Excerpts from 'The Gospel of the Religion of Truth'.

I am including a bit of the Gospel of the Religion of Truth here for people to read.   This is to show you that the gospel contains what you won't find anywhere else.   It is, I believe, genuinely new with significant insights.   If you want to read the whole gospel, you will have to download the complete PDF and it will cost $5.00.   This is to help pay for the upkeep of this site, which I am currently carrying all on my own. 

The fundamental differences between modern Judaism and Judaeo-Christianity are found in the original poor articulations of Zoroastrian concepts in Judaism and the more studied Neo-Platonic articulations applied in Early Christianity, both Judaeo and Gnostic.  We will go into these in detail later and they are very important.   The problem is the origins of these religions are exceedingly complex and lost to history because the earliest texts and histories were willfully and diligently destroyed by the Church upon its ascendancy as the ‘supreme religion of Rome’ after the Nicene Council.  One can also only wonder how many texts covering this very subject were in the Alexandrian Library only to be lost to the several fires, calamities and censorship of those early centuries.  But evidence enough exists from such finds as the Nag Hammadi collection to show an intense ferment of divergent ideas from the West and the East most often couched in Hellenistic stylings, if not actual substance of systematic logic.

What is most important, is to understand there were probably TWO important sources combining to form the original Christianity, which are not normally acknowledged.  These are;

1) Independent Greek logical investigation of the Cosmos (i.e. Plato and Euclid) and
2) Greek Study of Persian Zoroastrian Cosmology (unknown Greek Scholars).  

The addition of Judaism to Christianity was a deliberate and cynical adulteration of the original ‘magnificent work’.  It happened when the new religion first made its way into Roman Palestine where it was seen as a possible tool of subversion of Roman rule by religion by the Temple Elite.  Most importantly, it was then further altered by the low Greeks who were the first missionaries of this religion to the West - Paul ( a Greek Pharisee and later Nazarene) and his disciples, who quickly realized they could use the new religion for their own benefit instead of for the Temple elite.   In essence, the religion was hijacked - twice.   Later, this Jewish version (Nazarene/Pauline Christianity) was further adulterated by folding into it  Mithraic practices as a spur to attract converts from Mithraism.  The end result was Judaeo-Christianity which then set about destroy all records and evidence of Mithraism, Gnostic Christian sects and any thing which might betray the official story of how Judaeo-Christianity came to be.  The greatest secret which needs to be disposed of was the original and more pure Religion of Truth which had nothing to do with a character named Jesus or with the Jewish religion.   

So to unravel this Dark Age mess and to find the compelling elements of Original Christianity, or the Religion of Truth, we need to go back to the beginning and look at first, Greek Geometry and then its application to Nature and the Cosmos and then its application to Zoroastrian Cosmology. Because truth can be discovered independently by different people dedicated to seeing ‘what is really there’, it is quite possible to rediscover this original religion and be close on the mark to its original articulations.  

CHAPTER 2
GREEK MATH.

Geometry was well understood by the Greeks as the ‘study of all Universal Form, both concrete and abstract’.  The work of Euclid is carefully concerned only with Geometry and most importantly, the method of proofs for the statements.  Other Greeks would, and did, consult the same study and used the methodology of high and absolute integrity proofs.   These include famously, Archimedes and Apollonius but also Plato who used geometry and its systematic logic to illustrate and establish his dialog style of logical argument concerning human relations and morals.  A generation of his students founded what is known as Neo-Platonic Philosophy. These ancient scholars DID use that geometry and its methodology of systemic logic to write texts studying theological/cosmological ideas.  It was the very hallmark of ‘Greek Thought’ and one might add, it was highly admired and often imitated by writers from other cultures with varied results in style and substance ranging from the sublime to ridiculous, as is often seen in the Gnostic texts of Nag Hammadi.

Euclid’s Geometry begins with Formlessness (a point), then the smallest form (a line) and builds up to the most complex forms depending on utter proven consistency of construction.   It is referred to as ‘absolute’ geometry, meaning, if one part of it is found to be wrong....the whole thing is wrong.  In two thousand years since, NO ONE has found an error in the actual geometry and it is still used, today,  in describing General Space in Astrophysics.   Some readers here may refer to the ‘other geometries’ like Riemann’s Geometry and to Gauss’s finding of standard application of Euclidean geometry to survey in the 18th century were wrong (i.e. rectilinear line-of-sight triangles in earth survey did not sum to 180 degrees ‘EXACTLY’).   But this is only because Euclid was writing abstract concepts of rectilinear triangles in a flat (2 dimensional) space.   They would no more work for Euclid were he to apply that geometry to a sphere in his day....and he KNEW this even as he wrote his geometry.   To this can be added another very important observation that, as far as I know, I never seen anyone comment on.  Mathematicians often disguise their method in order to preserve their own prestige and safeguard their livings by obscuring ‘how they arrive at some mathematical discovery’.  The French Mathematicians, Fermat, was one of these coy individuals, for instance.   If everyone knew how to find something out for themselves, why would they need to consult (and pay) the ‘original expert’?  

Euclid’s SECRET was that there are ONLY TWO simple lines which may be used as ‘elements of discovery’ to comprehend all aspects of form.   These are the simple curve and the simple straight line.  A simple line does not change direction.  There are no others...in the entire Universe.    And guess which one Euclid used in his book ‘Elements’ to describe form?  It was the straight line and he implied (but never stated) that the curve was the result of infinite straight lines converging.  THIS IS FALSE.  It doesn’t affect his geometry (which is absolute) because this is omitted in the a priori’ section of his Geometry (the definitions).  This falsehood is STILL allowed to stand in modern mathematics, because it makes an artificially easy ‘one-to-one’ match up with numbers (Measurement).   It is a fudge...an error of convenience - But it is a BIG one.  

Euclid’s geometry was all about the description of FORM, without any reliance on MEASUREMENT.  Modern (Analytical) Geometry is based on discovery of form by RELIANCE on measurement.  So the error is allowed to proliferate in all the modern maths.   That is why mathematicians will often say that mathematics is ‘artificial’ but remarkably good at describing the Universe.  The part that describes the Universe is the part that is ‘pure geometry - without measurement’ and the artificial is the ‘cheating method of discreetly measuring some form’.  In Euclidean Geometry, only two tools are allowed....a compass and an UNMARKED straight edge (to forbid discreet measurement).   This is a hard-cast Euclidean rule - NOT to be violated.

The TRUTH IS  - It is the curve which is the primary element of form, not the straight line.   This has been proven 4 TIMES in the History of Western Mathematics.  First, in the 16th and 17th centuries by the mathematicians Mohr and Mascheroni, working independently of each other found that all of Euclid’s geometry could be worked with the compass, ONLY.    Later, in the 19th century, two very prominent European mathematicians, Poncelet and Steiner, sought to prove the opposite; that all of Euclid’s Geometry could also be accomplished with ‘a straight edge, only’.   They both failed.  Their independent findings were that, “FIRST GIVEN A PRIMOGENITOR CIRCLE, all of Euclid’s Geometry could THEN be accomplished with a straight edge only”.   The supreme takeaway from these people’s work is the straight line is an ‘interior, only (dependent) element to the circle (curved line)’.  It is astonishing that this TRUTH is all but unknown among the general population of the modern world.    The straight line is an inferior and dependent line to the curve!  But it is made the artificial ‘superior’ element of discovery, because it is convenient (critical) for purposes of measurement, the reason is that it geometrically mirrors the mono-directional single dimensional number line of arithmetic.  It is a calibration of numbers and form, but an artificial one.

I include another observation here which has great importance later on.  I include it here first because it is a fundamental facet of Geometry, but is never commented on.  It is the nature of dimensions in measuring and describing the Universe.   The word ‘dimension’ simply refers to the ‘measurement of a distance’.  It is not about ‘spinning doors in Space and spooky music’.  A dimension refers to the ability to apply a straight ruler in a mono-direction for comparative distances.  The Greeks quickly found this Universe to be 3-dimensional by the following means.  

The introduction of another well-known term, usually very poorly defined in academic institutions, is necessary.   That is ‘Right Angle’.   In school, children learn that a right angle is ‘90 degrees’...which means nothing, geometrically.  A right angle REALLY is ‘two intersecting lines, whose opposite extremes are MOST different from each other’.  For instance, a line (or ruler) which has the opposite extremes of ‘East and West’ is MOST DIFFERENT from a line whose opposite extremes are ‘North and South’.  A line which is only ‘Different’ like NE and SW...is a slope.   The slope may be described and mapped by comparison of  measurements along two rulers which are ‘most different’ to each other.   This is the basis of Cartesian system of mapping and coordinates.

The maximal number of ‘most different (right angle) straight line rulers’ in any give location in space are three; Horizontal, Vertical and Depth (forward and back).  Any attempt to place an additional ‘right angle’ in a 3-dimensional group of right angle rulers cannot be done.  These extra inclusions would only be slopes to the maximal existing three.  This straight-forward observation is the basis to the understanding of a 3-dimensional Universe.  But the Greeks were puzzled by the notion that time could also be measured and was deemed critical to the common practical and technical calculations.  They cautiously theorized that ‘Time’ was the 4th dimension...but could not prove this and so left it as a cautionary.  It was to try to include time in his Special Theory of Relativity which caused Einstein to seek out the help of Riemann’s Special Geometry.  Riemann’s non-Euclidean geometry concerns a geometry of curves and this leads to an observation about the nature of dimensions that no one, as far as I know, has ever articulated in Geometry.  It is this....

    “In order to measure in a lower dimension, you need to do this with tools and methods from a higher dimension.   For example, ‘To measure a straight line (one dimension) you need a compass, which is a tool of 2-dimensions’.  To measure 2-dimensional forms perfectly, you need a tool of 3-dimensions.   Euclid disallowed the use of a 3rd dimensional tool and as a result, the Greeks had three impossible constructions: The Squaring of a Circle, the Trisection of an Arbitrary Angle and the Construction of the Enneagon (9-sided regular polygon).”  

This baffled mathematicians for centuries because all three seemed ‘so reasonable’ - even necessary, to accomplish.  What was not understood is, you can easily accomplish these...with a 3-dimensional compass.  For those curious, imagine a regular compass which has a disc (wheel) where the pencil would normally be and you would mark on the disc where you start measuring a curve and where you stop.  You would set the compass at the center of the circle to measure the radius to the circumference and roll the wheel along the curve, measuring the amount of rotation on the wheel.  A 2-dimensional compass measures straight lines.   There is no tool for measuring curved lines.  You need a 3-dimensional compass to do that.  That was the self-limiting factor, even flaw, in Euclidean geometry.  And the critical lesson missed all these centuries was that YOU HAVE TO MEASURE THE DIMENSION BELOW - BY MEANS FROM THE DIMENSION ABOVE.