Personal Development Center

The Truth about Christ

by Robert L. Peck

The word Christ is so established in its religious meaning that few would even question that it had an earlier different meaning. In fact it was only because of my attempting to explain why the West far exceeded the East in evolution that the question arose. It could not have been found even then, if I had not also questioned the reason for the exclusion of the metaphysical from science and how the metaphysical was hidden.

This exclusion of science first became evident to me during a meeting I had with a group of well-recognized scientists when, during a question of a particular process, it became apparent that none of us knew anything about energy in its quiescent state. I remember laughing and suggesting that we call it phlogiston, which had quite a reaction with the group because in the context in which it appeared, it became a strong criticism of all of our extensive technical education.

To fully appreciate the shock of the term it should be remembered that the concept of phlogiston was but a short step beyond the ancient view that fire was a god who inhabited firewood. Phlogiston was later proposed as a metaphysical substance that probably came from the sun. It was a separate entity that could be stored within firewood, yet was not a part of the physical structure of firewood. This formulized concept was finally rejected because the energy of fire or the sun was believed bound within the molecules of wood and did not exist as a metaphysical free element. This led to the usage of the modern term of enthalpy, which is used to describe the amount of energy or heat that is bound within a particular chemical structure. Enthalpy or heat was then equated to the amount of work that the enthalpy or heat could perform. All other forms of energy were then equated with how much work they could do, such as by a boulder dropping from a cliff or the area an atomic bomb could destroy. However, it should be noted that such definitions specify how much energy is present but give no definition as to what energy actually is.

The equating of energy to work is not a definition of energy but rather what is called a metonymy. A metonymy supposedly describes the metaphysical or the hidden source of physical phenomena by labeling it with a known physical identity. Naming energy enthalpy does not describe metaphysical energy anymore than calling it phlogiston. The amount of energy (whatever energy is) is now, however, well defined by equating it to something that is physical and can be measured. Otherwise, what does the energy in a boulder look like and how does it differ from the energy bound in a chemical molecule? No one knows! Science hides many other metaphysical forces and causes other than energy and uses metonymies to define or hide them. As for example, muscle pain is caused by myalgia (Latin: muscle pain), life is contained within a seed, weight is caused by gravity, a vision is a mental construct, and a feeling is a neural response.

Recognition of how science hid the metaphysical behind metonymies gave me a tool that allowed me to find how the early Catholic Church learned to hide science and physical powers behind religious words that started with the deliberate hiding of the achievements of Constantine the Great.

I was extremely interested in Constantine because he managed to integrate religion, science and government and supported his citizens such that they obtained many of the individual powers that Eastern philosophy described but could not demonstrate within large groups. Fortunately, after studying Eastern philosophy I was able to bypass, to sufficient degree, my conditioned Christian bias and was able to observe Constantine as a powerful Emperor rather than as a sycophant of Catholicism.

My study started with the known statements of Constantine about himself. He claimed to be 1) a follower of Sol Invictus, 2) a Henotheist and 3) a believer in Christ. These three statements, which are well confirmed, formed a very strong interrelationship and the answer to my search when the word Christ was found to have a very different meaning than it does today.

Sol Invictus, or sun worship as it was defined, has long been described as pagan without any redeeming characteristics, and Henotheism also is passed off as a pagan belief that all gods are equal. It was difficult for me to accept that Constantine, known to be quite intelligent, could have given credence to the power of Sol Invictus if there were none, and he certainly did not accept all beliefs or gods as proven by his religious persecutions. I had to laugh again when I found myself attempting to find some redeeming power of Sol Invictus. It suddenly dawned on me that if a god is identified as having a power over the earth, then the sun should rank as foremost god. Science and common experience has more than confirmed that all life is completely dependent upon the sun. But does this god also have metaphysical properties such as described later by Constantine?

Considering this question leads to an understanding of Constantine’s usage of his term, Henotheism. If our schooling of science is forgotten and the sun approached as a primitive would, several very interesting observations can be made. The first observation is that sun is known to have a surface of flames. This conclusion is not because of direct touching or contact but rather because the rays of the sun have the very same properties as the rays from the flames of a fire. The second observation is that the rays of the sun or a flame convey the nature of flames through space to something that can absorb those rays. The heat and light of the flames can magically reappear at some distance away and are the same as the original flames. The sun can therefore be characterized as having three distinct properties: 1) The flames of the sun, 2) the radiation of the flames and 3) the manifesting of those same flames within some remote receptor. Children become very aware of these three natures as they burn a leaf with the sun’s rays using a magnifying glass.

This perception of the power of the sun existing in three different forms that are all the same provides the logical meaning of Henotheism. Heno is from the Greek root eis which means one in nature or purpose as compared with mono, as in monotheism, which means alone or singular. The power of the sun exists, therefore, in three different forms, yet all three are identical.

The worship of Sol Invictus must be considered as quite evolved when compared with that of religions that worship anthropomorphic gods who in turn rule the destinies of mortals through lesser gods or angels that carry their commands to particular and chosen individuals. Sol Invictus is known to manifest powers which are now known to be far more than just light and heat such as ionizing radiation, intelligence, and an influence upon mental states. Sol Invictus could therefore be easily believed to be the source of, or at least symbolic of, all changes, knowledge (as gnosis) and creativity manifested on earth.

Since Sol Invictus can be differentiated from common fires because of the radiation of its special powers, the radiation of Sol Invictus required a different description. Constantine used the word Christos for the radiation of Sol Invictus which included the Will or control of the sun. (The word Christos is the adjective form of the Greek verb Chrio meaning contacting, anointing, smearing or rubbing, Chrio, however, has other meanings since it is derived from Chraomai meaning to furnish what is needed as well as to handle or touch lightly. Chraomai is further derived from Cheir, Cher or Chao which can mean to pour through a hollow chasm or duct. It also has the meaning of being an impassible chasm. The Greeks used these words in other variations such as Chreos meaning a want or need, and Chreio or Chreo meaning to deliver an oracle or wise statement.)

Constantine further associated Christos with its two beginning Greek letters, χ (khi) and ρ (rho) or chr-, which he envisioned emblazoned upon the sun, and a later vision that symbolized that a word beginning with chr- would lead him into a victory against Maxentius who had a much superior force. History does not describe how he used the concept of Christos to bolster his troops, yet his later accomplishments suggest that he used the very simple action of telling his troops to trust in their own Christos and fight as individuals rather than as automatons using synchronized thrusting and parrying. This trust in individual powers is supported by how he first became impressed with the Christians when they managed to become irreplaceable workers in his government rather than enemies of the State. He noted that they were intelligent, literate and inspired honest workers and obviously of much better quality than the previous workers. We can certainly assume that they attributed their competency to following their personal Christos because they called themselves Christians.

Constantine forced his views of Christos upon all of the churches when he required them to approve his short statement about Christos at Nicaea in 325 CE. This statement was described as settling the debates about the relationship of God to Christ (not Jesus) and read, “The creator God created Christos which was the same as God. Christos then manifested God’s Will on earth.” This can be readily identified as a Henotheistic statement of the three natures of God or Sol Invictus.

The Christian Churches were noted as also giving up their Jewish religious observances including the Sabbath and replacing them with Roman Sol Invictus holidays including the birth date of the sun (December 25) as well as the Easter earth renewal rites. Even much later in the 5^th century, Leo the Great stated that it was the custom of many Christians to stand on the steps of the Church of St. Peter and pay homage to the sun by obeisance and prayers. Jesus became honored with an aureole painted behind his head in portraits that were similar to renderings of Constantine. The aureole was, of course, the depiction of the Christos of the sun. There is very little, if anything, in the original Greek of the New Testament Gospels that could be interpreted to disagree with God being at least symbolized by Sol Invictus and Henotheism.

Following the deaths of Constantine and the son who succeeded him, some of the Christian Bishops managed to gain political control of Rome and then admittedly set out to rewrite history. The story of all that occurred during this period of time is well documented in the Church approved Catholic Encyclopedia. The chief religious beliefs during the Constantine’s reign were declared anathema and labeled as the great Arian Heresy. The Encyclopedia states how the heresy dominated the entire Empire and that the majority of people at that time did not believe that Jesus was God. The Church therefore took all the necessary steps to eradicate any evidences or remains of the Heresy.

Fideism became the formal rationale for replacing what was openly acknowledged as a simple, logical explanation of the relationship of God to the earth through the Christos of Henotheism. Fideism philosophy (from Latin fides, faith), is based upon the view that since God is unknowable, the more confusing and complex an explanation is, the more likely it is to be correct.

The simplicity of the Nicene statement was made complex and confusing by the addition that stated that the Christos was actually the resurrected man Jesus made God. This modified Fideistic statement was then enforced by stating that anyone who persisted in believing the rational and simplistic Arian Heresy was himself an anathema to the Church. History records what happened to such people.

Fideism became the basis of establishing Faith as superior to Reason, which broke the relationship between science and government that Constantine had cultivated. Scientists under Church control had to have their reason or logical concepts approved of by the Faith of the Church. This, no doubt, resulted in what is perceived to exist today with Religion being the sole authority for metaphysical phenomena and science allowed to be authoritative only over the physical manifesting of the metaphysical. As for example, science dares not state that energy is a metaphysical power and consider its source or nature, but is quite free to study the physical manifesting of energy. Similarly, science is free to study the physical nature of radiation but not to consider it as Christos or the means whereby metaphysical sources are able to become one with the physical world.

In addition to eradicating the Arian Heresy, the Church still had to suppress the experiencing of Christos or personal inner powers which required forcing physiological changes within its members. Their method, which is now almost worldwide, is to suppress the activity in the lower gut or abdomen that was known to be the center or heart of an individual. The power in the bowels could be largely ignored by labeling the lower portion of the body as filthy and stating that the center of a person was in the blood-pumping organ in the chest. The heart was therefore shifted from the sacral or sacred region of the body to the chest. The sexual muscles that were used for quickening, girding the loins, and empowering the heart became weakened and atrophied with muscle tensions and inner controls rather than response to outer needs.

The powers in the heart were likewise suppressed by teaching that anything intuitive is of an evil power or at least questionable. The old poetic and religious transcendent love of the heart that could direct an individual into finding any desired goal in life became suppressed with duty and judgment. The expression of love was redefined to prescribed methods of caring and charity.

Fortunately, there are still many individuals who are able to find and trust their inner power and accept that there is a metaphysical source of energy, knowledge and strength. Such a source, however, needs to be accepted and identified as Christos by both science and religion. Such an acceptance and identity could assist in forming a better view of reality than exists between the two extremes of those who accept a physical phenomenon without a direct metaphysical source and those who accept a metaphysical source without a direct physical phenomenon.