EC 525

Upon Whom the Ends

of the Ages Have Come…

^{A fantasy for an Apocalypse}

© Ludis Cuckold (2015)

34 Addendum 6

Was St. Paul St. Augustine?

In Matthew 24:14, we read: “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.”

Every Christian missionary knows this sentence, but how many have thought about what it actually means? And why should the End come when “the good news” has come to the whole world?

Is there perhaps something about “the good news” that is not as good as some claim?

If only one explanation of a text is displayed and alternative interpretations are repressed, it ought not to be surprising most missionaries leave their harbor without a compass.

We should note that preaching the ‘gospel’ has nothing to do with preaching ‘Love your neighbor’ or the Ten Commandments. By substituting these tenets, Matthew resorts to language that will fool most people not familiar with practices of the legal profession that works on behalf of wealthy clients. Apparently Matthew has read what St. Paul had to say on the Law (see blog 30 above).

If at a later time the unsophisticated innocent claims that he-she understood ‘gospel’ to mean said tenets, the attorney may insist that there is nothing in the document that supports such an understanding, and click the search button on a computer and open it to the site of The Free Dictionary and point to item One that reads “ 1…. [The Gospel is] The proclamation of the redemption preached by Jesus and the Apostles, which is the central content of Christian revelation….”

Of course, this is but one interpretation of many, but the attorney will insist that his is the only correct one. Go prove him wrong. Unless you spell it out in detail, how is he or his client to know what ‘gospel’ means to you? Moreover, why did you presume you knew what it meant to the other party?

For St. Paul (see Addendum 2, EC 521) as per 1 Corinthians 15:1-8 the Gospel means, among other things, that “3…. Christ died for our sins” so we may be “saved”.

But what does “sins” mean? Are these many evil deeds or is it one done by many?

As I pointed out in Addendum 2, Paul is suspect of being a propagandist on behalf of government tax collectors, who are in the hire of an ad hoc group of princes determined to globalize their rule by setting up governments where such had never been needed before. Of course, it is not the princes, but the people who are compelled to pay for the resulting governments by paying taxes.

If such a plan seemed incomprehensible to people living one or two thousand years ago, it should not seem strange to us today, when similar flimflams are being proposed in Brussels, Washington, and Tokyo. If experiments with so called NIRP (Negative Interest Rate Percentage) rates are successful, government princes in Moscow, Beijing, and elsewhere are likely to follow the example of the West post haste.

The reader will have no problems understanding that NIRP also stands for an alternate way of collecting taxes. With no cash passing through the public’s hands, all government has to do is nationalize the banks, and, Presto!, it gets to suck a little more of our blood than heretofore, even as due to un-Christian schadenfreude the public goes ecstatic that bank presidents are forced to become salary men like everyone else.

Needless to say, NIRP has been as well thought out, as a similar program was in the days of St. Paul, who was a great supporter of secular law. Incidentally, we should not be surprised that Paul traveled not only to Rome, but visited Hippo on the shores North Africa, now Algeria, where he changed his name to Augustine* and invented the notion of original sin (click 2:20).

*According to conventional history, Paul is separated from Augustine by more than four hundred years. Hopefully the reader will remember that I reject orthodox chronology in favor of Anatoly  Fomenko’s  thesis that the chronology of Western history, founded by the Catholic Church,  is a series of self-serving lies.

Why would Augustine do that? Well, perhaps because he had changed his name once already—from Saul, the persecutor of Christians, to Paul the convert to Christianity. But what if Paul was a frumentarii, and the secret service of the Empire persuaded him to change his tactics, and persecute Christians with subtler methods?

What subtler methods? There are many possibilities. For example: by moving to another address, by being elevated to the post of bishop of Hippo, and by inventing, then preaching Original Sin as God’s way of belittling the pagans, the people of the wood.

Interestingly, St. Paul describes his own sin to have been his participation in the stoning of Stephen, a deacon of an early Christian Church responsible for distributing food to poor widows. Was Paul participating in the pogrom because as a frumentarii he had organized it to confiscate the church’s food stores for the Roman legion?