In the previous material it has been fairly well proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Christianity is a suicidal philosophy or teaching. If taken seriously enough by its followers it will destroy them, and if a whole race or nation takes it seriously enough and faithfully attempts to follow the teachings of the The Sermon on the Mount then that whole nation will destroy itself.

The great Roman nation, the finest civilization produced by the White Race in classical times, in the first few centuries A.D., did take Christianity seriously, and it did destroy itself, never to rise again.

Where did Christianity originate ? If we read the Jewish Bible, the Old Testament and the New testament, we will not get the correct answers. The fact is Christianity is,a and was, a Jewish creation, dreamed up, composed, and promoted by the hierarchy of the Jewish Race, undoubtedly, by the Elders of the Sanhedrin itself.

It is, in fact, an unholy teaching designed to unhinge and derange the White Gentile intellect and to cause him to abandon his real responsibilities of doing that for which Nature created him. It is an unnatural and completely perverted attitude towards the natural surroundings with which Nature has provided us.

Whereas the full impact of it completely destroyed the Roman Empire within less than two centuries after it became the adopted religion of Rome, it is today still an overriding influence hanging like a shadow over affairs and thinking of the White Race throughout the world. It is, therefore, important that we trace its origin, despite the fact that much evidence has been deliberately destroyed and many roadblocks have been p[laced in the way of objectively even considering the evidence that still survives.

Anyone recapturing his senses and looking at that evidence will find hat its origin is much different from what our church fathers today would have us believe. However, let us take at face value what the church fathers and the "Holy" bible are teaching us today. The first page of the New Testament, Matthew 1, immediately makes it clear that Jesus was a Jew and it traces his genealogy all the way from Abraham through David through Joseph to Christ. At another place it gives the genealogy of Mary, and makes sure that we are fully aware that she, too, is a Jew.

Here, immediately, the first major contradiction is revealed, glaringly revealed, that is, if Jesus was the Son of God how could he also be the son of Joseph ?

Anyway, be that as it may, we now look at the disciples of Jesus and the apostles and we find that Matthew, who supposedly wrote the first book in the New Testament, was also called Levi, son of Altheus and was, as so many Jews are, a tax collector in Capernaum. We find that the Apostle Mark, who wrote the second book of the New Testament, was also called John Mark, he son of Mary, in whose home in Jerusalem the early Christians gathered and he was a cousin of Barnabas. We find, that above all, Mark was also a Jew. We now come to St. Luke, who was probably the only Gentile in the group of twelve. Historians regard him as a Gentile physician. However, he was under the complete dominance of Paul, who was a proselyte Jew, and Luke spent most of his life as a disciple traveling around in the company of Paul, the Jew.

We now come to Apostle John whom we find is also a Jew, along with his brothers Peter and James.

We now come to the Apostle Paul, who changed his name from the real name of Saul, born in tarsus, of Jewish parents, and a man who was reared strictly in the Jewish tradition of the Pharisees of his time. Of the 27 books of the New Testament, it was Paul who is credited with writing 14 of them and credited with writing well over half of the New Testament itself.

And so it goes. Of the 12 disciples that Christ supposedly had, all of them Jews with the possible exception of Luke and as we noted he was completely under the influence of Paul. It is more than passing strange that, according to the New Testament itself, the writers, preachers, and apostles of this "New Teaching," as well as the supposed founder himself, are all Jews with very little exception. It is more than passing strange also that the Jews themselves never accepted this highly suicidal teaching but were tremendously active in promoting and foisting it on the White Gentiles in general,and the great Roman nation in particular.

We do not doubt that these Jewish characters were fanatically active in promoting the suicidal new teaching of Christianity, nor do we doubt that they had not only hundreds but thousands of Jewish helpers that were the "Hidden Hand" that promoted the spread of this teaching among the Romans and Gentiles in the Roman Empire. There is, however, serious doubt that such a character as Jesus Christ ever lived at all, and there is, however, overwhelming evidence to indicate he did not exist, but was figment of the Jewish of the Jewish imagination.

The beginning of the Christian era found Rome near the height of her civilization. Her supremacy, in the then known world, was pretty much unchallenged and it was the beginning of a long period of peace. To be specific, Pax Romana (Roman Peace) lasted approximately 200 years beginning with the reign of Caesar Augustus. Rome was highly literate, there were many great writers, scholars, historians, sculptors and painters, not to mention other outstanding men of philosophy and learning.

Yet it is highly strange that despite the great commotion and fanfare that supposedly heralded the birth of Christ and also his crucifixion (according to the bible), we find not a single historian nor a single writer of the era who found time to tale note of it in their writings. Outside of the fabricated biblical writings, no Roman historian, no Roman writer, and no Roman play-writer, has left the slightest hint that he had the faintest awareness that this supposedly greatest of all greats was in their very midst and preaching what is claimed the greatest of all the new gospels.

Whereas Caesar left voluminous writings that are still extant today and can be studied by our high school boys and girls, Christ himself, who had supposedly the greatest message to deliver to posterity that the world has ever known, left not the slightest scrap of paper on which he had written a single word. This, in fact, the biblical literature itself confirms and mentions only that once he did write in the sand.

Today we can still study Cicero;s great orations and writings. He has left over 800 letters behind that we can study to this day. We can study whole books of what Marcus Aurelius wrote, we can study what Aristotle wrote, what Plato wrote, and scores of others wrote that were contemporary with the first beginning of the Christian era, or preceded it. But strangely there is not a word that is in writing hat can be attributed to Jesus Christ himself.

Furthermore, the Greeks and the Romans of that era, and even previously and afterwards, had developed the art of sculpturing to a fine state. We can find busts of Cicero, of Caesar, Of Marcus Aurelius and innumerable other Greek and Roman dignitaries and lesser lights, but nor one seemed to think it important enough to sculpture a likeness of Jesus Christ. And the reason undoubtedly is there was none to model at the time. There were undoubtedly numerous skilled artists and painters at that time, but again strangely enough none took the time or the interest to paint a likeness of this purportedly greatest of all teachers, who in fact was proclaimed the Son of God come to earth. But no painting was ever made of this man, who, we are told, gathered great multitudes around him and caused great consternation and fear even to King Herod of Judea himself.

Now all of this is very, very strange, when, if, as the Bible claims, the birth of Jesus Christ was ushered in with great fanfare and great proclamations. Angels proclaimed his birth. An exceedingly bright star pointed to his place of birth. In Matt. 2:3, it says, "When Herod, the king, had heard of these things he was troubled and all Jerusalem with him." We can hardly gather from this that no one was aware of the fact that the King of the Jews, the great Messiah, was born, for we are told in the preceding verse that the Wise Men came to King Herod himself saying, "Where is he that is born King of the Jews, for we have seen his star in the East and we are come to worship him." Evidently the event was even lit up with a bright star from heaven. In any case, King Herod, we are told in Matt. 3, was so worried that he sent the Wise Men to Bethlehem to search diligently for the young child to bring it to him so he undoubtedly could have him put to death. As the story further unfolds we learn that Joseph heard of this and quietly slipped out in the night taking with him his wife, the young child and a donkey and departed for Egypt. When Herod found out that he had been tricked it says that he "was exceedingly wroth and sent forth and slew all children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under."

Now this is a tremendously drastic act for a King to take, that is, to have murdered all the children in the land that were under two years of age. Again we can hardly say that the birth of Jesus was unheralded, unannounced and unobserved, according to the story in the bible. However, it is very, very strange that this act of Herod, as drastic and criminally harsh as it is, is nowhere else recorded in the histories or writings of any of the other numerous writers of the times. All we have is the claims of those people who wrote the New Testament. In fact, whoever wrote the New Testament invented so many claims that are inconsistent with the facts that they even made a rather glaring error by pulling King Herod into the story. History tells us that in the year 1 A.D. When Christ was supposedly born, Herod had already been dead for four years. He could hardly been disturbed or very wroth about the birth of anybody in the year 1 A.D.

There is further great evidence that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John never wrote any of those chapters that are supposedly attributed to them. What historical evidence can be dug up reveals that they were written much later, not at the time that Jesus supposedly said all those things, but somewhere around 30 to 50 years later by a person or persons unknown. Furthermore, when we compare the first four books of the gospel with each other, which supposedly tell more or less the same story, we find that they contradict each other in so many details that one need only read them for himself to pick them out. I neither have the time, the space, not the inclination to go into all these contradictions. They are too numerous.

I do not contend that it really makes a great deal of difference whether there ever was a Jewish character by the name of Jesus Christ that led to the creation of a new religion to be foisted on the White Race for their destruction. The point is that, in any case, it was the Jews collectively who created and promoted this new teaching upon the White Race and it did destroy the Roman civilization.

Nevertheless, the evidence is overwhelming that these ideas long preceded the Christian era and it was not Christ who came out with them but a Jewish sect called the Essenes who lived on the border of the Dead Sea. It was they who had already evolved the ideas contained in the Sermon on the Mount but have been attributed to Christ. Not only had they evolved the same ideas as set forth in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, but the wording, the phraseology and the sentences were the same and they preceded the supposed time of the Sermon on the Mount by anywhere from 50 to 150 years.

The Essenes were a Jewish religious group living in approximately the first century B.C. And the first century A.D. We have important sources of their contemporary writings in the historian Josephus and also in the philosopher Philo. They are also mentioned by various other Roman and Greek writers of those times in which their religious teachings are revealed in considerable detail. However, in the last twenty years the thousands of Dead Sea Scrolls, many of which were written by the Essenes themselves, reveal a tremendous amount of insight into their religious teachings, and above all, reveal that they preceded and preempted the Sermon on the Mount word for word, so that the so-called "new" teachings of a figure supposedly appearing from heaven in the year 1 A.D. And preaching during the years 3- to 33 A.D. Were neither original nor were they new.

Furthermore, we learn that the Essenes were notable for their communistic society, their extreme piety and purity and their practice of celibacy. They possessed all their worldly goods in common and looked upon private property as an evil which might divert them from sanctity. They engaged in agriculture and handicrafts, considering these occupations less sinful than others. They also practiced baptism, and this practice preceded the the Christian era by at least one hundred. So the Christian apostles can hardly be credited with having instituted the ritual of baptism, as is claimed.

Why, the average reader might ask, haven't we been told more about the Essenes if they were the original practitioners of Christianity? There are two good and overriding answers for that. The Christians on their part, although the early Christian fathers were well aware of the Essene teachings and writings, took every measure possible to destroy them and purge them from circulation. The reason being they did not want their presence known because it would undermine their dogma that Christ was the originator of the New teaching. It would make impossible the claim that this was a great new revelation sent forth by God himself amid the hosannas and singing of angels. The Jews, on the other hand, did not want to reveal the presence of the Essenes because they wish to completely hide any connection between the Jews and the new religious teaching that they were about to administer unto the Gentiles. They even went to great lengths to appear hostile to it.

Before I go further into the highly illuminating and highly interesting Dead Sea Scrolls I want to make just one further point that is that the original manuscripts on which the New Testament supposedly based is always alluded to being translated from the "Original Greek." Since the New Testament repeats over and over again and again that Paul spoke to his flock in Jewish and that Jesus spoke in Jewish and that the Apostles were Jewish, why, then, is it that the manuscripts were all in Greek?

The historical facts add up to this : the Jewish hierarchy and undoubtedly the whole conspiracy was well coordinated and had many, many members and co-workers. It was not written at the time of Christ at all, but the movement was given great promotion by the combined efforts of the Jewish nation. As they organized and promoted their ideas further, these were reduced to writing considerably later than the years 30 to 33 A.D. When Christ supposedly came out with these startlingly and "new" revelations. The conclusions are that they were written by Jewish persons whose identity we shall never know and were written by collectively by many authors, were revised from time to time and not only in their original formation and formulation but have been revised time and time again throughout the centuries to become more effective and persuasive propaganda. However, we want to go further into the teachings of the Essenes and who they were and why their particular teachings were pounced upon by the Jews to be formulated into a well distilled poisonous brew and then fed to the Gentiles.

The Dead Sea Scrolls, which are more numerous and much more revealing than the Jewish press of today has informed us tell us much about the teachings and the life of the Essenes. One of the important things that they tell us about the Essenes is that they vanished from the face of the earth after about two centuries of existance and the termination date being somewhere around the year 100 A.D. They were, needless to say, only a very small sect of the Jewish tribes and not a part of the Jewish conspiracy as such. Being outside of the mainstream of Jewish activity and thought, the Jews nevertheless observed from them that this kind of teaching could ruin and destroy a people. The Jews, looking for a way to destroy the Roman nation, who in the year 70 A.D. had destroyed and levelled Jerusalem to the ground, noted well what these teachings were and decided to perpetuate them on the Romans.

Essenism was really a revolutionary new form of social order, an ideal cooperative commonwealth in miniature. Instead of the Messiah, the ideal of the Essenes was the "Teacher of Righteousness." They established a new cooperative communitarian brotherhood and they were the first religious society to establish and observe the sacraments of baptism and the eucharistic meal. Most important of all they were the firs group to condemn and abolish the age old institution of human slavery. Furthermore, the "Teacher of Righteousness" as promulgated by the Essenes may not have been the first pacifist in history, but he was the first to implement his pacifist theories with an overall practical measure, which if generally adopted, would abolish war. This, of course, was a wonderful religion for the Jews to sell to the Romans, for if they convert the Romans into submissive pacifists they could certainly soon thereafter dominate them in full. And this they did.

The Essenes lived in the area of Qumran near the Dead Sea and according to Philo, the Jewish Philosopher and writer contemporary of that age, "the Essene brotherhood would not allow the manufacture of any weapons or allow within their community any maker of arrows, spears, swords or any manufacture of engines of war, nor any man occupied with a military avocation, or even with peaceful practices which might easily be converted to mischief." Not only does Philo tell us about the Essenes, but also Josephus and Pliny, both contemporary historians, tell us much about the Essenes.

As mentioned before, much is emerging also from the study of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The overriding fact that emerges from the study of the writings of the historians of that time and the Dead Sea Scrolls is this tremendously significant fact : namely that the beliefs, teachings, and practices attributed to Jesus Christ,although not exactly identical in all respects with those of the Essene school, were nevertheless, closer to those of the Essenes than to those of the Bishops of the Ecumenical Council which determined the Nicene Creed of orthodox Christianity.

So we can come to the obvious conclusion that the Christian beliefs and doctrines as supposedly enunciated by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount did not originate at all at that time but at least 100 years earlier from a Jewish sect called the Essenes living near the Dead Sea; that the Elders of Sanhedrin recognized this teaching as being deadly and suicidal; that they further took this doctrine and distilled and refined it into a working creed; the Jews then, with a great deal of energy and tremendous amounts of propaganda (in which they excel), promoted and distributed this poisonous doctrine among the Romans.

Setting this creed down in writing ion what is now called the New Testament evolved over the next several centuries. It was written by persons unknown to us today but undoubtedly of Jewish origin. Furthermore, to give it a mystical and heavenly sent deification, they invented the person of Jesus Christ, and claimed that he was the Son of God. Then, having laid the ground work for this new church, they consolidated that power at a meeting in Nicene, where the creation of the new church was solidified, the creed formalized and given official sanctification.

Thus, in short, was launched the new church and the new religion of "Jesus Christ" which was fabricated out of thin air. Not a single trace of the Jesus Christ personage can be found in authentic history. Nevertheless, this newly fabricated hoax of Jesus Christ, the Son of God this idea, with all its suicidal doctrines, was soon to pull down in ruins the great Roman Empire and the great White civilization that went with it.

Never again did the White Race shake off the control if the Jews. Never again did the White Man regain control of his own thinking, of his own religion, his own finances, nor his own government. Unto this day the White Race has not regained control of its own destiny.

It is the unalterable goal of our new religion, Creativity, and the Creativity Movement, to again have the White Man regain unconditional control of his own destiny and his own future.

To do this we, first of all, have to straighten out the White Man's thinking. That is what this book is all about.