international Jews who had access to the international money market.

This is the real origin of Anti-Semitism in Germany. The fact that the blow fell on inoffensive citizens, [religious Jews – the ‘lesser brethren’] even on scholars and artists who had nothing to do with the world of finance, has blinded well-meaning people to the fact that the international money-lenders are responsible for the terrible troubles that fell on their own people. They knew perfectly well that there would be pogroms [race specific genocides].

The slaughter of a few hundred Jews was no more to them than the German casualties are to Hitler. They want world domination, and they are prepared that their own should pay for it.”
[end quoting from World’s Troublemakers]

That last paragraph, while off the immediate topic of the Scofield/ Untermeyer connection, was transcribed to demonstrate the fact that the persecution of Jews has been orchestrated by the International money-lenders who call themselves “Jews”. To achieve their political program of World Dominion they have utilized divisiveness and hatred between Jew and non-Jew; orchestrated pogroms, oppression, suppression, and persecution of the Jew masses. We will be posting information to further expand on and explain this process. Meantime, begin to realize that their plan can only succeed if the animosity between races continues. If we stop playing the game they made up, their game is up. Simple, and not easy. Simple and yet, true.



The Zionist Elites had it in their plans to create a Jewish state in Israel, since at least the early 1900s. And Jews weren’t disenfranchised before coming to Israel. Most Jews were living side by side with Muslims and Christians in the region for hundreds of years just fine. Zionism is what really took over Palestine in 1947. Ever heard of the Balfour Declaration? If not, you might want to, because it’s the biggest piece to the whole puzzle! The Balfour Declaration of 1917 was a letter written by Arthur James Balfour, (British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs) to Walter Rothschild, in essence saying that the British wanted to help form a Jewish State in Israel. This is what the short letter said below :

“His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” (end of Declaration)

Due to the large Jewish populace in Europe and the United States, the declaration became an international affair. For Palestinians, the Balfour Declaration was seen as their doomsday notice. They felt that they had been swept under the rug by Britain with the backing of all of Europe. David Lloyd George, who was Prime Minister at the time of the Balfour Declaration, told the Palestine Royal Commission in 1937 that the Declaration was made “due to propagandist reasons.” Citing the position of the Allied and Associated Powers in the ongoing war, Lloyd George said that (in the Report’s words) “In this critical situation it was believed that Jewish sympathy or the reverse would make a substantial difference one way or the other to the Allied cause. In particular Jewish sympathy would confirm the support of American Jewry, and would make it more difficult for Germany to reduce her military commitments and improve her economic position on the eastern front.” Lloyd George then said,

“The Zionist leaders gave us a definite promise that, if the Allies committed themselves to giving facilities for the establishment of a national home for the Jews in Palestine, they would do their best to rally Jewish sentiment and support throughout the world to the Allied cause. They kept their word.”

Prime Minister David Lloyd George of the United Kingdom also supported the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine because “it would help secure post-war British control of Palestine, which was strategically important as a buffer to Egypt and the Suez Canal.”. All this was done for special British Interests, as well as Zionist interests. Not for the true interest of the Jewish people. This setup an environment where there would be perpetual conflict and war. It placed heavy burdens on everyone. It destroyed families and lives of many people. It continues even to this day.

Ahmadinejad was right, in regards to a solution for peace in Palestine (Israel). Firstly, he never said he wished to wipe Israel off the map (that doesn’t even make sense, since Iran has the number 2 highest population of Jews in the Middle East right behind Israel), rather, he said that this Zionist regime occupying Israel would vanish from the pages of time. Ahmadinejad actually said he wanted peace in Palestine, and the only way that could happen is if there was a free and open referendum (vote) for Jews and Palestinians alike, to vote for new leaders and have a true democracy. I agree with him.

Also read the UN Partition Plan of 1947. They gave the Palestinians are a raw deal, where the Jews were to obtain 56% of the land, including the most fertile land in Israel (Palestine), and give 44% of the other land to the Arabs and Palestinians (even though they outnumbered Jews by at least double). This caused civil war and rioting all over in Palestine. Finally, the Palestinians were kicked out of their own homes, and left for dead in the Gaza and West Bank. AND IT SHOULD BE NOTED, many of the Palestinians were CHRISTIANS. Over 400,000 Palestinian Christians were kicked out of their own land during the Partition. They felt betrayed by their brothers and sisters in Christ in Britain and America, because they supported all this.

The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement (1919) was preceded by 2 Agreements (one of which was secret), which clearly outlines that these plans were in the works even before the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and around the start of WW1 in 1914 (it’s my contention that both World Wars and even the Great Depression were instrumental in gaining worldwide sympathy and support for the Jews to return to Israel, as well as put the world monetary system into the hands of the Zionist Jews as well).

The first was a set of letters exchanged between Sir Henry McMahon (British High Commissioner in Egypt) and Hussein bin Ali (Arab Leader) in 1915. Arab nation-states were already garnering their independence, and Hussein Ali (as king of the Hejaz – which was a strip of land or region squished between the Red Sea and Saudi Arabia, with Egypt to the West of the Red Sea) wanted independence from the Ottoman Empire as well. The British were in support of the Ottoman Empire, until the Ottomans pledged their allegiance to Germany in WW1. The Allies (France, Russia and Britain) via Sir Henry McMahon then offered Hussein certain parts of land and independence from the Ottoman Empire, if Hussein supported the Allies in WW1.

This letter below from McMahon to Hussein from 1915 declared Britain’s willingness to recognize the independence of the Arabs, subject to certain exemptions. READ BELOW:

“The districts of Mersina and Alexandretta, and portions of Syria lying to the west of the districts of Damascus, Homs, Hama and Aleppo, cannot be said to be purely Arab, and must on that account be excepted from the proposed limits and boundaries. With the above modification and without prejudice to our existing treaties concluded with Arab Chiefs, we accept these limits and boundaries, and in regard to the territories therein in which Great Britain is free to act without detriment to interests of her ally France, I am empowered in the name of the Government of Great Britain to give the following assurance and make the following reply to your letter: Subject to the above modifications, Great Britain is prepared to recognize and support the independence of the Arabs within the territories in the limits and boundaries proposed by the Sherif of Mecca.” (end)

This leads to the secret meeting known as the Sykes-Picot Agreement, in which the Allies (France, UK and Russia) outlined areas of the Ottoman Empire that each of them would possess, including areas that had been promised to Hussein and Arab Independence. This secret meeting happened in 1916 but wasn’t exposed until pretty much after the war was coming to an end around November of 1917. After the War was over, the British, via Prime Minister David Lloyd George and Arthur James Balfour (British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs), sprung it on Hussein that they intended to keep their promise in allowing Arab independence, but that they were going to form an independent Jewish State in Palestine, to which Hussein responded by saying this below :

“I will not accept an independent Jewish State in Palestine, nor was I instructed that such a state was contemplated by Great Britain beforehand.” (end)

In other words, not only did the Allied forces break their promises to Hussein (they basically deceived him into helping the Allied Forces in WW1) by usurping authority over certain areas that Sir Henry McMahon had promised to Hussein after the war (the Balfour Agreement was in stark contrast with what Britain via Sir McMahon offered the Arabs and Hussein), but also, the Sykes-Picot secret Agreement between France and UK, was exposed showing that the two countries were planning to split and occupy parts of the promised Arab country. The whole matter is discussed in “The Peel Report of 1937.” Essentially the Arabs got tricked into fighting on the side of the Allies, via BROKEN PROMISES.

One more point to mention, during a War Cabinet meeting on policy regarding Syria and Palestine held in 1918, it was stated that Palestine had been included in the areas the United Kingdom had pledged would be Arab and independent in the future. Lord Curzon (Viceroy and Governor-General of India), also noted that the rights that had been granted to the French under the terms of the Sykes–Picot Agreement, was in violation of the provisions of the Reglement Organique Agreements (which was an Agreement from 1861-1864) and the war aims of the other Allies. (The publication and exposing of the Sykes–Picot Agreement caused the resignation of Sir Henry McMahon.).

The regime occupying Israel, are Zionists and special interest groups from those Allied Forces who won WW1 (particularly Britain). The whole charade was one big POWER MOVE / LAND GRAB, not by Jews, but by a conglomeration of British / American bureaucrats that wanted to control the area. They couldn’t do that with a truly independent Arabian Palestinian state.

Ahmadinejad stated that his true goal was peace in the Palestine region, and the solution to peace, was to allow a referendum vote on new leaders, not ones instituted by the Zionist Oligarchs who TRULY control the area (not the Jews). The leaders of that region are liars and deceivers, just like they were after WW1, by lying to Hussein and the Arabs. They never planned on helping the Arabs gain independence, nor do they truly care about a Jewish State in Israel. Speaking of ‘hegemony’, they only care about their own political / economic power over that region. They don’t really care about creating a safe-haven for Jews. This was all a political plot to garner control of the region and destabilize and restructure the entire Middle East for their own agenda. This agenda has been ongoing for quite some time now, and is coming to a head. For example, in 1997, The PNAC (Project for the New American Century, headed by people like Dick Cheney) program said :

“America’s military must rule out even the possibility of a serious global or regional challenger anywhere in the world. The regime of Saddam Hussein must be toppled immediately, by U.S. force if necessary. And the entire Middle East must be reordered according to an American plan. PNAC’s most important study notes that selling this plan to the American people will likely take a long time, “absent some catastrophic catalyzing event – like a NEW PEARL HARBOR EVENT.”
– (PNAC, Rebuilding America’s Defenses (1997), p.51 ; Officially published in 2000)”

There it is, in black and white. The PNAC program in 1997, headed by the likes of Dick Cheney, flat out said they wanted no other country to challenge America, they wanted Saddam Hussein out of Iraq and they wanted to restructure the entire Middle East. They knew this process would take a long time UNLESS they had a NEW PEARL HARBOR EVENT. This was 4 years before 9/11. You connect the dots!

And one more thing, Mohammed Mossadeq (A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED LEADER, Iranian Prime Minister in the 1950s), was trying to kick British interests out of Iran, by nationalizing Iranian oil. The British and American Central Secret Agencies, created an entire special operation plan to oust him from office because of this. It was known as Operation Ajax. This is what led to the Ayatolla coming to power.

Just like they lied and deceived after WW1, and just like they blew up their own towers on 9/11, to go in and restructure the entire Middle East, they (strategically through black ops. stealth) ousted a democratically elected leader in Iran in 1953, by besmirching his reputation and making claims about Mohammed Mossadeq that were not true, which caused a coup d’etat, overturning the entire regime. It wasn’t for anything more than special British and American (ZIONIST) interests in the region.

There’s a religious component to all this too, which is why I believe Scofield and John Nelson Darby created Dispensational / Futurist Christian doctrines in the mid to late 1800s. They wanted to set the stage for Christian support of Jews forming a state in Palestine / Israel again. What better way than to trick ignorant Christians (I don’t mean that disparagingly, Christians were kept in the dark about Preterist Eschatology by their preachers and pastors), into believing they are living in the “END TIMES / LAST DAYS” and the only way Christ can come back is through Jews repopulating Palestine (from the Nile to the Euphrates is their ultimate aim outlined in the OT) and a third Jewish temple being built (and re-destroyed) in Israel!