Anathema

The Secret Story of Jesus Before The Holy Gospels Were

Written

by

Roland E Bouchard

Copyright 2007

www.jesusbarabbas.info
This literary work is Dedicated to God Almighty
And His Ever-Living Son, -at Whose Holy Feet
this unworthy Author imbibed the Sweet Elixir of
His Holy Naam or Word, -may I never forget His
Holy Name.
Author’s Prologue

Anathema: The Secret Story of Jesus Before The Holy Gospels Were
Written is a historical-fiction portrayal of three obscure but profoundly influential
men whose names are: Jesus, -but who has been otherwise called only “Barabbas”
instead; Judas the Galilean, -author of a fourth sect among the Jews and principal
protagonist of the generally glossed-over New Testament account of the actual
bloody insurrection that eventually led to the wealthy and educated Jews scattering
themselves abroad, the temple at Jerusalem was razed to the ground and, the nation
ceased to exist; and, Saul of Tarsus, -the actual creator and founder of
‘Christianity’ (along with his cohorts: Mark and Luke and their supporters) behind
the scenes of all that took place ‘in those days’.

It is hoped that this literary work, iconoclastic as it may be, (particularly

among ‘Christians’) accomplishes two things: first, that Jesus Barabbas is
presented in a new and favorable, indeed blessed, light; secondly, that ‘Anathema:
The Secret Story of Jesus Before The Holy Gospels Were Written’ dispels the
many legitimate questions and hyperbolic, incongruous and unrealistic notions
concerning the latter-day “Jesus Christ” that is of Saul/Paul’s epiphany or
apparition that occurred nearly ten years after the crucifixion of ‘the descendant of
David and Jewish messiah’, -in this case that of Judas the Galilean.

“Jesus Barabbas”, written in the original Greek Gospel according or

attributed to Matthew (27:17), - but that His name (Jesus) was removed or omitted
from the Latin translation of the same text (around 390 c. e.) and most of the
subsequent translations thereafter… leaving ‘us’ latter-day peoples with only
‘Barabbas’ instead. Moreover, it should be noted that ‘Barabbas’ is not a proper or
surname per se’ (any more so than is “Christ”), it is what He (Jesus) was called. It
is, rather, an Aramaic appellation, the meaning of which is: Bar = Son + Abba =
Father (as in ‘the Father of us all’ or, ‘God’, if you will). He was ‘the teacher of
righteousness’ and the actual author of ‘Sermon on the Mount’.

Standing on the stage of ecclesiastical history’s most dramatic and

celebrated hour, like a potted plant of poison ivy, Jesus Barabbas appears to have
said nothing whatsoever to anybody, nobody said anything to Him, -nevertheless,
although otherwise portrayed as ‘a notorious robber, murderer and insurrectionist”
(without evidence, much less proof), the Jewish multitude clamored for His release
(supposedly invoking a never before or since ‘custom’ of releasing one prisoner in
honor of the then upcoming Passover), -while, at the same time, demanding the
crucifixion of “Jesus Christ”. However, despite His “notoriety”, no (secular)
historian mentions Him. He is written about exclusively in the Holy Gospels. So
much for His “notoriety”, -this is especially peculiar as it relates (or not) to Flavius
Josephus, -who, otherwise, wrote at great length and in minute detail of much
lesser ‘notable’ men and events of ‘those days’.

Where did He come from? Where did He go after He was supposedly

‘chosen’ by the Jews (in honor of a ‘custom’ never before or since exercised) to be
released from prison, -while at the same time demanding the crucifixion of “Jesus
Christ”? Why was He ‘chosen’ in particular and why the apparently sudden ‘turn
of events’ as it relates to “Jesus Christ” -of whom, only one week earlier, hundreds
or thousands of Jews praised ‘his’ expectant arrival?

Does one believe what one sees with one’s own eyes or what others tell you
what to see (and ‘believe’)? Have ‘books’ and ideas been burned and banned and
therefore ‘know’ only what we see and that there is no alternative?
 How quickly and easily ‘we’ (latter-day people) loose sight of the fact that
“Jesus Barabbas” is ‘documented’ as having been ‘chosen by the Jewish multitude
to be released’ (not by ‘us’ latter-day people, ‘Christians’ and/or otherwise) and,
that, at the same time, also demanded the crucifixion of “Jesus Christ”. ‘They’
obviously had a reason or motive (‘good’ or ‘bad’) for deciding upon such a
dastardly deed. And so ‘a reasonable excuse’ is surreptitiously and cunningly
inserted into the passion narrative… to provide to ‘us’ (who really, it would seem,
have no business in that matter so long ago) with instilling sympathy and thus ‘we’
relate… i.e. “envy”. But, was that the real or only reason or motive for ‘the Jews’
to have acted in such an incongruous matter? In that we weren’t there (neither do
we have all the facts of the matter) -except that we have ‘sympathy’. Our attention
is cunningly diverted away from the insurrection that was raging all around them
and thus we loose sight of the fact that the ‘Holy Gospels’ weren’t written to
provide us with ‘facts’ or history in the scientific sense of that word in the first
place. They were written to provide and instill in us ‘faith’, -never letting the facts
get in the way of the ‘Good News’ story.

‘Envious’ = bad Jews’ (who were actually present and preferred who or
what , ‘we’ latter-day people, assume is the guilty [Jesus] Barabbas…) versus: ‘us’
latter-day people (who were not there…) but who are ‘good’ sympathetic followers
of the supposedly and assumed innocent “[Jesus] Christ” and, therefore are
‘Christians’. Ironically, ‘envy’ (‘jealousy’ and ‘blinding life-long hatred’) really
was the reason… but not of or by all the Jews at that time, rather the envy, jealousy
and blinding hatred of only one man… behind the scenes.

Jesus Barabbas and “Jesus Christ” are inexorably and forever intertwined
cunningly, cleverly and fraudulently ‘documented’, -in the Holy Gospels, -albeit
rightly or wrongly. Latter-day ‘Christians’ are wont to point-out the secularly
historical ‘documents’, -particularly those of the turn of the first century Flavius
Josephus as well as the second century Tacitus and, to a lesser degree, Suetonius.
Indeed, Josephus was the first non-ecclesiastical historian to cite “Jesus Christ”,
and as such, was utilized during the Council of Nicaea (325 c. e.) as ‘evidence’ of
the historicity of “Jesus Christ” -one can only wonder why it took nearly two
centuries to provide this ‘historical evidence’… but I digress.

Purely for edification’s sake, let us look at the noted reference concerning
Josephus’ “Jesus Christ” that immediately follows his “…thus the end was put to
this sedition”. “Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to
call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works -a teacher of such men as
received the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and
many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the
principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at
the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as
the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things
concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at
this day.”

Without much ado, I completely and utterly reject the claim that Josephus
actually wrote the above ‘good news’ nonsense, -it belies the facts of who and
what Josephus actually accomplished in his lifetime and what he otherwise wrote.
He was a Jewish General who fought against the fanatical ‘messianists’… until the
wealthy and educated Jews scattered themselves abroad, the temple at Jerusalem
was razed to the ground (-save the western or ‘wailing wall’) and the Jewish nation
was utterly destroyed in 70 c. e. The ‘historical reference’ regarding “Jesus Christ”
is obviously fraudulent, inserted into the contents of Josephus’ ‘history’, by a
latter-day ‘Christian’, for the sole purpose of establishing the credence of
‘historical documentation’. Likewise, the same is true regarding Tacitus and
Suetonius. In short and to the point, there is no creditable ‘historical
documentation’ concerning the mortal or corporal “Jesus Christ”, -save the ‘Holy
Gospels’… made possible by the efforts of Saul of Tarsus (and his cohorts and
their supporters) who wrote the ‘Holy Gospels’ and created and founded
‘Christianity’.

The long and short of all the references and arguments regarding the ‘spirit’
of “[Jesus] Christ” is simply this; ‘he’ (“if it be lawful to call him a man”) is a
literary confluence of the ‘switched’ “Jesus” [Barabbas]” and “Judas the Galilean”,
on the one hand and, is the immaculately conceived invention or creation, -as a
direct result of Saul of Tarsus -aka the Apostle and eventual Saint Paul’s epiphany
of the deceased ‘descendant of David and Jewish messiah’ (Judas the Galilean) as
the Greek converted philosophical notions i.e. the “risen [Jesus] Christ”, on the
other hand. Jesus Barabbas simply maintains His obscurity (despite His
‘notoriety’) and disappears from whence He came, -anathema (rendering unto God
that which is God’s).

Let me be quick to say that, of course I know and realize that, the
chronology as it relates to both Jesus Barabbas and Judas the Galilean is skewed,
-it was skewed in the first instance i.e. ‘those days’ (not by me). Although Jesus
Barabbas supposedly appeared during the reign of Pontius Pilate (26-36 c. e.) and
that Judas the Galilean ‘rose up in the days of the taxation (6 or 7 c. e.)’, Judas the
Galilean and all those who followed him (including and up to the days of Simon
Bar Korba (Son of the Star) -sometimes called ‘the Prince of Israel’) had only one
common idea and mission: the restoration of the theocracy as in the days of kings
David and Solomon. Many a Jewish ‘messiah’ was crucified, -indeed, thousands
were routinely crucified, -Judas the Galilean is merely identified here as the
‘author of the fourth philosophical sect of the Jews and chief protagonist of the
insurrection’ and thus represents all ‘Jewish messiahs’ (in the political sense of
affirming belief in a theocratic form of governance. (The same may be applied to
Ayatollahs of Islam).

Let us take a brief look at Saul of Tarsus, -his ancestry in particular and
more importantly, his ‘human nature’ as it relates to ‘those days’… particularly as
it relates to ‘the descendants of David’…

Saul of Tarsus is of the tribe (or family) of Benjamin and is the namesake of
the first ‘anointed’ king of the Jews. Born around the time of the initial call for
insurrection by Judas the Galilean (6 – 7 c. e.), young Saul eventually became a
flunked-out Pharisaic student of Gamaliel in his mid twenties and earned his living
as ‘temple thug’ some years later “persecuting ‘Christians”, as it were. (However,
with respect the ‘Christians’, there were no ‘Christians’ to speak of, -only fanatical
followers of the ‘descendants of David and the Jewish ‘messiah’.) Young Saul
possessed a particular and singular view of ‘the descendants of David’ since birth,
-being a direct descendant of his great-great grandfather, king Saul, the first king of
the Jews.

King Saul eventually was rebuked by ‘the Lord’ (for having disobeyed the
Lord’s commandment) and striped of his kingship. Dishonored and shamed as
king, nevertheless, he continuously commanded a large number of men in the
cause of protecting the Jews from her enemies. Eventually, he “fell upon his own
sword”, ostensibly to avoid being captured by the Philistines. This abominable act
brought everlasting dishonor and shame upon his heirs and descendants, -not to
mention permanently barring his heirs and descendants from ascending the royal
throne ever again.
 King Saul was replaced by David (of the tribe of Judah). King David was
succeeded by his son, Solomon. King Solomon was succeeded by his son,
Rehoboam… however, ten tribes revolted away from Rehoboam and/or the
existing theocracy as instituted by David and maintained and enlarged by
Solomon. Jeroboam headed a parallel secular government. This schism among the
Jews continued down through the centuries… into the days of the Roman installed
and supported secular governance of Herod the Great (an Idumean and ‘convert’
Jew).

There is no ‘written proof’, no ‘smoking gun’, so to speak, of particulars as

they may relate to certain individuals and events of ‘those days’. (‘History’, is
indeed, written by the victors.) It ‘appears’ that there is no evidence regarding
young Saul of ever having known “Jesus Christ” personally (except as an
epiphany, apparition or vision, -neither did Saul ever refer to “Jesus Christ”
corporally) nevertheless, I can only suspect that he really did know, and knew very
well, ‘the descendant(s) of David and Jewish messiah’. as he rode into Jerusalem
on an ass that fateful day, -his life-long nemesis and constant reminder of his
present-day failed life and hopeless future. (If I were Saul of Tarsus, given his
ancestry, I would have known ‘him’, -wouldn’t you?) All of Jewry expected ‘him’,
awaited ‘him’, -some with joy in the hearts, -others with dread… except Saul,
-who is ‘seems’ oblivious, -yet “persecutes ‘Christians’ (at a time when there were
no ‘Christians’? Human nature and ‘family education’ and the ‘triumphant
entrance into Jerusalem only one week earlier’ dictates the welling-up of young
Saul’s hatred, resentment, jealousy and envy towards ‘the descendant(s) of David
and Jewish messiah’. I simply cannot even imagine Saul’s ‘ignorance’ concerning
‘the descendant of David and Jewish messiah’… as he rode into Jerusalem on an
ass that fateful day, -his life-long nemesis and constant reminder of his present-day
failed life and hopeless future passing him in plain view.

The actual reality of ‘those days’ is simply this, that, No Jew, ‘good’ and/or
‘bad’, ever knew, or saw or even heard of “Christ”, -likewise, neither have any of
‘us’ would ‘know’ anything about either man, -save from out of the exclusive
pages of ‘The Holy Gospels’ themselves, -obfuscated by Saul of Tarsus.

“Christ” is an anglicized Greek literary term (Kristos), -first written After

Saul of Tarsus, -aka ‘Paul’s’ epiphany of the crucified but risen ‘descendant of
David and Jewish messiah’ and converted into a Greek philosophical notion
around no earlier than 40-45 c. e.

Emanuel Kant once observed, “…it is not the falsehoods that matter, but the
intention behind it.”

Why, or rather ‘who’s intention was it to the render the Holy Gospels
historically inaccurate, its chronology contradictory, confusing, incongruous…?

Although the deafening silence of and by the ‘Church’ during these past two
millennia requires clarification of these issues, alas, I have determined that it will
never come, -it cannot. The modern-day ‘Church’, having whole-heartedly
accepted and vigorously maintains the previous claim that she is the sole arbiter of
‘The Holy Gospels’ as being ‘the inspired Holy Word of God’, -not to mention the
veneration of Saul of Tarsus into sainthood, this makes any current correction or
clarification impossible… except as anathema to ‘Christians’.

But, even that is not enough for me to be prompted to pen this literary work,
such as it is… for it was not until I took the ‘mortal leap’ further and delved into
the mystery of Such a One as Him, that I have come to my own ‘epiphany’
concerning ‘those days’ and these things…

What good might there be to merely denounce one man (if it be “lawful to
call him a man”) as merely a myth and point to another man in speculation instead?

That Jesus Barabbas surely lived and walked among humankind (not only
merely among the Jews exclusively in ‘those days’)… Such a One did before. The
unrealized history of man indicates He does so today. He has always lived and
continues to walk among humankind.

Either He did exist or He didn’t… either He does exist or He doesn’t. It

matters not one jot that He did exist if He doesn’t exist today. Who would seek
medical care from Hippocrates for a broken arm today? Who would question
Moses in a legal matter? Who would receive wisdom from Solomon? It is no less
absurd to assume deliverance from ignorance and find salvation and grace from the
pages of a book about a past Master or Lord or Guru or Saint of the Highest Order
(call Him whatever you will).

Is a map an actual place? Is truth the written pages of a book?

Like a lighted Candle is ablaze, He comes to light another, becomes spent

and is no more. The Light anew shines the same as it was before.

‘Truth is above all, -but true living is higher still’. It is in life that we may
experience pleasure and pain; it is in love that we may know right and wrong, it is
in light (our daily life) that we may find our way.