The Templar Legacy

A new fictional book came out earlier this year which I just finished reading. I just wanted to get some opinions on it's topic. I think it provides more of a controvery towards the authority of the Christian church then the Da Vinci code. Read below if you wish to know the secret found in the story and to discuss.


[SPOILER ALERT FOR THE BOOK 'THE TEMPLAR LEGACY' BELOW]




The story in this book tells the Templar treasure the actual bones of Jesus himself and with them the Gospel of Simon (who is St. Peter's original name). In this Gospel it tells of Jesus’ life as a simple enlightened man who died on the cross in a historical accurate way (the body hung until death took it days later and then the remains were put into a unmarked grave with other crucified). Simon has a revelation after Jesus’ death that he feels this man's teachings were good and that he (Simon) wants to continue Jesus’ teachings to others will reach the same enlightenment Simon found. After this Simon then goes and digs up Jesus’ bones and places them in a secret place along with his story (The Gospel of Simon). Simon and the other followers of the man Jesus simply tell his story and spread his teachings to to those around them as a way to pass on Jesus’ knowledge. Not that this man was the son of God, but that what he taught was morally correct and better for human life at the time. It says that at a later date the church choose to up Jesus to the level of 'son of God' to have a one up on the other religions of the time and that the later Gospels were edited to reflect those changes.

Having this stance on the beginning of the Christian religion pretty much eliminates all the contradictions and historical inaccuracies of the bible and says those stories were merely manipulated to bring in more followers. Taking the original stories of being good natured, respectful and loving towards your fellow human being and adding a supernatural or miracle aspect to them so that they will get more followers.

What are the thoughts?

My thoughts are... it sounds like a good read. Did Peter (simon) ever have a Gospel? Ill check the Nag Hammadi library

Lachean said:

My thoughts are... it sounds like a good read. Did Peter (simon) ever have a Gospel? Ill check the Nag Hammadi library

Click to expand...

The book itself is quite entertaining. It reads a lot like the Da Vinci code. There was a Gospel of Peter found but the gospel, like the others, were written by unknown authors. The Gospel was the first heretical gospel found and was never accepted by the Church.

The gospel of Simon in the book was completely made up by the author and int he story was written by Simon (Peter) directly after the death of Jesus and was never manipulated. The problem with the current gospels is that they have been written and rewritten so many times we do not know what has changed from the original versions as no originals exist today.

Perhaps we will never know. A great attempt was made by the early Roman church to burn any and all literature (as well as any knowlegable people) that was contradictory to their newly invented, state sponsored, religion.

They pretty much wiped it all away. Well, almost. Some went underground (they had to or die:shock: ) and have been able to pass this information down through the generations.

This book tells the tale. It just reports the facts and facts can be rather boring on occassion but a good, informative read, none the less.

"The Hiram Key is a book that will shake the Christian world to its very roots. When Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas, both Masons, set out to find the origins of Freemasonry they had no idea that they would find themselves unraveling the true story of Jesus and the original Jerusalem Church." <snip> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1931412758/104-3309513-2030353?v=glance&n=283155

Captain America said:

Perhaps we will never know. A great attempt was made by the early Roman church to burn any and all literature (as well as any knowlegable people) that was contradictory to their newly invented, state sponsored, religion.

They pretty much wiped it all away. Well, almost. Some went underground (they had to or die:shock: ) and have been able to pass this information down through the generations.

Click to expand...

Very true, once the Nicean Council announced their chosen gospels for the canon all other books were claimed heretical. It was on personal opinion of certain individual’s in the church for what was heretical and what was not. Thankful many people stored away and hide versions of books and gospels that were written in the exact same time as the canon gospels so that we may now study them with the education and intelligence humans only started receiving in the past 100 years.

This book tells the tale. It just reports the facts and facts can be rather boring on occassion but a good, informative read, none the less.

"The Hiram Key is a book that will shake the Christian world to its very roots. When Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas, both Masons, set out to find the origins of Freemasonry they had no idea that they would find themselves unraveling the true story of Jesus and the original Jerusalem Church."

Click to expand...

I have only skimmed through the book at the local Barnes and noble's but from what I read the authors make some mighty big conclusions based on the little evidence provided, much like the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail. I think I'll go get the book and read it though so I can better state my opinion.

My most recent book I am reading is Misquoting Jesus : The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why by Bart D. Ehrman. Interesting factual book and a very easy skimmer. First paragraph in each section states the fact right up front and the rest of the section backs up that fact with sources and evidence. The book is based on today's bible being a collection of many stories molded by human error and intended and not intended manipulation. No real conpiracy theories.

Well, I'm not taking a position on book, per say, except to say that I read it and it mostly contains historical facts and is, with minimum exception, void of speculation or conclusion.

In the Christian Bible, what is the name of the central character that supposedly "died for our sins and was the son of God, and is God in and of himself?"

Which diety was born of a virgin?

Just attempting to answer these two questions can be rather enlightening.

Not sure where you are going with this so I'll bite.

Jesus is the answer to both questions according the the Christian bible.

Gibberish said:

Not sure where you are going with this so I'll bite.

Jesus is the answer to both questions according the the Christian bible.

Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to bait you Gibby. I just think it is kinda funny that even the most "knowlegable" Christians do not realize that Christ is a title and not a name.

The Gnostic Scrolls (the early Christian sect that was actually there at the time) record his name as Y'shua ben Yehweh if memory serves me correct. actually, the first christians believed James the Just was the actual messiah (Jesus' brother) The Romans changed all that though, approxamately 300 years after the "fact" (I use the term loosely.)

The Talmud records his name as Y'shua ben Panthera. The illigitimate son of Panthera, a Roman soldier who had his way with Mary.

Again, it has been a while since I read the book and these names are the best of my memory (spelling not withstanding.:roll: ) and I could be wrong. Perhaps, I should go back and refresh my memory.

There are actually many dieties that claim virgin birth that predate "Christ". Christianity is just another religion that adopted the same myth.

Christianity is just a "melting pot" religion that used borrowed myths and legends from many other religions. This was necessary as a means of compromise for the Council of Nicea to be able to sell it to the masses.

Some people don't want to know that but just the same, it is what it is.

Captain America said:

I wasn't trying to bait you Gibby. I just think it is kinda funny that even the most "knowlegable" Christians do not realize that Christ is a title and not a name.

Click to expand...

Yes Christ ('choosen one') is a title given to the man Jesus by the Christian church.

The Gnostic Scrolls (the early Christian sect that was actually there at the time) record his name as Y'shua ben Yehweh if memory serves me correct. actually, the first christians believed James the Just was the actual messiah (Jesus' brother) The Romans changed all that though, approxamately 300 years after the "fact" (I use the term loosely.)

The Talmud records his name as Y'shua ben Panthera. The illigitimate son of Panthera, a Roman soldier who had his way with Mary.

Click to expand...

Y'shua ben Yehweh translates to 'Jesus son of Joseph' doesn't it?

There is debate over the Panthera topic, which isn't saying much since ther is adebate over about anything Christian related. In the Greek version of the bible where in Isaiah the passage talks of the birth the word 'Parthenos' is used, which directly translates to 'chaste' or in the context 'virgin'. It is debated that when the roman scribes copied the Greek texts they might have assumed Parthenos a Greek translation of the name Panthera. Even among the Christian bibles this single verse changes from virgin conceives, virgin becomes pregnant, to young woman conceives.

Christianity is just a "melting pot" religion that used borrowed myths and legends from many other religions. This was necessary as a means of compromise for the Council of Nicea to be able to sell it to the masses.

Some people don't want to know that but just the same, it is what it is.

Click to expand...

Most major stories in Christianity are from stories from previous religions or societies and most often paganism. The whole reason Constantinople gave the Christian church it's first authority of power, which catapulted it to what it is today, was to unite Rome and its many religions under one roof. Which is why, as you state, Christianity is a melting pot.

We are pretty much in agreement with this topic, it is always amusing to discuss though.

We are pretty much in agreement with this topic, it is always amusing to discuss though.

Click to expand...

Agreed. It appears to me that you are far better versed in this than I am. Interesting indeed. I would be interested in knowing more. Particularly about the borrowed myths. I know a little bit about a few of them. Can you add on to that?

One point I was raising, is the indisputable history that is either denied or spun to suit dogma. Knowing the real history can really mess somebody up who has been indoctrinated into a particular theology if it is the first time they heard about it.

Captain America said:

Agreed. It appears to me that you are far better versed in this than I am. Interesting indeed. I would be interested in knowing more. Particularly about the borrowed myths. I know a little bit about a few of them. Can you add on to that?

Click to expand...

Let's see.

1. Noah's Ark flood. This story is thought to be an apocalyptic exaggeration from stories depicting a number of floods that occurred in the Mesopotamia time period (2000 years prior to the writing of the Noah story).

2. Halloween. Originally celebrated by Euopean pagans on November 1st as All Hallow's eve. Pagans attracted the spirits by leaving out food by their front doors. Pagans scared off spirits by wearing masks. November 1st was the start of the new year for Pagans, when the days got shorter (this was before the Gregorian calendar we used to day was used). The new year started in Winter which many people died during the cold so start of winter symbolized start of death so day of the dead or All Hallow's Day was created.

3. Easter. Pagans celebrated this day as the resurrection of the Goddess Ishtar also called Easter (the Queen of heaven who rides the beast of revelation) from the underworld. They welcomed her resurrection in many ways including orgies, rabbits, and eggs. To help bring pagans to Christianity and unite Rome under one religion Constantine ordered the council of Nicea to rename the holiday of "Resurrection of Lord Jesus Christ" to "Easter".

4. Sunday. In Judaism the Sabbath (Saturday) was a day of worship. Roman pagans worshipped their first day of the week (Sunday) and paid tribute to their sun god (Mithras). This was a huge day of worship in pagan Rome so the Council of Nicea agreed to abolish worship on Saturday and move it to Sunday to help easy Pagans to Christianity.

5. Christmas. Romans pagans celebrated Sol Invictus on December 25 (birth of their sun god Mithras). When Constantine switched from Pagan to Christian Mithras lost following but the day was still celebrated and slowly switched to celebration by Christians. It wasn't until Charlemagne promoted the holiday of his coronation, December 25, did it start to become a widely celebrated holiday.

There are a few. I'll read up a little and find some more.

Gibberish said:

Let's see.

1. Noah's Ark flood. This story is thought to be an apocalyptic exaggeration from stories depicting a number of floods that occurred in the Mesopotamia time period (2000 years prior to the writing of the Noah story).

2. Halloween. Originally celebrated by Euopean pagans on November 1st as All Hallow's eve. Pagans attracted the spirits by leaving out food by their front doors. Pagans scared off spirits by wearing masks. November 1st was the start of the new year for Pagans, when the days got shorter (this was before the Gregorian calendar we used to day was used). The new year started in Winter which many people died during the cold so start of winter symbolized start of death so day of the dead or All Hallow's Day was created.

3. Easter. Pagans celebrated this day as the resurrection of the Goddess Ishtar also called Easter (the Queen of heaven who rides the beast of revelation) from the underworld. They welcomed her resurrection in many ways including orgies, rabbits, and eggs. To help bring pagans to Christianity and unite Rome under one religion Constantine ordered the council of Nicea to rename the holiday of "Resurrection of Lord Jesus Christ" to "Easter".

4. Sunday. In Judaism the Sabbath (Saturday) was a day of worship. Roman pagans worshipped their first day of the week (Sunday) and paid tribute to their sun god (Mithras). This was a huge day of worship in pagan Rome so the Council of Nicea agreed to abolish worship on Saturday and move it to Sunday to help easy Pagans to Christianity.

5. Christmas. Romans pagans celebrated Sol Invictus on December 25 (birth of their sun god Mithras). When Constantine switched from Pagan to Christian Mithras lost following but the day was still celebrated and slowly switched to celebration by Christians. It wasn't until Charlemagne promoted the holiday of his coronation, December 25, did it start to become a widely celebrated holiday.

There are a few. I'll read up a little and find some more.

Click to expand...

Regarding #1, I watched a very interesting program that actually validates the great flood and was able to prove it using scientific methods. It appears that a portion of a mountain range washed out through erosion and possibly torrential rains and the resulting mudslides. The land on the other side of this range was below sea level. The ocean suddenly rushed in, not much different from the recent events in NO when the levies failed. Their first clue was evidence of rock from the ocean's barrier had washed as far as five miles inland when the breach occured. Further, the fresh water lakes that were inland, that we're covered with salt water after the breach, gave evidence of fresh water fossils below a particular timeline in the ground sediment and salt water fossils from above that line. They were pretty much able to date this event through that procedure. It is thought that this was the orgin of the legend.

#2 Halloween, although not a christian adopted myth, I had also heard about as well. Those were the Druids if memory serves me correctly, no?

#3 Wasn't Mithra also reserrected during "Easter" too? In fact, (well, fact may be too strong of a word) besides Mithra being born on Dec 25th (Christmas) wasn't he also born in a manger to a virgin? I have read many things suggesting that Christianity was heavily influenced by Mithraism, which predated Christianity (600-1200 BC) and many say it was a "knock-off" religion borrowed from Mithraism as the two have so much in common.

I visualize the Council of Nicea meetings going something like this. Imagine, if you will....

A big round table with elders from many cults and religions present. The Roman Grand Poobah stands and speaks.

"Greetings friends, Romans, countrymen and religious freaks. I have called this meeting because of the widespread spiritualism spreading across the empire has gotten out of control and it is causing a great divide. It has resulted in a decrease of tax revenues thus hurting the empire. That is not acceptable. To that end, all future monies accrued through donations to the various religions shall be forthwith referred to as "tithes" instead of taxes and each and every believer will know their tax..er..tithe dollar....will not only bless the coffers of Rome but also bless them spiritually as well. Therefore, there shall be no further grudging bitterness amongst the masses when the taxman...er...tithe-man...comes to town.

The Emperor in his infinite wisdom has decided to unite all the religions into one in an effort to reunite the populus as one. It has been determined by Constinople, through the divine guidence of his mother and Ra, that this religion shall be based upon the legend of Jesus Christ from Nazareth. All Roman subjects will be obligated to submit to this newly state sanctioned religion or suffer the penalties of their dissent. There will be zero tolerance towards anyone who rebels against it.

However, in the spirit of cooperation, the Emperor has decided to let the spiritual leaders create this religion up amongst themselves through due process of negotiation and compromise as to allow each religion to be a part of it's creation. Let the negotiations begin.

Rabbi: The sabbath must remain on Saturday.
Mithra Priest: That is not acceptable. We can allow a sabbath I suppose, but it will have to be on Sunday to coincide with our day of rest. Otherwise, two days a week will be rendered useless. In return, we will allow you to incorporate the legend of Moses.
Rabbi: Sold. Write it up.
Gnostics: We have to have the water to wine myth or our followers will rebel.
Mediator: Let's allow that. Lets unite the Druid, Jewish, and Mithran versions of the great flood and change the timeline to accomodate all the followers across the board.
Rabbi: But Noah has to stay. That is non-negotiable.
All: Agreed.
Mithra: Our people are going to need the diety, what was his name again? Oh yeah, Jesus, well, this diety has to be born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, die for the sins of his people and come back to life the following Spring. To leave this out will cause widespread chaos amongst the military ranks as they believe wholeheartedly in this.
mediator: OK. Jesus will be born of a virgin, in a manger, and die for his people...
Rabbi: <interupts> "for the SINS of his people. That will work in nicely with some prophecies in the torah.
Roman Grand Poobah: Well, you guys hammer this out. I am going to bathe with my houseboy. I'm gonna lock this door and you guys don't get out until you come up with a religion everone will follow. I really to prefer to kill as few people as we have to, to get this thing going. Good luck.



I suppose that was a rather difficult meeting.

Captain America said:

Regarding #1, I watched a very interesting program that actually validates the great flood and was able to prove it using scientific methods. It appears that a portion of a mountain range washed out through erosion and possibly torrential rains and the resulting mudslides. The land on the other side of this range was below sea level. The ocean suddenly rushed in, not much different from the recent events in NO when the levies failed. Their first clue was evidence of rock from the ocean's barrier had washed as far as five miles inland when the breach occured. Further, the fresh water lakes that were inland, that we're covered with salt water after the breach, gave evidence of fresh water fossils below a particular timeline in the ground sediment and salt water fossils from above that line. They were pretty much able to date this event through that procedure. It is thought that this was the orgin of the legend.

Click to expand...

What was the date of the flood according to the program? I believe I read something on the same finding at they were placed at around 4-5k BCE. This would be about the same time of the flood from the Epic of Gilgamesh which is the great flood or floods I am referring to that happened in Mesopotamia. There is also a theory of the opening from the Black sea to the Mediterranean widening in an earthquake which allowed the Mediterranean to flood into the Black sea basically doubling its size.

#2 Halloween, although not a christian adopted myth, I had also heard about as well. Those were the Druids if memory serves me correctly, no?

Click to expand...

It was Celtic yes. It was not introduced into Christianity until around 900 CE. The thing I always found interesting was that the pagans that celebrated All Hallow's day celebrated all those who died. The Christians took their day All Saint's day (which was previously celebrated in May) moved it to November 1st to replace the pagan holiday. So now instead of celebrating all those who died they would just celebrate the Church saint's.

#3 Wasn't Mithra also reserrected during "Easter" too? In fact, (well, fact may be too strong of a word) besides Mithra being born on Dec 25th (Christmas) wasn't he also born in a manger to a virgin? I have read many things suggesting that Christianity was heavily influenced by Mithraism, which predated Christianity (600-1200 BC) and many say it was a "knock-off" religion borrowed from Mithraism as the two have so much in common.

Click to expand...

From what I have read the virgin birth and resurrection of Mithra were fabrications developed in the purpose to discredit Christianity even further. Of course that is my person conclusion as I haven't seen any person who claims such events to source historical records. There are many similarities between Mithraism and Christianity and both are thought to have spun off from the Egyptian stories of Osiris.

Haha very interesting rendition of the meeting. From what I have read it was not to dissimilar to that. The major bishops of the time gathered in Rome and placed all the books and gospels on the table and they picked the 4 gospels that are in the bible, destroyed the rest, and changed the 4 gospels texts as needed. The Gospel of Mark is thought to have about 100 more pages then the one in the Christian bible.