What Kind Of Christian Are You Part 2

Copyright 2005 El-Veasey Publishing Inc.

Paul was a fully-grown man so being "separated" from his mother's womb has to mean spiritually separated from his mother's womb, "the cultural womb". He became spiritually independent of all social, cultural and hereditary influences, of all the things that gave birth to him as a specific person with a specific ego and a specific history in time. That’s why his name was changed from Saul to Paul. It was a new birth, a spiritual birth, a change in ego identity!

"To reveal his Son in me" is the same as that "Spirit of God's Son" that is sent into the hearts all who are open to it. "I conferred not with flesh and blood," means he didn't attempt to verify his experience with disciples or any person, only with the “Spirit of God’s Son” The Spiritual Son, Christ.

The early Jewish Christians' religion was exclusive, ethnic, personal. They practiced circumcision and were fixated on the physical man, Jesus, as their savior.
Paul's view differed from theirs he states, Gal 5:2 "Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. Gal 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law”.

Paul lays it on the line! He says you gain nothing from Christ by being circumcised!
He continues, Gal 5:4 "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. Gal 5:5 for we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. Gal 5:6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love".

Paul really lays it on line! He says if the law justifies you, Christ has no effect on you and you have fallen from grace! Whew! Notice he didn’t say Jesus has no effect into you, but “Christ has no effect into you” meaning that he’s referring to Christ the spiritual man not Jesus!
He explains how being a Jew and being circumcised are not physical, Romans 2:28 "For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: Roman 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God".

Hear that people! Being a Jew is inwardly, within the person, in the heart, in the spirit not in the letter or to be taken literally. He’s expressing the same idea about being a Jew as he does about being a descendant of Abraham or an heir of God in Gal 3:7 and Gal 4:6-7.

He sums up his spiritual view of the matter nicely!

Gal 3:28 “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus”. He's saying even though we're all ethnically different, we're all one in Christ (Spirit). Paul's religion is non-exclusive, non-ethnic, transpersonal and universal!

Jesus agrees with Paul that the inner, spiritual, meaning of the law is the central thing.
He says, Mar 7:18 "And he saith unto them, are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;" Mar 7:19 "Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?"

Physical things can't defile us spiritually only spiritual things. The heart is the Soul. What one eats drinks can't enter the Soul only the body.

He continues, Mar 7:20 "And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. Mar 7:21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, Mar 7:22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: Mar 7:23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man".

Jesus makes it clear that what motivates us from within, our thoughts, desires, emotions, fantasies, etc., is the true cause of evil behavior (and good behavior I might add). He emphasizes the point, "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart". Mat 5:28. In other words, whatever you're fixated on in your heart (your imagination) is the true judge of one's moral rightness, not just behavior. "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment". John 7:24. Whatever dominates one's heart will tend to dominate one's behavior.

There were always two types of religious followers, following two types of Christianity and saviors, the literal-minded Christians following Jesus the physical man. And the spiritual-minded Christians following Christ, the spiritual man! One based on the genetic link of the savior to God, the other on the spiritual link of the savior to God. Paul's idea that having faith like Abraham makes one a true descendant of Abraham illustrates the spiritual view.
The appearance of the physical man always precedes that of the Spiritual man.

Paul illustrates the pattern for us,
1Co 15:46 “Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven”.

The first man symbolizing the physical man is Jesus; the second the spiritual man, is Christ! The thing that made Jesus special was Christ!

This pattern is seen in the Old and New Testaments: Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, Moses and Joshua, John the Baptist and Jesus, Jesus and Christ.
Paul continues, 1Co 15:49 ”And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly”.

Just like the pattern we start life as the natural (physical) man but have the potential to become the spiritual (heavenly) man (or person).

He goes on, 1Co 15:50 “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption”.

Woeooooh! Stop the Presses! Paul says, “flesh and blood” cannot inherit the kingdom of God! How does that impinge on the idea of dead physical bodies being resurrected or rising from the dead? If “flesh and blood” “can’t” inherit the kingdom, I think that pretty much rules it out don’t you? The resurrection must be Spiritual: Our Spirits are resurrected (liberated) from the dead, not our bodies.

Paul continues: 1Co 15:51 “Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 1Co 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed”

Paul says, “we shall not all sleep” meaning die, but shall be changed in the “twinkling of an eye”. If we don’t die and change in the “twinkling of an eye” that means the change is spiritual not physical.

He explains:1Co 15:53 "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.1Co 15:54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory”.

The corruptible and the mortal are the physical body. Incorruption and immortality the spiritual body. The spiritual body is resurrected from the physical body, that’s how “death is swallowed up in victory”. The Spiritual body is immortal and can’t die.
Paul concludes: 1Co 15:55 "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? 1Co 15:56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.1Co 15:57 But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ”.

Again he emphasizes the connection between death, sin and the law! He even says (as shocking as this may be to many of you) “the strength of sin is the law!” but faith in Jesus, the spiritual Jesus, brings victory over death, sin as well the law. I leave the resurrection pattern to simmer in your minds!

1Co 15:44 “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 1Co 15:45 (or a sensory mind and a Spiritual mind)
"And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit”. (The first Adam is the sensory man, the second, the spiritual man. We contain both these “men").

Spiritual Truth frees us from the law and death! Jesus said, "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth". John 4:24 And " And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. John 8:32.

See how the Truth makes you free, like the Spirit makes you free, like God makes you free…

So what kind of Christian are you? Spiritual-Minded or Literal-Minded?

May the Light never cease to Lighten your Minds

http://www.blackmerda.com

What Kind Of Christian Are You Part 1

By El-Veasey

Copyright 2005 El-Veasey Publishing Inc.

There are spiritual-minded Christians and literal-minded Christians!
But first a llittle meaningful foreplay!

Symbolically, the law represents the father, who lays down the law, rules of conduct, discipline and metes out punishment to those who disobeys him or his law. Spirit represents the mother, who gives love, affection, solace, sympathy, understanding and forgiveness to those who disobey the law (the father) through lack of understanding, immaturity or ignorance.

The father symbolizes God, the mother the Goddess; the father discipline, the mother love; the father the masculine aspect of God, the mother the feminine aspect of God; the father the right hand of God, the mother the left hand of God.

The feminine aspect of God had been left out of the male dominated Jewish religion but Jesus brought it back with his emphasis on the less masculine virtues of love, forgiveness, loving one’s enemies, praying for those who despitefully use you and the greater serving the lesser, as in the example of his washing the feet of his disciples. The masculine view is the complete opposite of this view.

The Son or Child represents the harmonious conjunction of the qualities of the Father and Mother, of the Law and Love. The Son or Child is the Savior who represents the future, progress, and the new!

The Spiritual view of the law is for the more mature, independent minded, person not corrupted by the power gained by being freed from the literal interpretation of the law. The literal view is for the immature dependent minded person motivated more by childish impulses than by wisdom and intelligence and who need some external force or locus of control to guide their behavior.

Judeo-Christianly speaking, the law is the old Jewish law of Moses and those early Jewish Christians who were still influenced by that tradition stuck to that tradition of literal obedience to the law. Like religiously keeping the Sabbath or the practice of circumcision as a sign of their specialness to God.

They maintained strict obedience to the law, even after Jesus appeared teaching that, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath: Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath". Mark 2:27-Mark 2:28 (King James Version).

Most Christians reading this, will probably focus more on the "Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath" than on "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath" because you've been taught to view Jesus as different than yourself and everybody else. But in this statement he makes the connection between himself and everybody else.

His saying that the son of man is "Lord of the Sabbath" is the same as saying man is "lord of the Sabbath", that follows logically from "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath". Man was made to rule the Sabbath; the Sabbath was not made to rule man, if you're willing to see it honestly, the way Jesus puts it.

Another question for you to ponder: who is the son of man or what does that phrase the son of man mean?

Obviously Jesus is including himself in the category, man. When he’s accused of breaking the Sabbath he replies, “that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath”. Since he didn’t specify that the “Sabbath” was made for him, personally, that suggests that he means it was made for all men. The same can be said for his reference to “the son of man”. If he was specifically referring to himself, wouldn’t you expect him to say “ I the son of man, am lord also of the Sabbath?” but he did he say that? That suggests that when he’s referring to the “son of man” he means himself and as well as all men.

The literal, interpretation of the law of the Sabbath was that man was compelled to observe it and his soul's salvation depended on his strict observance of it. The symbolic, spiritual interpretation, presented by Jesus was that the Sabbath was created for man's use therefore strict observation of it was up to man’s discretion. Mark 2:27-Mark 2:28.

Jesus' view of the law was spiritual or symbolic, as was Paul's.

Paul elucidates his view for us, Gal 3:10 “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. Gal 3:11 "But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith”.

Paul says no one can be made justified by following the literal law, only by the faith of Jesus Christ. Faith symbolizes Spiritual perception of the law.

He confirms this, "For we walk by faith, not by sight" 2nd Co 5:7.
Walking by sight means by sensory perception, walking by faith by spiritual perception. He states that the law is a curse and those who work under it are cursed! Gal 3:10.

He continues, Gal 3:5 "He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?"

Paul emphasizes that miracles are worked by faith (Spirit) not by the law. He's pointing out the difference between what can be accomplished with a Spiritual perception of the law compared to a literal perception of the law.

He goes on, Gal 3:6 "Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness". Gal 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham". Paul says those who have faith they way Abraham had faith are the "same" as the children of Abraham.

Jesus concurs that a genetic connection isn't necessary to be a descendant of Abraham, He says, "And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham". Mat 3:9.

He's saying that God can make anybody or anything, even stones into to children of Abraham. So don't think you're special because you may be genetically linked to Abraham. Gal 3:7.

Jesus healed and performed good deeds on the Sabbath in contradiction to the literal view of the law and was accused of being a sinner for it. John 5:18 "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God".

Jesus gave this explanation as justification for his behavior. John 7:21 "Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel. John 7:22 Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers;) and ye on the Sabbath day circumcise a man. John 7:23 If a man on the Sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath day? John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment".

Doesn't it sound like he's telling them that they're taking this Sabbath thing too seriously?

What does he mean by "Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment"? Doesn't it sound like He means don't judge his behavior by the literal view of the law because, the literal view is judging by appearance or face value?

He literally broke the law! He healed on the Sabbath! So the accusations against him were correct as far as the literal view of the law goes. But Jesus focused their attention on a "higher" more spiritual perception of the law.
He said don’t judge by “appearance” but by” righteous judgment”, “meaning spiritual judgment”, because although to appearance he was breaking the literal law. He was keeping the “higher spiritual law" of doing what's good or right when needed which transcends the constrictions of the literal view of the law!

Paul contrasts how the law limits us compared to how the Spirit frees us!

He says Gal 4:4 "But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, Gal 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Gal 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Gal 4:7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ. Gal 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. Gal 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Gal 4:10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years".

Paul says they were giving up their spiritual freedom as “heirs of God through Christ’ by returning to observing days, months, times and years or back to the literal observance the law like keeping the Sabbath. Paul says that through faith in Christ one becomes a Son of God and is an heir with Jesus and has the same freedom as Jesus.

Jesus concurs with this view.

He instructed those who have faith, meaning those who accept it, to pray like this, "After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Mat 6:9.

He said pray "Our Father" not his father or my father! I "believe" this means… he means "Our Father" not "his father" confirming Paul's view on the subject that those who accept "the spirit" of God's son into they're hearts are heirs with Jesus!

Paul is speaking spiritually about being a "Son of God" when he says, " God hath sent forth the “Spirit” of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father". He didn't say God sent forth Jesus, into your hearts, but the "spirit” of his son in to your hearts! I take that to mean he sent forth, Christ, his spiritual son into their hearts. Heart = Soul (Spirit) not body.

Paul never met Jesus in the flesh. So his Jesus is spiritual! He's not focused on the physical Jesus but on the spiritual Jesus, Christ. "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me". Gal 2:20.

Saying "yet not I, but Christ liveth in me" isn't that the same as Jesus saying, "Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works"? John 14:10. Isn't that the same experience? Paul calls it Christ, Jesus the Father.

Is Paul talking about Jesus the physical man when he says "Christ liveth in me"? If he was why didn't he say "Jesus liveth in me"? It’s impossible for Jesus the physical man to “liveth” in Paul but not for Christ the spiritual man. The Christ that "liveth" in Paul is the same " Spirit of his Son" that God sends as a salvation to the hearts of all those who are receptive to it.
This same "Spirit of his Son" transformed Paul from a tormentor of Christians to a leader of Christians.

The writer of acts puts it this way,

Act 9:3 "And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: Act 9:4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? Act 9:5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. Act 9:6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. Act 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man".

But Paul describes it like this, " Gal 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace". Gal 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood"

Does this mean that a light from heaven literally shone around him? What is heaven? It's not up in the sky, unless it's a planet! Something happen to Paul mentally and emotionally! He had a spiritual experience! Heaven means the Spiritual Mind! The light a visionary experience! That's why they heard a voice but saw nothing! If that happened today you would say he was hallucinating and those with him shared a group hallucination! But I say was it an hallucination or an elucidation?

Psychologically speaking, a part of Paul that was repressed by his religious upbringing was in agreement with the Christian doctrine and its followers he was persecuting. He was trying to stamp-out in them what he couldn't consciously accept in himself. The more he heard the Christian doctrine and the more contact he had with them, the more stimulated this repressed part became and the more hostile he became toward them!

This repressed part eventually became so stimulated that it burst through into his conscious awareness on the road to Damascus! ("I am Jesus whom thou persecutest"). Psychoanalytically speaking, it's called the return of the repressed! See Freud "Further Remarks on the Neuro-Psychoses of Defense", In which Freud introduced the concept of "the return of the repressed" (1896, p. 170)

This experience was so powerful it had a psychosomatic effect on Paul! He was blinded! A functional blindness, nothing was wrong with his eyes physically and he eventually regained his sight and but became a different person!

The split between Paul's conscious and repressed personalities was erased! He was "reborn!" and became a new man, Saul!

End of part 1

How Many Jesus' are in the Bible?

By El-Veasey
Copyright 2001 EL-Veasey Publishing

Before we get to the meat of the conversation, a little meaningful foreplay.

Do you think that when Jesus said, unless you drink my blood and eat my flesh you have no life in you, he meant his actual flesh and blood?

When a certain Zen master told one of his disciples who understood a certain part of his teachings, "You have my flesh"; and to another, who understood a different part, "You have bones". That all that remained of him was his blood splattering in the air as he stood before them talking to them?

Jesus and the Zen master were both speaking symbolically (using literal sensory objects to illustrate spiritual processes).

Eating Jesus’ flesh means understanding the basic aspects of his teachings. Drinking his blood means understanding the more subtle advanced parts of his teachings. You have no life in you means you have no spiritual understanding in you. The people he was speaking to were obviously alive so he's not talking about literal life when he says "you have no life in you".

But literal minded people are so conditioned to taking everything literally they think he’s talking about actually eating his physical body and drinking his physical blood! (As if when someone says, "I had to go all the way to bum f*#*ck Egypt", bum f*#*ck Egypt was mistaken to be a literal place! Or a spiritual path was mistaken to be an actual path you can put your feet on!).

Literal minded people are so fixated on the literal meaning they can't see the spiritual meaning! If they do catch a glimpse of something spiritual they see it as something that doesn’t matter because they see matter as the only thing that matters. So if it’s not matter, to them, it doesn’t matter!

At the beginning of Christianity there was an on going conflict between the spiritual-minded (later called heretic Christians) and the literal-minded Christians (later called Orthodox Christians).

The Roman Dictator Constantine and newly converted Greco-Roman priests, at the 1st council of Nicea, (in what is now modern day Turkey) created Roman Christianity in the 4th century AD. Constantine convened the council because; the various Christians groups had contradictory beliefs about the nature of God and Jesus and were fighting and killing one another over!

This situation was destabilizing portions of Constantine’s empire, so he ordered all the Christian clergy throughout the empire to attend this meeting so they could try to create some type of standard doctrine that they all could agree on: uniting the feuding factions and stopping the instability and bloodshed.

The spiritual-minded Christians held the doctrine that Christ was a spirit and was only operating through the body of Jesus and that although Jesus’ body could die, Christ, the spirit couldn’t (sounds reasonable to me). The literal-minded Christians, were exclusively focused on the man, Jesus, his death and the resurrection of his dead body as proof that he was the only begotten Son of God or as some thought, God in the flesh!

A vote was taken on which doctrine would be the accepted one and the Spiritual-minded Christians were out voted by the literal-minded Christians and were banished from the proceedings and branded heretics because they wouldn’t accept the doctrine of Jesus, the physical man, as the Christ or the resurrection of his physical body from the dead.

Catholic was chosen for this new brand of Roman Christianity because it meant universal or pertaining to all. There was to be only one God, one Son of God, one church, one doctrine and one creed as there was to be only one Emperor for all the citizens of Rome. This was the origin of the 1st Orthodox Church of Christianity: the Roman Catholic Church

As I said the spiritual-minded Christians (lumped together under the name "Gnostics" and "Heretics") were focused on the spiritual identity of Jesus, called the Christ while the literal-minded Christians were focused on the physical identity of Christ, called Jesus Christ. As if Christ was Jesus' last name when it’s really a title translated from the Greek, Christos, from the Hebrew, Messiah, meaning anointed (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary).

So his name would be Jesus the Christ, or the anointed, not Jesus Christ (anointed). The name Jesus is translated from the Greek, Iesous, from the Hebrew, Yeshua or Yehoshua, or in English Joshua (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary).

Further confirmation that Jesus' real name was Yeshua, the name that the public and most Christians aren't aware of, resides in an article in the New York Times 10-22-2002 edition about a recent archeological find archeologists were trying to link to Jesus. They discovered a burial box with the Aramaic phrase "James (Ya' Akov), son of Joseph (Yosef), brother of Jesus (Yeshua)" inscribed on it.(I think the box was later prove to be fake) Note Jesus' real name translated from the Aramaic inscription into English on the box.

So you see his real name wasn’t Jesus but Yeshua (for all of you Christians who think that Jesus is the only name you can be saved by). Since he was the son of Joseph (Yosef) he would have been referred to as Yeshua Bar Yosef (Bar meaning, son or heir Hebrew). In English his name should be Joshua not Jesus (Jesus=Joshua)Strong's Bible Lexicon.

So why did New Testament Christian scholars translate his name as Jesus instead of Joshua as they did Joshua the son of Nun in the Old Testament whose name is also Jesus?

Was it because in the Septuagint (the original Greek bible or Old Testament, translated from Hebrew around the 3 BC) Joshua's name is translated as Jesus?

Could it be because there were other Jesus' in the Bible, most notably, Joshua the son of Nun, who inherited the leadership of Israel from Moses?

Is it because in an effort to make Jesus and his name unique (the only name you can be saved by according to Christian doctrine) they didn’t want people to know that his name or maybe even he wasn’t really that unique(The only begotten Son of God)?

Here is the meaning of the name Joshua the son of Nun from Strong's Bible Lexicon,

"Joshua = Jehovah is his help, or Jehovah the Savior. The son of Nun, of the tribe of Ephraim, the successor of Moses as the leader of Israel. He is called Jehoshua in Num. 13:16 (A.V.) and Jesus in Acts 7:45 and Heb. 4:8 (R.V. Joshua)".

"The meaning of Nun = "fish" or "posterity" 1) father of Joshua the successor of Moses".

The fish was also the symbol of Jesus and the early Christians. So was Joshua the original Hebrew messiah?

Some scholars think so! See "The Cult of Joshua, Christianity Revealed" by Dr. M D Magee
http://www.askwhy.co.uk/christianity/)

Here's a list of the various names and persons that mean Jesus in the Bible according to Strong's Bible Lexicon.

Jesus (Joshua) 2, Jesus (Justus) 1; 975 Jesus = "Jehovah is salvation" Jesus, the Son of God, the Savior of mankind, God incarnate.

1) Jesus Barabbas was the captive robber whom the Jews begged Pilate to release instead of Christ.

2) Joshua was the famous captain of the Israelites, Moses' successor (Ac. 7:45, Heb. 4:8).

3) Jesus, son of Eliezer, one of the ancestors of Christ (Luke. 3:29).

4) Jesus surnamed Justus, a Jewish Christian, an associated with Paul in the preaching of the gospel (Col. 4:11).


Take special note of Jesus # 2 Jesus Barabbas and the meaning of Barabbas: “Bar means son and Abba means father. Barabbas i.e., son of Abba or a father, a notorious robber whom Pilate proposed to condemn to death instead of Jesus, whom he wished to release, in accordance with the Roman custom (John 18:40; Mark 15:7; Luke 23:19). But the Jews were so bent on the death of Jesus that they demanded that Barabbas should be pardoned (Matt. 27:16-26; Acts 3:14). This Pilate did” (Easton's Bible Dictionary).

Note that Barabbas's first name is left out in these stories.

Jesus was referred to as "the son of the father" but the meaning of Barabbas shows that there were two "Jesus' sons of the father" on trial in the Gospel story! So how can we be sure which one was the "real" Jesus, when the translators left out the fact that Barabbas' first name was also Jesus?

It seems that Yeshua was only translated as Jesus when it was referring to the Jesus the writers wanted us to believe was Jesus, preventing us from seeing that there was more then one person named "Jesus", or referred to as "the son of the father" on trial in the story. Is that why Barabbas' first name was omitted from the story? For more on Jesus Barabbas

(See "The Mystery of Barabbas" 1993 Dr. M.D. Magee http://www.askwhy.co.uk/christianity/0480Barabbas.html).

We should have figured out by the Gospel writers repeated emphasis that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, that there must have been others called the Son of God or there would have been no need for that emphasis!

There was the Greek, Hercules, who had an earthly mother and the God, Zeus for a heavenly father. Or the Egyptian Pharaohs, who were actually considered to be Gods, because they were sons of Gods or the ancient Emperors of China who were called the sons of heaven (God).

But check out this spotlight that Luke shines on whom the original Son of God is while giving Jesus’ supposed genealogy:

Luke 3:38 "Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the Son of God"!

Adam was the son of God? Holy Moly!

Here we have an example of one of the many contradictions between the Old and New Testaments.

In the Old Testament Adam is depicted as a creation of God not a Son of God. But in the New Testament gospel of Luke, Adam is depicted as the original Son of God thousands of year before Jesus!

But the Genesis text plainly states that God created man not a son! Gen 2:7 “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (King James version).

But Luke just as plainly states that Adam was the Son of God and chronologically the first Son of God, showing that the writer of Luke didn't view Jesus as the only Son of God! But in an effort to make Jesus (Joshua) appear special or unique, the Roman Christian clergy made Jesus the only begotten Son of God (whatever that means) to make him distinct from other sons of God. But how many ways can a father (even a spiritual father) beget his sons?

(Begotten is from Beget. Beget meaning to procreate as the father: Sire: To produce as an effect or outgrowth (Webster’ Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary). So all sons of God are begotten by their fathers!

So God had two sons Adam and Jesus! Interesting! But wait I’m not done yet. Check this out!

Gen 6:4 "There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown".

Wow! God had more than one son? More like a few sons! Did you know that? Even more reason for them to invent the “only begotten son” slogan (scholars, and clergy etc.,)

And for all you armchair theologians who think that the title "sons of God" means angels. Angel is from the Greek, Angelos, and literally means messenger (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary) as in "messenger of God", not "son of God" as some of you may have been brainwashed to believe.

If that were true that would make Jesus an angel instead of your Lord and Savior!

It's so easy to turn a “blind” eye and a “deaf” ear to obvious contradictions in our religious conceptions when we accept what we’ve been brainwashed to believe without thinking it through!

The original messenger of the Gods was the ancient Egyptian God of wisdom, Thoth or Tuhuti, who brought the message of wisdom and truth to the people. He’s the original model for the Christian idea of the Holy Spirit. He's also the model for the Greek God Hermes and the Roman God Mercurius, the source of the English word, Mercury.

But let's move on.

As a matter of fact there were many messiahs in the Old Testament (messiah means anointed). All the kings of ancient Israel were messiahs or anointed ones. During their coronation their heads were anointed with oil by the high priest. That's why Jesus was mocked as the "King of the Jews" because the messiah was expected to be a king, like David and Solomon, who would restore the kingdom of Judah to its original glory.

The Jews first messiah in the sense of a deliverer was the Persian king, Cyrus, who set them free from Babylonian captivity as the messiah was expected to set them free from Roman domination during Jesus' time. The prophet Isaiah even calls Cyrus the anointed (Messiah) of God.

Isaiah 45:1 “Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut”.

As I said, an earlier messiah and the forerunner of Jesus, was Joshua the son of Nun, the successor of Moses, who actually led the children of Israel into the Promised Land of Canaan. This places Moses in the position of the forerunner of the messiah. A pattern adopted by the fathers of early Orthodox Church and applied to John the Baptist and Jesus in a successful attempt to give their fledgling new religious cult historical validity, by connecting it to a more established religion with a long textual history.

So you see Jesus wasn't the only Jesus or messiah in the bible!

So how many Jesus’ are in the Bible?

Let me leave you with the list of Jesus' to simmer in your minds!

1) Jesus Barabbas was the captive robber whom the Jews begged Pilate to release instead of Christ.

2) Joshua was the famous captain of the Israelites, Moses' successor (Ac. 7:45, Heb. 4:8).

3) Jesus, son of Eliezer, one of the ancestors of Christ (Luke. 3:29).

4) Jesus surnamed Justus, a Jewish Christian, an associated with Paul in the preaching of the gospel (Col. 4:11).

We may find even be more Jesus' than this if we look hard enough!

May the Light never cease to Lighten your Minds!

Be Ye Therefore Perfect, Even As Your Father In Heaven!

Be Ye Therefore Perfect, Even As Your Father In Heaven!

By El-Veasey

Copyright 2001 El-Veasey Publishing Inc

Mat 5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy
neighbour, and hate thine enemy.Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;Mat 5:45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

Mat 5:46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?Mat 5:47 And if ye salute your brethren only [only your family and friends], what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?Mat 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. (King James Version)

In other words, if you do the things that Jesus tells you to do, you'll be perfect like your father in heaven. (Meaning your spiritual father not your earthly father).

I bet you didn't know that you could be perfect did you?

Most of you have been taught from childhood that the attainment of perfection is not realistic. But here Jesus is, saying that perfection is possible (if you believe what Jesus said) because you are the offspring of your heavenly father, which means that if your heavenly father is perfect, you have the potential to grow up to be perfect like your heavenly father.

Jesus gives us an opportunity to be his spiritual brothers and sisters. He says you can be in his spiritual family if you follow his teachings, because he is also the offspring of "your father in heaven".

That's why Jesus teaches you to start the "Lord's Prayer" with the words, "Our Father which are in heaven"

Mat 6:9 "After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name".

Paul supports this position but with a slightly different perspective the subject, Gal 3:26 "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus". Paul says that if you have faith in Christ Jesus you are a child of God.

He goes even farther,Gal 3:29 "And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise".

Here Paul is saying that if you are Christ's (have faith in Christ) you are an heir of Abraham according to the promise that God make to Abraham.

Gal 3:7 "Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. Gal 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. Gal 3:9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham".

For those of you who may have a hard time digesting this exotic meal (believing you're a child of your heavenly father or that you can be perfect), don't argue with me; argue with the writer of the Matthew. I didn't write Matthew. These are the words attributed to Jesus in Matthew. I'm just shining a brighter light on what's already there. I'm not adding or taking anything away from what is said in Matthew.

Whether you agree or disagree with me is not the point. It's about whether what I'm pointing out is in the text or not. All I'm trying to do is shake-up you mind a little! Get you talking, studying and discussing the issue! To make you look a little deeper, a little closer at what Jesus is saying to you.

As a matter of fact I would really appreciate if you would let me know what you think about this piece, if you agree or disagree with it and why.

Read the preceding verses in Matthew chapter 5 for a more complete view of the subject and the social situation and social context Jesus was speaking in.

May the Light never cease to Enlighten your mind!

What Is The Kingdom Of Heaven Part 2

By El-Veasey

Copyright 2005 El-Veasey Publishing Inc.

Let’s continue,

Matthew 13:44 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; that which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field.

Jesus says the kingdom is similar to a treasure hidden in a field. Like something hidden, that you find, that’s more valuable than anything else you have; and you're willing to all other values for this one invaluable possession.

Let’s go on,

Matthew 13:45 again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls:
Matthew 13:46 Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.

Here Jesus says again that the kingdom is like a man, this time like a merchant, who found an expensive pearl (or the treasure hidden in the field) and sold all he had to buy it. He says the kingdom is like an intelligent man who can discriminate between things of greater and lesser value. This is virtually the same idea as in Matthew 13:44.

Matthew 13:47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:
Matthew 13:48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.

This time Jesus says the kingdom is like a net cast into the sea, catching all kinds of sea life. This is the same idea as the field with the good and bad seeds growing in it. In the field symbolism they separate the good from the bad plants. In this one, they separate the good from the bad sea life and throw the bad sea life away.

So I ask you again does the kingdom of heaven sound like it’s place to you? And for those of you who’ll say, yeah! You may be right about the kingdom of heaven, but the kingdom of God is different from the kingdom of heaven. Well this next one’s for you!

Mark 4:30 And he said, Whereunto shall we liken the kingdom of God? or with what comparison shall we compare it?
Mark 4:31 It is like a grain of mustard seed, which, when it is sown in the earth, is less than all the seeds that be in the earth:
Mark 4:32 But when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches; so that the fowls of the air may lodge under the shadow of it.

So you see here in Mark, Jesus is using the same analogy that’s in Luke 13:19 and Matthew 13:31 except this time, he uses the phrase the kingdom of god instead of the kingdom of heaven. (As he does in Luke also for those of you who didn’t catch it the first time around). The kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God are interchangeable terms for the same thing or experience!

I don't want to bore you but let’s look at a few more verses,

Matthew 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Here it sounds like Jesus is talking about a place called the kingdom of heaven, because his talks about being great and lest in the kingdom of heaven and of entering the kingdom of heaven, but considering what you’ve read so far is he?

Read on,

Matthew 10:7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Matthew 10:8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

Here Jesus says go preaching saying the kingdom is at hand! At hand means it’s here now! As proof that it’s at hand he says, heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils. These were the signs that let his followers know that the kingdom was present there and then, because those things couldn’t be done under normal circumstances.

I "hate" to keep belaboring the point but is Jesus talking about a place?

See if you can put all the pieces of this puzzle together and see what picture it presents to you. In the meantime take a look at how I put the puzzle together and the picture it presents to me. I know this is long piece but bare with me a while longer it may be worth your wile!

So if the kingdom of heaven isn’t a place what is it? Let’s look at Jesus' descriptions of the kingdom spiritually or symbolically.

The mustard seed represents the mind in its immature spiritual state. The tree represents the mind in its mature spiritual state. The birds represent the spiritual awakening of the mind. (Birds are creatures of the air. They fly through the air like thoughts fly through the mind. Air represents spirit because although it’s invisible and vital to life.)

The growth of the mustard seed represents the growth of the mind, from spiritual immaturity to spiritual maturity with all its spiritual powers developed (the birds nesting in the tree). (Luke 13:19)

The man who planted the good seeds and could discern the difference between the good and the bad seedlings. Represents how spiritual wisdom can sort-out the good from the bad thoughts in the mind (the field). And can detect and root-out bad thoughts planted in the mind by someone else (the enemy planting tares among the wheat while the man slept). (Matthew 13:24)

The leaven, leavening the 3 measures of meal until it was all leavened, illustrates how a little wisdom can cause the whole mind to expand until its completely developed through the total process of spiritual development; childhood, adulthood, parenthood; hindsight, insight, foresight; purification, initiation and perfection. (Luke 13:21)

The treasure hidden in the field and the pearl of great price, illustrate how spiritual wisdom is hidden in the mind and how once we discover it, it’s the one thing we should value more than anything else. (Matthew 13:44) (Matt 13:45)

The net cast in the sea illustrates how the mind is like a net that catches all kinds of good and bad thoughts and how spiritual wisdom can sort the good from the bad thoughts. (Matthew 13:47)

The kingdom of heaven appears to be an expanded mode of spiritual wisdom where those so expanded (have entered the kingdom) can heal and do things considered impossible to us in our normal mode of awareness. (Matthew 10:7)

But if you still think the kingdom of God or Heaven is a place, please write and publish your own article showing how you see it; how it all makes sense and how the facts in the text support your conclusion!

But to seal the deal here's one last quote from Jesus that proves the kingdom is not a place.

Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

May the True Light never cease to Lighten your Mind!

What Is The Kingdom Of Heaven? Part 1

What is the Kingdom of Heaven? Part 1


By El-Veasey

Copyright 2000 EL-Veasey Publishing Inc

You’ve heard a lot about the kingdom of heaven but do you know what or where the kingdom of heaven is? I would say that most of you think it’s a place. Some place all good Christians go when they cast off this mortal shell (die). Well let’s see what Jesus has to say on the subject.

Let’s examine how he explains what the kingdom of heaven or God is in a few verses attributed to him in the New Testament.

We find him attempting to give people an idea of what the kingdom is in these words,

Luke 13:18 Then said he, Unto what is the kingdom of God like? And whereunto shall I resemble it?
Luke 13:19 It is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and cast into his garden; and it grew, and waxed a great tree; and the fowls of the air lodged in the branches of it.

Luke 13:20 And again he said, Whereunto shall I liken the kingdom of God? Luke 13:21 It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

In verse one Jesus asks, what is the kingdom of God like? Like means what’s it similar to. He asks what does it resemble? Resemble means what something looks like. (When you resemble someone you look like them or similar to them.)

In verse two he says, the kingdom of God is like a mustard seed or something that grows like a seed, from it’s seed-state into tree or something like a tree, big enough for birds to nest in.

He’s obviously speaking symbolically because mustard seeds don’t grow into trees! He’s making the point that the kingdom of heaven resembles something organic, something that can develop from something insignificant into to something significant. So is he talking about a place?

But let’s look at some other verses, to see if I’m on the right track, or if I’m way out in outer space in my approach to the subject! Let’s look at some verses from Matthew as a comparison and to provide a little more ammo for those of you who think I’m just tripping out!

Matthew 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: Matthew 13:25 But while the man slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. Matthew 13:26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. Matthew 13:27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?

Matthew 13:28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?

Matthew 13:29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
Matthew 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Ok! In verse one Jesus says that the kingdom of heaven is like a man (intelligent like a human) who sowed a good seed in his field. Again we have the imagery of the seed, of something that can go through a process of development and change. He’s saying it’s like a man; it can reason and think. (The man told his servants that an enemy planted bad seeds among the good)

Jesus says the kingdom is like a man who uses good judgment or wisdom. (He tells his servants not to pull up the bad seedlings because they may accidentally pull up the good seedlings too. He tells them to wait until the harvest then they can separate the mature plants from the weeds (tares).)

So is Jesus talking about a place? Do you know of a place that can reason and make choices like a man? I don’t think so. But let’s look further,

Matthew 13:31 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:
Matthew 13:32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

This is just a repeat of the text found in Luke. I don’t think any further comment on it is necessary.

Let’s try another one,

Matthew 13:33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

Jesus says the kingdom of heaven is like leaven. Like Leaven? (We even have an interesting synonymy between heaven and leaven. They’re virtually the same word with interchangeable first letters.)

The kingdom of heaven is like something that can be hidden in something else and has the power to alter that something's original state (the rising of the meal). So does it sound like he’s saying the kingdom of heaven is a place?

(It’s interesting that Jesus says three measures of meal. Three or the trinity symbolizes the three levels of human development: Child, Adult, and Parent.

And the three levels of developmental time: Past, Present, and Future. Or in the ancient spiritual systems the three degrees of knowledge or spiritual attainment: hindsight, insight, and foresight.

3 also symbolizes the 3 degrees of spiritual transformation purification, initiation and perfection. And of course, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.

Let’s continue,

Matthew 13:44 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; that which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field.

Jesus says the kingdom is similar to a treasure hidden in a field. Like something hidden, that you find, that’s more valuable than anything else you have; and you're willing to all other values for this one invaluable possession.

The Power Of Thought forms to Hurt you or Help You!

The Power Of Thought forms to Hurt you or Help You!

By El-Veasey

Copyright 2005 El-Veasey Publishing Inc

Bad luck and good luck are historical thought forms that have influenced the mind of people for thousands of years. People from all cultures believe in their reality. This belief can bring people together in a configuration of good or bad luck that can be beneficial or detrimental to all involved.

If we believe we’re unlucky and expect bad things to happen to us. We may find ourselves being telepathically attracted to situations that confirm this belief.

Gods, Goddesses, Demons, and Ghosts are historical thought forms that can be activated or called up by those who believe in them. Gods can have a beneficial effect on us, while demons can have a detrimental effect on us, depending on how intensely we believe in their power. Not only can they affect those who believe in them.

They can also affect others through the telepathic projection of the good or ill will of those doing the projecting although the ones projecting may attribute this effect to the Gods or Demons. This is how the idea of cursing or blessing someone originated.

God and the Devil are other thought forms created and sustained by those who believe in them.

There has been some controversy about whether demons are real or not or just split-off parts of the possessed one’s personality as in multiple personality disorders.

If we believe that dreams are real then demons are real as real as any vivid dream we’ve ever had. If you’ve ever awakened form a vividly real nightmare or sexual dream, with your heart racing and your palms sweaty. Then you know that dreams are realities in they’re own right, as are demons, they're of a different dimension than waking life but just as real in their effect on us.

Demons and dreams are mental matter. This mental matter is not normally perceivable by the senses, but it has been reported that some Yogis and spiritual mediums can create thought forms, so dense, that others can see them. The less dense the thought forms the more sensitive viewers have to be to see them.

Jesus healed people of sickness by casting-out demons and forgiving sins when sickness was believed to be caused by demons or the commission of sins. People believed Jesus had the power exorcise demons and forgiving sins and they responded to his words of healing and forgiveness with the appropriate responses.

Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, Moses and other cultural heroes, whether they actually lived or not, are all thought forms, unless you believe that they exist now in flesh and blood reality.

Heaven, Nirvana, The Pure Land, Paradise, Hell etc., are all thought forms or mental places. The only way to enter them is through the mind, imagination or dreams.

Now the question is can a thought form (or a free floating complex as the Jungians call it) exist independently of its creator once it’s attain a certain degree of substantial reality? And can we exist as thought forms without physical bodies? (Thought forms are mental bodies)

Although we’re flesh and blood realities we’re more or less perceived as thought forms by others depending on how well they know us. The less they know us the more they impose thought forms over our sensory reality, based on their memories of previous interactions with us.

Even those who know us react to us as a combination of thought forms and sensory reality and only notice the difference between the two when we act in ways different from the memories they have of us. We do this to others also. This is the way people normally perceive one another.

This is the way the spiritually unawakened experience reality, by reacting to their memories of others as if they were actually the others they are imposing their memorized thought forms over.

That's the power of thought forms. They can be just as real as the actual person or thing they are a reflection of.

Cultural thought forms can be even more powerful and even more real in their effect on us, so beware!

How To Walk In The Footsteps Of Buddha

By El-Veasey

Copyright 2005 El-Veasey Publishing Inc

Most aspiring Buddhist think that their quest is to follow the footsteps of Buddha or even walk in his footsteps,

whatever Buddha did they think that they should do. If the Scriptures State that Buddha cut off his locks or that he vowed never to cut his hair or beard again, then that's what they have to do because Buddha did or didn't do it!

So they conform in dress and style to the style and dress they think that Buddha adhered to. They think that by imitating Buddha they will be like Buddha but that's not what they're supposed to do.

What they don't realize is that they're imitating, Siddhartha, the worldly personality of Buddha, because, Buddha isn't a person but an unconditional, transcendent, experience of total immortal being.

This is what Buddha refers to among other things, as the unborn,

("There is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed. If there were not this Unborn, this Unoriginated, this Uncreated, this Unformed, escape from the world of the born, the originated, the created, the formed, would not be possible. But since there is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, therefore is escape possible from the world of the born, the originated, the created, the formed."
(Buddha, "Sermon after his enlightenment" Yoga, Immortality and Freedom, Mircea Eliade, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1970.)

The goal is not to imitate Buddha, but to emulate Buddha. An imitation is a counterfeit, not the real thing. The idea is to become Buddha not to imitate his worldly personality or behavior.

When one becomes Buddha, one will express him or herself in whatever manner suitable for the worldly personality currently being used as a mode of life-expression and it will be appropriate for every situation and occasion.

Although Buddha recommends following his Eightfold path as the way to experience Buddhahood, That's not the way he became Buddha. He became Buddha by an act of willpower and self-determination.

"Gautama sat in a meditative mood underneath the tree from early morning to sunset, with a fiery determination and an iron resolve: "Let me die. Let my body perish. Let my flesh dry up. I will not get up from this seat till I get full illumination".
("Lord Buddha" from the book "Lives of the Saints, Sri Swami Sivananda, THE DIVINE LIFE SOCIETY, 1941)

The Eightfold path is just a vehicle for those of a certain psychological temperament to attain Buddhahood. But those who have a temperament similar to Buddha's can attain the experience of Buddhahood they way he did if they so desire.

Similarly, Buddha wasn't a Buddhist. (Just a Jesus wasn't a Christian), Buddhism was created by the followers of Buddha (just a Christianity was created by the followers of Jesus).

Buddha never taught anyone to be a Buddhist. (And Jesus never taught anyone to a Christian). Buddha taught his followers how to become Buddha. (Just a Jesus taught his followers how to become Christ).

I think that one of the reasons there are so many types of Buddhisms and conflicting types of Christianities existing today, is because their followers are following the teachings of Buddhism and Christianity and not developing the innate Buddha or Christ within themselves as their "founders" taught them to do.

Hui Neng, the 6th Zen patriarch, also taught that one should develop the Buddha within,

"We should work for Buddhahood within the Essence of Mind, and we should not look for it apart from ourselves"
(Hui-Neng, six Zen patriarch, "The Platform Sutra" http://www.angelfire.com/realm/bodhisattva/platform-sutra.html)

So how do we walk in the footsteps of the Buddha?

To walk in the footsteps of Buddha is not to walk in the footsteps of Buddha,

Because when we walk in our own illuminated footsteps we will indeed be walking in the footsteps of Buddha and there are no other Buddha footsteps to walk in!