Print This Page

The Origin of the Lie

  (The following is excerpted from Dr. Husfelt’s forthcoming book The Greatest Lie Ever Told - a Manifesto for a Religious Revolution and a New Consciousness) 

“This All, which you see, which encompasses divine and human, is One, and we are but members of a great body”

Seneca 4 BCE – 65 CE


This statement of Seneca’s verifies that there was knowledge of the oneness of all during the time of Jesus. There is no evidence at all to support the contention that Jesus believed himself to be the one and only fully divine one. But that is one of the pillars of Christianity. The whole liar’s game of Saul’s began with the story of Jesus’ anointment.

Jesus was anointed by one Mary of Bethany—the Magdalene. In the Jewish faith “both king and high priest were anointed and were thus a meshiha, a messiah.”[i] Messiah in Greek is Christ or Christos. Thus we end up with Jesus Christ and the term Christianity. Not Jesus the anointed or Jesus the Christ but Jesus Christ—“a purely functional title distorted into a proper name.”[ii]

The claim by Saul that Jesus was fully divine was a lie. But why the anointment? Could Jesus’ anointment by the Magdalene have had a deeper meaning? Could it have been an acknowledgement of his unique humanness and role as prophet and messenger? And could it have been a statement of his divine mission and an outward sign of his divinity within—the divine spark?[iii]  In addition, why was the anointing done by a woman and not by one of his male disciples? Could it have been a symbolization of the sacred marriage, which signified oneness?

Anointing with oil generally meant a person or object was ‘set aside’ for divine service. This was a form of sanctification identifying a person as a priest and/or king—a messiah. This sanctifying practice extends back to the goddess tradition of the Near Eastern religions where “anointing the head of the king with oil was a ritual performed by the heiress or royal priestess who represented the Goddess. In Greek, this rite was called the hieros gamos or ‘Sacred Marriage.’ The anointing of the head had erotic significance, the head being symbolic of the phallus ‘anointed’ by the woman for penetration during the physical consummation of marriage…. Through his union with the priestess, the king/consort received royal status, he became known as the ‘Anointed One’—in Hebrew, the ‘Messiah.’”[iv]

It would appear Jesus and the Magdalene had a special relationship for her to have anointed him. This special relationship was as husband and wife. Being referred to as Rabi indicates that Jesus was married and the Magdalene would have been the most likely candidate.

But by what authority could Mary Magdalene anoint Jesus? By all accounts, it would seem that she was of a royal lineage of the Tribe of Benjamin and possibly a priestess in the manner of the Egyptian cult of Isis[v]. Being of a royal lineage and a priestess meant that she had the authority to anoint Jesus.

But there is more to the anointment than it seems. Jewish by birth, Jesus was bringing a different message and interpretation of the Law of Moses contrary to the Temple priests. Even though “the gospel accounts cannot be read as historical documents, the impression they give is that Jesus, like the gnostics[vi], was not happy with the effects of organized religion in the first place. Many of Jesus’ actions and teachings, as portrayed in the gospels, are strongly critical of contemporary Judaism. Jesus is pictured as preaching a message of spiritual love rather than one based in the Mosaic Law; he breaks the observance of the Sabbath and criticizes religious officials for blind adherence to custom while ignoring the reality of the spirit; like a rebel reformer, he casts the money lenders out of the Temple; he accuses the Pharisees of taking the keys of knowledge and hiding them; and he teaches the mysteries of ‘the kingdom within,’ the mysteries of transformed consciousness, rather than expounding teachings to be upheld by a priestly class.”[vii]

Being outside the acceptable framework of Judaism, Jesus needed acknowledgement of his divine mission and message. He needed a legitimacy of his authority as a prophet; he needed to be anointed. However, as a symbolic priest-king and prophet, he was bringing something unexpected—a message of equality and freedom of the mind and spirit based not on human laws but on Natural Law. 

Jesus was not bringing a physical revolution to restore the Jewish kingdom from the yoke and the oppression of the Romans. This was what the Jewish people wanted and expected of their messiah. They wanted a liberating monarch, a warrior-king messiah riding a white horse to lead them, not a messiah spouting philosophy and riding on an ass. But Jesus knew in his heart that the purest, and in some ways the most radical, means to a revolution is to transform the consciousness of people—a freedom that no tyrannical state can suppress.

Tilting at windmills is always difficult and dangerous. His “‘libertarian’ message apparently did not go over well with the authorities in charge.”[viii] And it seems that in one way or another, Jesus’ total plan didn’t work out as he thought it would, and the rest is history. A history that is not an account of truth, but a history based on a lie—The Greatest Lie Ever Told.

It would have been easy for the liar Saul to corrupt what he had heard about Jesus’ anointment and use it as an opportunity to change Jesus’ true message, that we are all divine as well as human, into one where Jesus became fully divine, the ‘Christ’— the sole anointed one of God. “The term ‘Christ’, to many Christians, signifies everything that the Church teaches about Jesus, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the anointed one of Israel, the Messiah.”[ix]

Saul used ‘Christ’ as a proper name implying that Jesus had a double nature as fully human and fully divine. But this is an oxymoron—an impossibility. We are human and we do have a divine spark within us that needs to be awakened,[x] but that does not make us fully divine.

What resulted from this lie was an incarnation doctrine where “the Two Natures were so intrinsically fused that Jesus was simultaneously all human and all divine – an utterly impossible combination of opposites quite beyond anyone’s capacity to understand or explain. And yet this incomprehensible notion continues to be voiced from pulpits, and congregations and men of the cloth take it for granted.”[xi]

Can you see the very slight difference, but a totally different meaning, between this incarnation doctrine and Divine Humanity where human and divine interpenetrate resulting in not being fully one or the other? Saul promoted the lie that Jesus was the Son of God—fully human, fully divine. This was directly opposite to Jesus’ true message that each one of us is human and each one of us has the spirit of God within. Think for a moment how different the world would have been over the past 2000 years if Jesus’ true message had been spread and not the lie of Saul’s.

[i] Michael Baigent, The Jesus Papers, p.38

[ii] Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln, Holy Blood Holy Grail, p. 327

[iii] Leviticus 8:10 “And Moses took the anointing oil, and anointed the tabernacle and all that [was] therein, and sanctified them.” Sanctification: “the procedure for making a person, place, or thing sacred.” Jonathan Z. Smith, The HarperCollins Dictionary of Religion, p. 957 Anointing = Sanctification = Sacred = Divine.

[iv] Margaret Starbird, The Woman with the Alabaster Jar, p. 36

[v] Universal Mother Goddess

[vi] Seekers of the Mystery through direct knowledge or gnosis

[vii] David Fideler, Jesus Christ Sun of God, p. 171

[viii] Ibid, p. 171

[ix] Douglas Lockhart, Jesus the Heretic, p. 42

[x] All things in creation have consciousness. For example trees have consciousness. This consciousness is of an oneness of existence; there is no separation. Thus, there is no need for awakening. However, human beings have a consciousness that views things dualistically with an egocentric self that only sees separatism. The divine spark represents the consciousness of unity or oneness. Thus there is the need in humans to awaken it. This then awakens us out of our ‘sleep walking’ state of separateness into an awakened state of oneness. And as in all other things of creation, the awakening in humans is a gradual possess that may eventually result in enlightenment even though one will still have human frailties.

[xi] Ibid, p. 44


Previous page: Vesica Piscis
Next page: The Lie of Salvation