GALILEAN CHRONICLES

 

The problem of the recreation of the life of the Apostles, in this specific case the life of St. Peter, has as its first obstacle the tradition that the centuries have raised on his person. Let us say that the phenomenon of protection of the predetermined images, defended by tradition, has its positive point of view against the manipulation of those who tried their luck and ended up publishing a literary iconography totally foreign to the real model. But this positive sense should not obviate that our world having been subject to a growth of intelligence from poor principles, the enrichment to which this growth leads is the necessary revision of the positions in order to reconstruct the objectives of knowledge according to the freedom of those who seek only the truth and never the use of truth in the service of secret, private or even public interests.

It is true, complex causes arise in the midst of understanding why the church itself, defending the truth, was incapable of reconstructing the life of its saint par excellence, St. Peter. Our work has to look at the truth following the Law that encourages us: "There is nothing hidden that will not be discovered and come to light". If what comes to light is a cause of terror for those who do not love the truth, this is the problem of those who tremble before the truth; to the children of the truth its effect on the stranger is not a cause of objection and even less a problem.

Let us not forget that the people of past millennia tended by inertia to be conservative - not to confuse this conservative tendency with their political affectation -, and by all means tended to think the less the better, slaves as they were to their circumstances. And as far as those who declared themselves their masters, employers, pastors, etc., were concerned, they were too concerned with keeping them "slaves", "servants", "workers", "good citizens", to waste time finding out if Peter was a relative of Jesus and to what degree that kinship corresponded to him, for example.

We enter into the Mystery of the Life of Peter the Fisherman from a sincerely apocryphal position, - well, apocryphal is apocryphal what is said apocryphal: no, because I am who I am, I do not sign with the name of another -, but it is, in truth, profane, not at all professional, and that, therefore, is not subject to any historical rule nor is it indebted to any method of investigation, more than anything because not being in the pay of anyone I owe no one, and having no other authority over my thought than the Truth, no one can impose a dot or comma on me, and only to the Truth do I refer my thoughts. And as Truth is what it is, and if I am not mistaken I am a child of Truth, I fear that my thought comes in the manner of the fruit of the flower, that is to say, determined by its own nature. This particular reasoning of mine does not seek to please anyone, but, as far as possible, to lay the foundations of my research. It is necessary to begin, then, at the beginning, by the Man, by that fisherman, brother of Andrew, to whom one day the latter announced that they had found the Messiah. The exact words according to someone who knew the two brothers are: "Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, was one of the two who heard John and followed him. Then he found his brother Simon and said to him, 'We have found the Messiah, which means the Christ. And he led him to Jesus, who looked upon him and said, "You are Simon, the son of John; you shall be called Cephas, which means Peter". Immediately, according to Matthew, Jesus withdraws into the desert, where he is followed by Andrew and John for a day, returning home to tell the news to his brothers. When Jesus returns from the desert he begins to gather all his Disciples and they all follow him, all going to Canaan, where the Mother of Jesus and the brothers of Jesus were, and to whose wedding of these relatives of Jesus and his Mother all the Disciples are invited.

It is the third day, according to John.

And we already have all the Disciples at the famous wedding of Cana or Canaan, where Jesus performed his first miracle. From there they immediately went down to Capernaum "and stayed there for some days".

John immediately cuts his Gospel in Capernaum and from the Beginning he flies to the End, Jerusalem, wanting to make it clear that from the beginning Jesus knew the End, and nothing and no one in this world could close the way to the Cross. The Lamb of God had been born to be sacrificed in atonement for all the sins of the world, committed in Ignorance, and so it was to be. At the beginning it was impossible for the Disciples to understand Jesus; only after the Resurrection could they see Christ in Jesus, and hence the colossal leap from the Beginning to the End with which John breaks all the molds of making History and surprises the whole world by transposing dates in time.

The Evangelist - in the case of the dynamic succession: Baptism, Desert, Wedding, Capernaum, Jerusalem - is not looking at man but at the Spirit that was in man. But we, who are his readers and not his counselors or his interpreters or his translators or even his equals, and having seen this, we stay in time and see how people from different localities, for Jesus and his brothers were raised in Nazareth, hence he was called a Nazarene, and Peter and Andrew, raised on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, for they were fishermen, curiously find themselves at the same wedding feast, enjoying the same wedding celebration. Point without importance, or at least it has never had it until now, but that to us, perceptive eyes that scrutinize the interiors of the stones, serves us as an indicator and, knowing the Jewish social structure, very similar to the traditional Christian, because not in vain Christianity inherited the sense of life of Judaism, except for the Christian Faith, it is understood, we must conclude that the disciples of Jesus and the Family of Mary of Nazareth were in Canaan of Galilee, according to the Evangelist, and it is too late to doubt his word, not by chance, nor as a result of being exclusively following Jesus, but celebrating the wedding of a common relative. That is, the Jesus who "walking by the Sea of Galilee saw two brothers, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea, for they were fishermen; and he said to them, 'Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men. And they immediately left their nets and followed him"; That Jesus who came to the boats of Peter and James, the same Jesus that they were all relatives of the bride and groom in honor of whom Canaan was celebrating his wedding.

From this point on, the sequence presented by John in his Gospel is as follows: Jesus is baptized and the Baptist reveals to Andrew and John: Christ in the son of Mary of Nazareth. Immediately Jesus withdraws to the desert, from where he returns to call his first Disciples, with whom he attends the wedding feast in Canaan. It is not the Hour of Jesus but the time to unveil himself before his future Apostles and let them see the Prophet announced by Moses saying: "Yahweh will send you from among your brothers a prophet like me, whoever does not listen to his word will be cut off from his people". If at first, when Jesus said to them "Follow me and I will make you fishers of men" the Four Brothers could not understand exactly what he was talking about, after Canaan what Peter and James had always known, that the son of Mary was the legitimate living heir of the Crown of David, was confirmed forever.

And we move on. John is at the Jordan; the multitudes of sinners go to him to be baptized, and the day comes when he is approached by the One of whom his God had told him: "On whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and resting on him, he it is that baptizes in the Holy Spirit". Our question is logical: what did John see, for it is said: "And I saw". It is St. Matthew who comes to help us.

Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized. John opposed him, but finally he bent his knees and allowed him to be baptized. When Jesus was baptized, he came up out of the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon him...

New question: Did John alone see it - the dove - or was it seen by all those who were there? To which St. Luke answers with his usual clarity: And it came to pass, while all the people were being baptized, that, when Jesus was baptized and was praying, heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended in bodily form, like a dove.... That is, it was not a vision, it was a dove of flesh and blood that alighted on Jesus, and this was the visible sign by which the Baptist saw, and bore witness "that this is the Son of God". A sign that everyone who was there that day saw and that, apart from the amazing fact of finding a dove in the desert, no one gave it the importance that the dove had for the Baptist.

For, indeed, since when do doves fly in the desert? Perhaps we would have to ask a bird lover to explain to us if this behavior is typical of a dove, that of wandering in the desert. The answer as if he would give it to us: Yes, if it is a homing pigeon.

Some will say to me, what is the importance of a pigeon playing the role of Jonathan Livingston Seagull and for once in the History of the Universe, a bird serving its Creator as a messenger? I will answer that it would not be the first time, already on another occasion another sister of this dove of the desert served its creator carrying in its beak an olive branch, as it is written speaking of Noah. The importance looks to the banishment of the imagery of this picture of a dove mysticoid, not carnal, emerging from the ethereal heavens to be seen exclusively by the Baptist. Attack I undertake on the grounds that his word would have had no value as a witness before the ears of those who heard him testify, saying:

"I knew him not; but he that sent me to baptize in water said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and resting upon Him, the same is he that baptizeth in the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bear witness that this is the Son of God". A vision that St. Luke specifies, as we have seen, clarifying that the Sign came in the form of a dove of flesh and blood, so that all those present, including the brothers of Peter and James, had eyes to see what the Baptist was seeing, although they could not understand the meaning of this event; a dove crossing the desert and coming to alight on Jesus! and they would never have penetrated its meaning if John had not unveiled the mystery to them, a manifest symbol of how God took a man out of his people, and by resting his Spirit on him sent him to all of us, his entire creation, to close one Era and open a new one.

Jesus comes out of the water, Andrew and John follow him, and for a day they go into the desert, from where Jesus bids them farewell, and He goes alone into the desert of temptations with the spirit of one who is going to meet face to face with his enemy. The Hour of the Duel has come between the Son of Eve and the Chief of the Rebels, that Satan who in the form of a Serpent, this time not in body, said to Adam's wife: "No, you shall not die, for God knows that on the day you eat of him you shall be as gods, knowing good and evil".

The Day of Yahweh, "day of Vengeance and Wrath, day of Judgment and Terror" for all the enemies of God who rose up against His Spirit and sought to set their will above the Will of Almighty God, that Day had come. The Champion of Heaven against the Champion of Hell! Heaven, taking the cause of Man in its hands, had chosen the greatest of its sons, the Firstborn of the God of gods, the King of kings of Paradise, the Only Begotten Son of God in person walking to meet the Slayer of Adam. As two contenders who are about to face each other to the death and subject their Duel to the Law, so the Son of the Eternal went up through the desert to meet the one on whose head the Champion of God was to let his fist fall, fulfilling the Scripture which was to be fulfilled for us, and which without Him it would have been impossible for us to fulfill: "He will crush your head", without pity, without mercy, Hell to Hell, darkness to Darkness!

The Law obliged the Judge of the Adam Case to reclaim the Blood of the Victim by means of and exclusively through the hand of a fellow-creature of the dead, that is to say, of another man, for the Law says: "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man's hand shall his blood be shed; for man is made in the image of God". Law, therefore, from which the Necessity of the Incarnation is seen; for if from the blood of a man alone God could claim justice by sending another man against the murderer, it is understood that from a son of God any son of God could be Sent by the Judge to seize him and bring him before Judgment. Looking at this Wisdom, the Genealogy of Jesus traces his line back to Adam, of whom it says: "Adam, Son of God".

The Law, therefore, established among the sons of God the impossibility of taking Vengeance by his Hand. No son of God born of another creation could intervene in the Course of History of the Human Genus. Creatures all, of flesh and blood all the children of God, it was impossible for all of them to proclaim themselves the Avenger of Adam's death. Divine Impossibility in which the Murderer had placed his trust.

It did not fit in the head of the Enemy of God and His Kingdom that the Father of all the Peoples of Creation would give us as Champion and Hero his Only Begotten Son, His Child, His Right Hand, the light of His eyes, it did not fit. And it did not fit him by logic. First, because the Only Begotten being of the same Nature as his Father, God, and the Law established the Necessity of a man as Champion of the Blood of Adam, by this simple Truth the Only One who could satisfy the Victory was out of the question. And secondly, because God would not expose "his Child" to a Duel to the death. According, then, to the thought of Adam's Murderer, the Human Race was lost and its Destiny was Self-destruction, as it had been written: "Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return".

For God having subjected the Restoration of the Human Race to the result of the Duel to death between the Son of Eve and the Chief of the Rebels, concerning whom God said in Moses: "Wicked and perverse generation", and believing in the Impossibility of his Defeat at the hands of a descendant of his First Victim, Satan walked through the History of the Earth, as we see in the Book of Job, doing and undoing as he pleased.

The Contradiction and Paradox created as a result of the Fall was, as we can see, no mean feat. By the Law only a man could face a duel to the death with the Evil One, because otherwise it would be impossible for the Rebel to surrender, and by the Law no son of God, except the Only Begotten, could be the Chosen One to proceed to this imprisonment. But being of the same Nature as the Father, the Son could not be subscribed as the Champion of Mankind - according to the Devil's thinking. Error that would cost him Freedom, because this presupposition denied the Truthfulness of the Sonship of the whole House of God. Now, if the Devil and his court of Hell proceeded to take as vain the Creation in the Image of its Creator, God wanted to strangle this thought by the Election of the One through whom He does everything and in His Incarnation to found the Truthfulness of His Paternity over all His House in the Blood of His Only Begotten Son, establishing by the Grace of His Primogeniture the Truthfulness of every child of God, for although by adoption, this is legitimate and eternal, and from here, as our Apostle said, "We call God with the words of the Only Begotten One, we call God with the words of the Only Begotten One: We call God with the words of the Only Begotten, saying "Father".

And there He went, the Only Begotten of His Father and Firstborn among His brethren, Jesus, the son of Mary, the daughter of Bathsheba, of Ruth, of Sarah, of Eve, accompanied by two of His dearest relatives, Andrew and John, going up the desert road to meet the Enemy of His Eternal Father and His own Crown, the Crown of the King of the Universe, against whose Head He was ready to crash His Fist the same who made His Almighty Voice resound in the Darkness, saying: "Let there be Light." That God the Only Begotten Son, our Creator and Champion, King and Savior, Father and Master, made man, overcoming the Impossible Incarnation, Door that according to the Devil would never be opened by God, turns to the two young men and bids them farewell, saying to them: We will see you in Canaan, tell Peter and James to be ready. It is the son of Mary of Nazareth who speaks to them, it is the spiritual Head of the Davidic Clan of Galilee, the legitimate heir of the house of Solomon who speaks to them. And they turn back.

When Jesus returns and goes to the sons of Zebedee and their relatives, the son-in-law of Peter's mother-in-law and Peter's younger brother, the Andrew who told him: "We have discovered the Messiah", they follow him to Canaan because they were invited to the wedding, and they are surprised by the words of the son of Mary of Nazareth: "Come and I will make you fishers of men". This point, the relationship of kinship between Peter and Jesus, raises the level one more point and forces us to travel back in time to a date a little further back.

Let us go back to the time of the return from the Captivity, during the days of Cyrus the Great, when a caravan of expatriates is repatriated to their national home, led by their natural prince: Zerubbabel, the legitimate heir of the Crown of the kings of Judah, son of David, son of Solomon...

Pre-Christian Chronicles

In the light of the conclusions that have been drawn from the translations of the unearthed Libraries of the Pre-Christian Middle East, we know positively, and from this knowledge we can recreate the true structure of the international relations that allowed Cyrus the Persian to conquer an empire. Herodotus' Histories, without detracting from their value, were written in ignorance of the importance of the Biblical element in the development of world events of the time. It is to some extent amusing to see how those who have called themselves historians, blinded by their anti-Semitic hatred and anti-Catholic prejudices, were unable to penetrate behind the fabric of fables which Herodotus took up as a standard of truth and handed down to the future wrapped in the golden cloth of the Classical Age. Not being a Historian of our days, but only that, a writer of his time, one cannot ask of the author of the Histories anything else than to reflect in his writings the ignorance in progress in his day about the things of the Past. From our knowledge of Power and History, it must be said, at this point one must be a perfect fool to believe that the commanding general of the military forces of the kingdom of Media gave the crown of Ecbatana to the king of Persia, until then a kingdom of second importance in the political game, because of his pretty face, that of Cyrus.

And from the light of knowledge on the table one has to be something more than a fool to believe that the king of Babylon, the superpower of the moment, stood aside from the triumphal ride of the Persian, with his inactivity giving away the Empire to the one who until then was his vassal, for the pretty face of Cyrus. In a world where iron was the law and truth was held by force, the nonsense that Herodotus wrote about the rise to power of Cyrus could only have a place in the mind of an illiterate shepherd, which, in the end, well thought out, was the vast majority of the world, an illiterate people, their illiteracy referring more to the knowledge of the laws of Power than to the knowledge of the letters that make up the alphabet. It was counting on this illiteracy of the people about the laws of Power that Herodotus wrote the string of nonsense which, as regards Cyrus, he called "Histories".

It is the facts that put on the table his testimony and erase the writing on the wall by sages of Herodotus' status engraved in our memory. We know positively that in the days of Nabonidus the imperial cities on the borders of the Babylonian kingdom of the Chaldeans were in the hands of Jewish officials. Any professional historian can vouch for this information, which, if told by a lover of truth is a mere supposition, in the hands of a mercenary of historical information sounds like that, knowledge. But what is absolutely incredible is that these mercenaries in the service of Power have never dedicated a single line to the singular phenomenon that appears before our eyes when we discover that a people of slaves rise up to hold the keys to the kingdom of their master and lord.

The culprit of this atypical and phenomenological situation, without a doubt, the prophet Daniel, head of Nebuchadnezzar's Privy Council. But what fascinates me personally is to see how the experts in imperial structure, the British people, being one of the architects of the unearthing of the Libraries of the Ancient Middle East, these experts have behaved like illiterate shepherds about what an Empire is and the series of structural forces that move, they who had in their hands the largest Empire that has ever moved the Earth for longer than any nation has ever had it in their hands. It sounds clownish, therefore, that precisely the imperialists par excellence, the British people, in the face of Herodotus's nonsense about the rise of Cyrus the Persian, reacted like the shepherd of the fable.

The fact that the armies of the frontiers of the kingdom of the Chaldeans were in the hands of Jewish generals can only be explained from the Bible. Unifying it with the True History of the Chaldean Kingdom, we see that the coup d'état that brought Nabonidus to power took place immediately after the orgy of Balthasar, a coup d'état led by Daniel, prophet and chief of the Magi of Babylon, a coup d'état that had been brewing for some time and for which the famous story of the writing on the wall served as a starting signal.

We note in the history of the reign of Nabonidus that he delegated all the imperial functions to his court, devoting himself, as puppet king, to dig up lost cities in the desert. It would be under this court, dominated by the head of Nebuchadnezzar's Privy Council, that the hitherto slaves would jump to the leadership of the armies of the frontiers, which would later open the doors to Cyrus, a peaceful conquest that the new king of Babylon would pay, not with gold, but with freedom, as is well seen from the very famous, but unknown at the international historical level, Edict of Religious Freedom of Cyrus, whose content I will translate throughout this section.

Medes Chronicles

Let us observe how the anti-Semitic hatred of the historians of the Modern Age and their anti-ecclesiastical fanaticism blinded their intelligence to the point of blinding their eyes when, faced with the unbelievable, that the general in chief of the second superpower of the time, Media, would hand over the crown of his king and lord to a vassal prince, and this without mediating a single battle, they limited themselves to say: Amen. It would be the first time in the history of mankind that a superior army surrendered to an inferior one because of the pretty face of the assailant enemy, in this case Cyrus the Persian. Herodotus, being what he was, a man of his time, in no case a historian of our days, limited himself to write the string of nonsense that ran in his days about the rise of a prince of second rank to the summit of the empire, inexplicable phenomenon that only from a mythical perspective was able to understand the people, and that he, a simple writer, was limited to reflect past years of the events, demonstrating to have little wood of historian and much of what he was, that, a writer.

It was impossible that the prince of Persia had not been subject to vassalage at the court of Babylon. Let us remember that after the division of the world by Cyaxares and Nabopolassar, the result of the destruction of the empire of Nineveh, Persia was relegated to what it had been, an obscure power, with the difference that this time around it, North and West, two strong kingdoms had risen, against which only the prince of Susa was subject to vassalage.

It is true that by agreement Cyaxares subjected Persia to the influence of his scepter and that Nabopolassar ceded this influence in exchange for the western frontier, richer, and more in need of his attention if we take into account that on the other side of the Jordan and west of Sinai was Egypt. But it is no less true that Media and its king had on its western frontier another potential enemy of great stature in the Hellenistic peoples.

Persia was relegated to the back room of the empire, in theory dependent on the king of Media but in practice exposed at the feet of the king of Babylon. If Persia's independence is respected, it is due to an agreement between the victors that serves as a symbol of perpetual friendship between Ecbatana and Babylon. Any military uprising for the royal independence of Susa could be crushed at any moment, either by the Chaldean or the Mede. Hence, if Ecbatana sought alliance with Susa to keep the frontier closed on Babylon, Susa sought alliance with Babylon in order to maintain its autonomy from Ecbatana, which was signed, as was normal in those days, by the delivery, as "guest-hostage" of an heir to the crown, in this case Cyrus.

We have then that Astiages the Fat, heir of Cyaxares and king of Ecbatana, marries one of his daughters with the father of Cyrus, in alliance against Babylon, which Susa takes as a guarantee of autonomy from the court of Nebuchadnezzar. And in turn the father of Cyrus gives in "hostage" a son of his to the king of Babylon as a gesture of submission to the crown of Nebuchadnezzar, forcing Babylon to serve as a wall against any invasion of the powers signed between Cyaxares and Nabopolassar on the status of Persia.

In order to hide the web of relationships that made possible the rise of the Persian prince to the imperial throne and that we will unravel until the end, the children's story of the persecution of the son of the Median princess given as wife to the father of Cyrus, the mythical salvation of his son by a shepherd, and the prodigious conquest of Media and Babylon without even fighting, or at least one battle, was expanded. What less than a battle! But no, none. And the most curious, amazing and fascinating thing is not that a writer of the fantastic things of his time was not surprised by the story, the most amazing thing of all is that the same people who pretend to give us lessons of Universal History have swallowed this ball. And what is most laughable is to see that such deep throats were capable of affirming the Histories and denying History: affirming in the Age of Enlightenment, God save us from their enlightenment, that there never existed a Nineveh, nor a Troy. Assertions for morons that if under the Enlightenment of the Modern Age were taken in the 18th century as the word of God, in the 19th century God plunged his hands in the mud and rubbed Nineveh in the face of such geniuses. It is not an accusation, but to remove the mask of infallibility that the Historians of the XXth claimed for themselves.

The facts sing. First Media. The general in chief of the kingdom of the Medes gets off his horse and puts his military forces at the orders of the prince of a vassal kingdom. For the face! Incredible act that the legend signed by Herodotus establishes in the jealousy of the general in chief of the Medes forces, who, scorned because the mother of Cyrus, one day his fiancée, was taken from him by his king and father-in-law in potential to be given as wife to the king of Persia, blah blah blah ... a story typical of the tales of a Shakespeare's Midsummer Night ... because King Astiages had a dream in which he saw his dynasty broken by the fruit of his daughter with the chief of his armies, oh la la, and terrified he gives his daughter, the betrothed of the chief of his armies, for a wife to the king of Susa, keeping away the danger of Ecbatana, a ball that would eventually return to his roof to sink the whole building ... Well, for the sake of it, after giving the kingdom to a vassal prince, the whole of Babylon also opens its doors to this same second-rate prince ... by the face! You really have to be a moron to listen to this story and give it the attention it deserves such Chronicles of the True History of Mankind.

And all this from above after having contained Babylon to Egypt, closing the way to Lydia to the pharaoh; a pharaoh who, even being in the antipodes of these events, had risen up and was beating the king of Babylon to get up and do something, to join Croesus and give back to Astiages the throne that his servant had stolen for Cyrus, for the face of it!

I think you have to be a real moron not to see, in that triumphal walk of a second-class prince in the relations of the Power of the moment, a fabric of international forces united by the same reason, thinking and leading core of the actions of all those who gave Cyrus the Empire, which he paid with the Edict of Liberty, which stands as our main and most powerful proof of the connection of the Jewish world with the momentous change that the whole Civilization gave as a result of the ascension to the imperial throne of Cyrus.

The Mystery of Dioces the Mede

Another of the Stories that the eminent Historians of the Modern Age collected without flinching, that is to say, without any desire and even less capacity to unravel, refers to the mystery of the miraculous formation of the kingdom of the Medes. The legend once again rises to the altars of history and leaves the mysterious journey of the founding Dioces of the kingdom of the Medes, after which he returned with the keys of what would later become Ecbatana, its capital, in the mists of the succulent universe of the Myths.

The historical structure is unequivocal and does not lend itself to fables. But let us not forget that if Herodotus had no idea of the existence of the Bible, modern historians, blinded by their anti-Semitic prejudices, made a total mutism about the revolution that made possible the leap from a nation composed of tribes in a barbarous state to a society subject to a monarchical structure. And they are mute because this revolution took place following the deportation of the Israelites to the Mountains of the East.

Since the days of Tiglath-Pileser I, back in the 12th century B.C., the Assyrians already knew of the existence of the barbarian peoples of the North. But it would not be until the days of Shalmaneser III, in the IX century, that the confrontation with these barbarians of the mountains north of Assyria would become periodic. Shalmaneser found a group of some 27 tribes, each subject to its own prince, and whose military and social structure was typical of all Indo-European nations in its beginnings, that is to say, anarchic, fruit of the theory of freedom that has always been natural to all barbarians.

That those 27 tribes of the North came from other parts of the world and that among them was the people of the Medes, in turn divided into tribes, is a matter of course. The problem is that modern historians tended to mold all the data in order to give themselves a History to suit their own mentality: which, however, being their school of imperial mentality, this reconstruction did not obey the Law of Power in any case. In any case, there are data that it was impossible for them to avoid and, however much it weighed on them, they had to take for granted. The connection between Medes and Persians, reflected in the commercial relations between those peoples of the North and the nations south of Assyria, is one of those annoying data that they avoided as far as possible in order not to correct the Histories of their master.

The fact is that during the days of Shalmaneser III the Medes were still as savage as they were during the days of Tiglath-Pileser I, two and three centuries before. By savages in this case we mean that they did not know how to structure a State nor proceed to define a Civilization of their own. Samshi Adad IV and Adad Nirari III - always in the IX century - imposed tribute to the Medes and allied peoples of the mountains, but without ever succeeding in reducing them to the yoke of Assyria or conquering them for their civilization. The law of the freedom of the barbarians was preferable to the law of slavery that prevailed from Nineveh. And under that law they continued to multiply and grow.

So much so that when Tiglath-Pileser III, in the middle of the eighth century, set out to conquer glory and fame for eternity, and burst into the northern country, he confronted the barbarian chieftains, and defeated them one by one: he led back to Assyria a caravan of slaves that numbered tens of thousands of heads. A little later the following generation revolted against the Assyrian yoke, but with no other consequence than the crushing of the revolt and the annihilation of a population already decimated by the first war against Tiglath-pileser III.

Thus, when Sargon II, in 722, razed the kingdom of Israel, and destroyed White Samaria, whose ivory domes shone in the sun of the centuries, to the despair of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, who saw the chosen people sinking into idolatry, things already described in the Bible, and deported the survivors of Israel to the land of the Medes, the nation of the barbarians of the North experienced a transfusion of warrior blood, under whose pressure, already heated by the desire for revenge of the nation that received this new breath, rose in rebellion against the common enemy, living together the defeat and banishment of the leader of the revolt, the mysterious and enigmatic Dioces of the Legend.

We must count it to the shame of the historians of the Ancient Near Middle East that they never wanted to open their eyes to this meeting of two peoples in the same time and place, the one highly evolved, the Israelites, whose origin as a Kingdom and State dated back to the days of David and Solomon, and the other in its most savage state, both subject to the same imperial despotism, and who close their union through the blood they shed in the revolt of which Dioces was the leader. Such historians of the school of Herodotus, enemies by system of the almighty influence of the Semitic element in the History of Civilization, inasmuch as the Semite is the Jew, close the chapter of the confluence of these two peoples, the Israelite and the Mede in revolt against the common enemy, Sargon II, by saying that the barbarian tribes put their heads under the yoke again, thus burying their eminences in oblivion the Israelite Connection.

This Israelite Connection in the future of the Median People became so decisive and transcendental that the hitherto impossible, to make of all the tribes a single nation, became a reality and overnight the barbarians gave themselves a king, built themselves a capital and organized themselves under the structure of a State. Now, the explanation of the creation of a State overnight has two outlets. One is for moronic intelligences, the other is the expression of reality. The Modern Age preferred the first. The reality is that the evolution during the course of a generation, that of Dioces, of the passage from a barbarian structure to a state structure, implied a real revolution. And for it to be consummated it had to have experts in the field, a highly civilized people, raised in the structure of Power that represents the formation of a Kingdom.

This revolution took place precisely when the Israelite people entered the Middle Ages. And any explanation of this revolutionary step by which a people of many barbarian tribes, in an anarchic state for centuries, merges into a Crown and proto-imperial State that does not go through this Connection results in a History for illiterate shepherds, which would be the history that Herodotus collected speaking of Cyrus.

The formation of the Empire of Ecbatana had only one purpose, the destruction of Nineveh. It was under the force of perpetual vengeance, sealed with blood during the revolt that drowned Sargon II between Israelites and Medes, that the grandson of Dioces, the Cyaxares of Universal History, and father of the future wife of Nebuchadnezzar, that the new nation product of the union of the Israelite People with the Nation of the Medes would launch itself against Assyria and tear Nineveh from the surface of the Earth.

Fall of Nineveh

In that mother revolution at the origin of the formation of the Median kingdom, and as it is to understand from the logic of Power, to give cohesion to his military crown Dioces closed the picture of his staff with the Israelite element, now a tribe united by blood to the Nation of the Medes and by the State to the Crown of the king of Ecbatana. It was the establishment of a civilized monarchy on a barbarian substratum, in which the chieftainship was retained by the barbarian element, and its consistency rested on the foreign element, highly evolved, but by its status as a new tribe unable to take the crown. And this structure of obedience to the monarch, in the Israelite element something natural, but alien to the barbarian blood, would be the fundamental column on which the dynasty of Dioces based its military power.

That the thirst for vengeance moved both peoples, the Israelite and the Mede, and was the bosom in which both bloods united to conceive the Crown of Ecbatana, is seen in the fierceness with which the heir of Dioces, Fraortes the Younger, launched himself against the common enemy. The fault as always, the Assyrian.

During the reign of Sennacherib the Librarian, the yoke of Nineveh weighed criminally on all the nations west of the Euphrates. Concerned with drowning in blood the cry for freedom of the peoples west of the Euphrates, Sennacherib was unconcerned with the barbarians of the North, and Dioces took advantage of this unconcern to consolidate his revolution and bequeath to his dynasty a strong army ready to quench the thirst for revenge of the New Nation. Thanks to the adventure of Sennacherib in the West, Dioces extended his influence to the back of Nineveh, closing with the people of the Persians the typical alliance between friends for enmity towards a common enemy.

Dead Sennacherib and Dioces the sons of both faced each other on the battlefield. But Ashurbanipal proved too strong a rival for Fraortes the Younger, whose kingdom had not yet matured enough to match the structure of an empire. So his successor, Cyaxares, withdrew on his kingdom in order to give him the final touch.  Which as we all know reached its apotheosis in 606, the year in which the thirst for revenge of the Northern Nation was drunk with the blood of the hated enemy, the Assyrian, whose capital was torn from the surface of the Earth never to be inhabited again for ever and ever, as announced by God in his Book.

Between the ascension of Cyaxares to the throne and the destruction of Nineveh we have the invasion of the Media by the barbarians of the Siberian steppes, which delayed the Final Hour, but could not prevent the divine design from being fulfilled to the letter. In the din of that cry of victory he who has ears to hear hears the tongue of the Hebrew rising together with that of the Mede, both souls drunk with the pleasure of the gods, at one raising to their gods the same thanksgiving.

We must not forget that Herodotus, a Greek, did not know the Bible, and therefore his ability to discover the existence of the Israelite element in the Origin of the Median Revolution is amply justified; nor must we fail to see that modern historians, knowing the Bible and the History of the Pre-Christian Middle East, covered their ears and plucked out their eyes rather than recognize the power of the influence of the Semitic element, incarnated in the Israelite People, speaking of the irruption in Universal History of the kingdom of the Medes. It will be from this connection that it will be explained how a major state, composed of the Israelite element, arranged the transfer of the crown, which it created, from the hands of the house of Dioces to that of the house of Cyrus. Reason that will be explained following this same structure of reasoning.

Babylonian Chronicles

But if the Assyrian sowed in the North the seed of an almighty hatred that in due time would bear its fruit, south of Nineveh this hatred was already a fact that, crouched like the lioness that contemplates her victim seated, the governor of Babylon awaited his moment. This moment would come to Babylon with Nabopolassar.

Aware of the advance of the king of Ecbatana, Nabopolassar launched himself against the king of Nineveh, using with the king of Nineveh the same law that he applied to all nations. Crushed the Assyrian Empire, Nabopolassar ascended the throne, closing between him and Cyaxares an alliance of mutual peace, sealed with the wedding between the daughter of the king of the North and the son of the king of the South.

And then the division of the world.

The king of Babylon kept the world south of the Taurus Mountains, leaving all the north, and from there to the confines of the Anatolian West, to the king of Media. The king of Media left to the king of Babylon the world south of the Tauros, and thence to the confines of Palestine, Arabia and Egypt. Behind both kingdoms there remained Persia, an autonomous region subject in principle to the vassalage of the crown of Ecbatana, but subject to the political influence of Babylon. Persia, a region with no real army or unified state force of its own, its power as an enemy was reduced to that of a frontier province serving the mutual interests of both kingdoms. Because of the marriage alliance between Ecbatana and Babylon any revolt of Susa would hit a wall impossible to break through. However, any crossing of the limits of influence over Persia dictated by both powers could shift the balance of power and pass the dependence of Susa from one crown to the other. Imbalance that did not interest neither the allied crowns, both launched to the conquests of the West, one by the North and the other by the South, nor the crown of Persia itself, too weak to resist a joint attack of the forces of Ecbatana and Babylon.

By the North Cyaxares reached the kingdom of Lydia, whose conquest was not consummated, and by the South the king of Babylon reached the Great Sea, where the son of Nabopolassar destroyed the kingdom of Judah, as it is written.

Just as before the kingdom of Israel had been wiped off the face of history, now it was the turn of the kingdom of Judah. And just as before the Assyrian deported the cream of the surviving Israelite youth to a foreign land, thinking to humiliate their pride and put down forever the danger of revolt, now Nebuchadnezzar did the same with the survivors of Jerusalem and its kingdom, deporting to the land of the Chaldeans the cream of the surviving nation.

If in the first case the deportation did not mean slavery, but sharing the same hatred and desire for revenge with the population of the land to which the Israelites were deported, joining which, from the merger came into being a New Nation, with its capital in Ecbatana, in this case the deportation of the Jews meant slavery in the land of the same people who destroyed their kingdom.

What revolution could bring to power this people of slaves whose master had as much and more experience than the Jewish people themselves in the structural nature of a State and Empire! None. Unless... Indeed, God elevated a Jew to the supreme head of the Privy Council of the king of Babylon. And even then and only if this man of God managed to overcome all the intrigues against his person that the members of the king's Privy Council had to put in his way.

The historians of the Modern Age, more concerned with touching the noses of the Catholic Church than with penetrating the structures of the Past, were unconcerned with the Influence and Power of the Magi in the Court of Nebuchadnezzar. The hatred of the Semitic element, for being Jewish, was always stronger than their sense of truth, and where they saw any possible Hebrew-Jewish connection, they turned away and ignored History, limiting themselves to journalism of the Past: Year such and such, king such and such, war such and such. Period and dead.

But at the height of the rule of Nabonidus, the last of the Chaldeans, of Assyrian origin to make matters worse, the keys of the great border cities were in the hands of Jewish generals, a fact that any historian can confirm, highlights that the power of the head of the king's Privy Council, and Chief of the Magi of Babylon, was of extraordinary scope. The more powerful the figure of the moment, the more extensive it was. In the case of the prophet Daniel this power must be multiplied to its maximum power if we take into account his survival after the death of Nebuchadnezzar and his presence in the plot that overthrew his dynasty and handed the crown to a foreign prince, the Nabonidus of history. Or does a dynastic change occur without revolution? The innocence of modern historians not to see any revolution in a change of dynasty is as great as their perversity to turn their backs on the truth if it would satisfy the passion that led them to touch the noses of the Church in order to demonstrate that they and not God are the true architects of History, if not the one that is at least the one that was.

So we have two elements of the same body touching at the end of the end to give the Crown of the Empire to an unknown, our Cyrus. On the one hand the Israelite element at the origin of the Crown of Ecbatana, and on the other the Jewish element at the head of the border cities of the kingdom of Babylon.

It remains for us to define the nature of the revolution that led Nabonidus to power, Cyrus to the Empire and Zerubbabel to the return to the Lost Homeland.

Persian Chronicles

We could give free course to a whole encyclopedic book dealing with this subject of Cyrus' rise to Empire and his Edict of Religious Freedom. The angles are so rich in succulent mysteries that a new version could hardly be set aside, mirroring History. First, because of the series of impossibilities previously exposed, skipping which a second rate prince confronts the three superpowers of the moment and triumphs, writing what Julius of the House of Caesar signed: Veni, vidi, vincit, but this Julius of the House of the Achaemenids without having to fight a battle that deserved this name, except the one he fought with Croesus the Lydian; and second, because since when in the Culture of the Nation of the Persians, did religious freedom appear as an emblem! Even in our days, genetics betrays those who proclaim themselves successors of that Cyrus defender of religious freedoms and who, claiming to be his successors, understand religious freedom as the destruction of all infidels, especially if they are Jews.

In that game of forces between superpowers of the moment it was natural that the matrimonial alliances opened and closed directions. From this reason that the son of Cyaxares, Astiages the Fat, married a daughter of his belly with the prince of Persia did not imply any right of Susa to the Crown of Ecbatana, in the same way that the marriage between the daughter of Cyaxares and the son of Nabopolassar did not give any right to the king of Ecbatana on the crown of Babylon. Absolving Herodotus for his ignorance, any historian knows that the princess given in marriage of alliance passed directly to live under the crown of the prince consort. The fable of Prince Cyrus, son of this marriage, being exposed to the decree of death and saved by a shepherd, has no value, except that of wishing to save in some way the right of Cyrus to the throne of Media and to clothe his incredible accession to the Empire with the mantle of the providence of the gods. It was impossible for a second-rate prince, as I said before, to dream of conquering all the crowns of the superpowers of the time, and what is more fantastic, without even having to fight a single battle. Oh la la!

So, surpassing Herodotus, we return to reality. And the reality is that if Astiages married a daughter from among his daughters to the crown prince of Persia, as usually happens in any marriage of this kind: this alliance was intended to maintain the autonomy of Susa against Babylon, reminding Ecbatana to Babylon that any accession that exceeded its political influence over Susa would give rise to a war legitimized by blood between the crowns.

On the part of Susa, while the king of the Persians secured the support of the king of the Medes thanks to the marriage between his heir and the princess of Ecbatana, playing both sides, things of Power! the king of the Persians maintained his political independence from the king of Ecbatana: vassalage by means of the king of Babylon, signing with the Chaldean the classic rehenage of his heir, by which the first, a second rank kingdom, obtained from the second, a kingdom of first magnitude, coverage and assistance to the charter of his independence from the king of the Medes. It would be in this court, and not in the hut of any shepherd, where Cyrus would be raised.

Let us remember that at the time when Cyrus was to be delivered - and hence the legend of his disappearance from the sight of Ecbatana and Susa - into the hands of the Chaldean Court, the Head of the House of the Magi, and Head of the Privy Council of the King of Babylon, and therefore in command of the royal hostages, this Power was in the hands of a Jew named Daniel.

Let us further observe that the same process which Nebuchadnezzar carried out with Jerusalem, destroying the city and taking with him its surviving princes, this same process was that which his father, Nabopolassar, carried out with Nineveh, destroying the city and deporting to his kingdom its surviving princes, from which, just as from the surviving Jews would come the prince Zerubbabel, both raised in the court of Nabuchus under the hand of the same Head of the king's household, Magus and prophet Daniel, would later come Nabonidus, the future king after the coup d'état that overthrew the dynasty of Nabuchus.

Cyrus, closing this incursion, was related by his mother to the crown of the Medes, and by his maternal grandfather, to Astiages himself, son of Cyaxares. Astiages, brother of Nebuchadnezzar's wife, being the maternal grandfather of Cyrus, related his grandson, unwittingly, to the Crown of Babylon. The opportunity to unite these three crowns, the Persian, the Chaldean and the Mede in the same head was extraordinary.

Cyrus had legitimate blood rights over the three crowns of the moment. Obviously for this he had to overthrow the dynasty of Nabuchus, put on the throne a puppet king, Nabonidus, subject the border cities to men loyal to the Wizard of Babylon, Jews like himself, and overcome the confrontation with the king of Ecbatana. Something not very difficult to do if the Great Wizard of the East took into account that the staff of the Median Crown was in the hands of descendants of Israelites, all sons of the same Abraham, in whose ears the Will of God, who had arranged the ascension of Cyrus the Persian to the throne of king of kings, would find a well-disposed soul.

The price that Cyrus would pay?

Freedom!

Jewish Chronicles

All that glitters is not gold. And in the envelope of the archetypal anti-Semitic image making the Jew the classic miser, miserable creature crawling among the strata of power, gold not only does not glitter but is pure paint. It would not be until after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and the coexistence of the Jew in Islam and against Christianity that this painting began to be manufactured and completed, becoming the Jew the most abject kind of worm, with no loyalty to anyone and capable of betraying the friend of today if the enemy of yesterday comes to power and its survival in tomorrow depends on the survival of the enemy of today, who was the friend of yesterday. But as far as the Hebrew, Israelite or Jew, of the times before Christ, and especially during the centuries from the XVI to the VI, that is, a whole Millennium, the Hebrew was a born Warrior forged on the battlefield, whose fame was consolidated worldwide during the days of David.

But to believe that a born warrior is crushed while his chest is still alive is a mistake, which eventually cost Nineveh its existence. A warrior only ceases to exist, dead. The same spirit of Freedom opposed the kingdom of Judah to the empire of Babylon. The image that the world of that time had of the Jew was that of a brave and courageous soldier. Truth that highlights the door that was opened to freedom through his entry into the Babylonian army, serving in which came their leaders to reach the highest positions in the cities on the borders of the kingdom. With the help of the chief of the Magi? Well, yes, always: but no influence carries weight when it is a question of defending cowards, who, had they been cowards, not for ten such as Daniel, would the king of Babylon have accepted their appointments to guard the Gates of the Kingdom.

The Edict of Freedom which Cyrus signed upon entering Babylon was drawn up long ago and the New King of Babylon merely affixed his Seal. This Edict is the key that opens the door to the whole Mystery of that Century: the rise of Cyrus, the fall of Babylon and Ecbatana, the complicity of Babylon in the Fall of the kingdom of Lydia and its refusal to join Egypt to support Lydia and stop the foundation of the empire of Cyrus. And at the same time it allows us to see the nature of the Caravan that prince Zerubbabel led from Babylon to Jerusalem.

I mean, Zerubbabel led an armed army, enriched by the treasures of the Community of the Great Synagogue of the East and exalted by the priestly tribe, but first and foremost Zerubbabel was a prince and those who accompanied him were the same generals and soldiers who opened the Gates of the Kingdom to Cyrus, of whom Cyrus happily got rid of, thinking that just as they had deserted their former master they could desert the new lord, and it was better for his Empire to have such servants, loyal only to their God, outside the army than inside the army.

The biblical account is sufficient proof when it comes to confirming the veracity of the armed nature of the Caravan of the heir to Solomon's crown. As I said, the archetypal image of the Jew installed in our memory during the last centuries cannot be exported to the times we are dealing with. Zerubbabel leads an army of occupation with full powers of armed defense against the occupiers of the Lost Homeland. Who, as we read, did not take long to try to destroy them. Which they did not succeed because those settlers, masons, carpenters and others, under the cloak of work carried the soldier's sword. And they had Cyrus' permission to defend themselves and to assert their lives. What is Liberty without the right of defense!

It is understood from his Edict that Cyrus did not grant the Jews a Freedom to invade the Country and make Joshua's Zerubbabel in full Reconquest. From the Edict it is understood that the Jews bought their Freedom to return to their Homeland and settle in the land following the laws of peaceful settlement, and subjection of the new populations to the imperial duties. Under these premises, as we see in the Biblical account, Zerubbabel and his men rebuilt Jerusalem, settled and began to expand throughout the Hebrew Homeland.

Here is the famous Edict of Cyrus

A.- I am Cyrus, King of the World, great king, mighty king, king of Babylon, king of the lands of Sumer and Akkad, king of the Four Regions, son of Cambyses, great king, king of Ansan, grandson of Cyrus, great king, king of Ansan, descendant of Theispes, great king, king of Ansan, descendant of a royal line without end, whose law Bel and Nabu bless, whose reign makes the pleasure of the gods.

When I was ready, I entered Babylon, and set up my kingdom in the palace of kings amidst joy and gladness. Marduk, the Most High God, disposed the hearts of the inhabitants of Babylon toward me, and I will worship him all my days.

And he continues:

B.-By my deeds Marduk, the Lord Almighty, rejoiced, and me, Cyrus, the king who worships Him, and Cambyses, my son, the strength of my thighs, and all my troops He has blessed, and by this in a spirit of grace we glorify in exaltation His Most High Divinity.

All the kings who sit upon their thrones from one corner to the other of the Four regions, from the North Sea to the South Sea, who dwell in ... all the kings of the West who dwell in tents, paid tribute to me and came to kiss my feet over Babylon. From ... to the cities of Asshur, Susa, Akkad and Eshunna, the cities of Zamban, Meurnu, Der, to the ends of the land of the Gutis, I brought back the gods to their places of worship from of old, to their sacred cities in ruins from ancient times.

I gathered all their inhabitants and restored their cities. The gods of Sumer and Akkad, whom Nabonidus, against the wrath of the gods, brought to Babylon, I, by the will of Marduk, the Lord God, brought back to their cities of worship.

Let all the gods pray for me before Bel and Nabu for all the days of my life, and say to my Lord, Marduk: "May Cyrus, the king, your servant, and Cambyses, his son...."

And he concludes thus:

C.- Now that I am king of Persia, Babylon and the nations of the Four Regions with the help of Marduk, I declare that I will respect the traditions, customs and religions of the nations of my empire, and I will not allow, as long as I live, any ruler under my command to insult them.

From now on forever, as long as Marduk disposes the kingdom in my favor, I will not impose my religion on any nation. Every nation is free to accept it, and if any nation rejects it I will never rise up against its freedom to impose my Belief upon it. As long as I am king of Persia and Babylon, and of the Four Regions, I will not permit the religious oppression of one nation over another, and if it should occur I will punish the oppressor and restore his right to the oppressed.

As long as I am king I will not allow anyone to take possession and expropriate the property of others by force or without compensation. As long as I live, I prescribe slave labor.

Today, I declare: that everyone is free to choose his Religion; that everyone is free to choose his dwelling place, understanding that this right does not annul the duty towards the law of the neighbor; that No one may be blamed for the crimes or faults of his relatives.

I prescribe slavery and my governors have the duty to prohibit the exchange of persons for things within their dominions. Such a custom must be exterminated from the face of the world.

I pray to Marduk to grant me to fulfill my obligations to the nations of Persia, Babylon and the others of the Four Regions.

The Mystery of Jesus the Galilean

But to understand the mentality of Peter and why God chooses for Mother of Christ to a Galilean, our Mary, if we still want to see the cause of contempt for Jesus and his Disciples by the Jews on the basis of their Galilean origins, contempt superimportant in understanding the mental nature of the Christian movement of the beginning, real contempt in his day forgetting which has been and is committed a tremendous error in applying to the mentality of the early Christians a Jewish substratum according to the Jewish understood from the consequences of the Crucifixion of Jesus; if we want to see why God chose Galilee to shine the Light of His Wisdom and from the Galilee of the Gentiles to radiate His Kingdom over the centuries, the first thing we must do is to enter into the history of that Galilee of the Gentiles, whose origins in time, as a Hebrew territory, counted for the dates more than a millennium, enough time - obviating the deportation of its youth during the Assyrian neo-imperium - to proceed the genotype to a sui generis, particular, typical, patriotic mentality, which in the case of the Galilee, as seen in the Gospels, came translated in the dialectal speech that, opening its mouth, betrayed Peter during the famous Night of his Denials. We can say, without much room for error, that compared to the Jew of his times the Galilean was the Andalusian of ours in relation to the Spanish. The Andalusian opens his mouth and the fool who does not guess his origin. This particular difference that gives the Andalusian his way of speaking the same language of all Spaniards has its origin in the greater space of time during which Andalusia was enslaved to the Muslim Empire. Subject from the beginning to the whip of Islam, while the North was in eternal struggle of Reconquest, Andalusia preserved its Latin roots at the same time that its exposure to the Maghreb yoke gave its speech those particular notes, which it would keep once back in the common Homeland of the Spanish Free Peoples. Those centuries in prison within the walls of the tyrannical empire of the Muslims, when those bars were thrown down by the Catholic Monarchs, provoked in the Andalusian an overwhelming need for freedom that determined its expansion to the ends of the world, which could be satisfied during the Days of Discovery.

Thus, exposure to particular circumstances determines the patterns of mental behavior of a people, which translates into their speech, Andalusian case and Galileo case. Let us see when the rupture between Jews and Galileans begins, which would be so important at the time of the condemnation of Jesus on the basis of his Galilean origin.

Hebrew Chronicles

The real determining rupture of an alienation of the Jew from the Hebrew had its origin immediately after the death of King Solomon. If we take the Hebrews as a single being as the fruit of the flesh of Abraham, then we have to say that the rupture between Jews and Galileans-Hebrews opened a process of violent, incurable schizophrenia, the progress of whose pathology could not be other than the destruction of the national body. Indeed, in 722 Sargon II destroyed the kingdom of Israel, that is to say, Galilee and Samaria, and in 607 Nebuchadnezzar did the same with the kingdom of Judah. Neither God, we can affirm, can do anything when madness is left to its own forces. However, more than satirizing about processes that are things of the book, what interests us here is why the Hebrews of David and Solomon broke the Covenant of Unity between the Tribes of Israel, causing the beginning of the end of the Hebrews as a Nation and People, who would never return to the scene, occupying henceforth their place the Jews.

From the reading of the historical books of the Bible, it can be seen that the clash of forces between Judah and the rest of the tribes of Israel came as a consequence of the same error that dragged Cain to kill his brother Abel. Cain was driven by the desire for revenge and restoration of the divine destiny of his father Adam. And since the only one who stood between God and his desire was his brother Abel, the answer was elementary; once Abel died and God had determined that one of Adam's sons would avenge his fall and inherit his lost glory, once Abel died and Adam had no more sons, Cain obliged God to anoint him as his champion and heir to Adam's lost crown. Cain's mistake was in his muscles. He did not think with his head, he thought with his biceps. He did not see God as God sees himself. And from this error, seeing God as a man looks at another man, he believed that his thinking and God's thinking had the same end and beginning.

In the Jewish case the error had the same scheme of reasoning. God had promised to a son of David the universal and everlasting kingdom (since we are citizens of the Christian civilization and are aware of the existence of the Psalms of David I have no need to import here the welter of prophecies in this respect).

Translated this promise to the mentality of Solomon's century, the Prophecy came to say that God had promised the Jews the Empire. Amen, Hallelujah, God is Great: The next Empire to extend its flag over Mesopotamia and from here to the ends of the Earth would be the Empire of the Jews. The logic of the facts said so. With David the Hebrews had raised the greatest army of the time. With Solomon the kingdom of the Jews had stored what is most necessary to carry out a War of Conquest, gold and silver in infinite quantities. The heir to this army and treasure would be the first king Messiah, the heir to the Promise of the universal kingdom, whose descendants would rise as a Dynasty until the end of the world, and his kingdom would extend over the surface of the whole Earth.

Jeroboam only had to follow this logical argument to open the War for the Empire, take the armies out of their barracks, scatter them over Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Phoenicia, and his sons would take over Crete, Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Libya, Media, Persia, and his grandsons in the future India, Scythia, Iberia, Abyssinia, Arabia.... The dream of the Empire of the Jews that even today sounds in the head of a remnant of the madmen of Jeroboam, and that, as seen in the Network itself, the paranoid schizophrenia of war is identical to that which caused the breakup of the Twelve Tribes, leaving alone those of Judah and Benjamin with their dream of universal dominion.

The Galilee, at that time part of the Solomonic kingdom, understood that Judah, that is, the Jews, after the death of King Solomon had lost their judgment and made the same mistake of Cain, not seeing God for who he is, and falling into the error of believing that it is God who serves man, that God is to do the will of man. Could not the great King Solomon, endowed with all wisdom and strength, have opened the march if he had considered that the Prophecy referred to him, the son of David?

To stop the process of destruction of the Hebrew national body, it would have been enough for Jeroboam to have followed the advice of the elders. But the advice of the Jews seemed better to him; he himself had been raised suckling that milk, and, stumbling on the stone of Cain, he raised his arm against Abel believing that the fear of the destruction that the division would raise on the horizon would force all the Hebrews to accept the policy of fait accompli that the Court of the Jews intended to impose on them. Mistake that would cost them both to end up as they ended up.

If the Jews blamed their fate on the other tribes of Israel, the relationship with them was one of hatred until the fall of Jerusalem, making them guilty of their fate. The tribes of the kingdom of Israel returned the favor to the Jews in the form of constant and continuous wars. For three long centuries the Jews and the Hebrews-Galileans had time to open between them a wall of enmity that would never again disappear from the Jewish mental structure, being from this side of hatred that the Jews looked with the contempt that deserved a Hebrew - for being Galilean - the Jesus of our Divine History. Spit in the face for being a Galilean of which, of course, St. Peter was not spared and suffered until the end of his days. And this even though St. Peter was the same as our Jesus of the blood of David, that is, by blood more Jews than Jerusalem itself.

Let us now see how Galilee became the homeland of Jesus and his Disciples.

Nazarene Chronicles

The logic of events refers to the events of history, and that, as we see in the Legend of Cyrus collected by Herodotus, has to do with popular fantasy what Astrology with Astronomy or Theosophy with Theology. Great and profound would be the discussion on the true origins of Cyrus, and no less interesting and exquisite would be the connection of the Invasion of Greece by the Persians of Xerxes who had the service that the 10,000 of Xenophon gave to the cause of his brother Cyrus, with the invasion of this same Xerxes of Greece who would write the famous Resistance of the Spartan Leonidas and his 300 heroes. Let us observe, then, that the historians tend little to connect facts and consequences and consequently we see how at the time of studying the cause of the invasion of Artaxerxes or Xerxes, none of them emphasizes the 10. 000 of Xenophontes as a decisive factor that stops in the mind of the Persian king a hatred towards the Greek, ally of his hated brother Cyrus, and determines that the fear of the awakening of this nation under a king, seeing that it was enough to the Greeks only 10,000 soldiers of fortune to shake the foundations of the throne of Darius, pounces on the Empire and puts an end to the Dynasty of Cyrus the Great.

Leaving aside the official plot about Cyrus and his empire in relation to the Greeks and the Jews, but breaking with the formal opinion about the latter in order to the intellectual precariousness demonstrated in the connection with the former, let us say that the prosperity of the Jews under the Persians had its cause in the secret pact that the Jewish generals of Chaldean Babylon signed with the Prince chosen by Daniel and his god to be the next king of the land. When Cyrus occupies Babylon, the Jews, in charge of the keys of the cities of the northern borders, the way by which Cyrus enters the kingdom of Nabonidus, give him the keys of the kingdom of the Chaldeans, which is why historians had to write against their wishes, that Cyrus entered Babylon without taking the sword out of the sheath.

With his Edict Cyrus paid the debt to the Prince of the Magi of the Babylonian Court, but, as king, Cyrus relied on the talent of the Jews in the things of Administration, leaving the Persian free for the things of war. And it would be this special situation of the Jew in the Administration of the Persian State that would inspire the Final Solution that God thwarted by seating our Esther on the Throne of the queen.

Thus, although Cyrus did not grant a free hand to the Jews of Zerubbabel, the support that he and his men found in the Court of Cyrus remained until the death of the Great King. It was not until Darius that their problems with the Palestinians began to take on a certain dimension. With Ezra, Nehemiah and Queen Esther these problems passed away and since then no anti-Jewish disturbances have been recorded in Palestine under the Persians.

What interests us now is the mentality of that Zorobabelian Colony, rebuilder of Jerusalem and founder of the foundations of the New Temple.

From the Edict it is understood that Zerubbabel and his followers were perfectly aware of the express prohibition that its content imposed on the occupation of a territory by violent means and the imposition of religion on the occupants using coercive means on the native population of the surroundings. But by this same Edict the King's Law was such that no one could contradict his New World Order, and the Settlement of Zerubbabel in Judea and Palestine by the King's Peace could not be contravened by any local government.

Let us not forget that the Banishment of the Jews under Nebuchadnezzar took place about 596, and the Return opened its march in 536. Rounding up the numbers, a scant 70 years separated Judah from its ruling class, so that when the children of the deportees returned the land still retained the warmth of its former owners.

Nabuchus imported foreigners to make up for the lack of the deportees and the dead, but if we think that in normal conditions a ruling class does not reach 10 percent of a national population, and that the remaining immense 90%, taking out the fallen in the Jerusalem-Babylon War, remained in the land of their fathers, we understand the absence of shock of any kind that the Caravan of Zerubbabel found in the non-deported Jewish population. There is no invasion, not even occupation. It is the natural return of the prodigal son to his parents' house. When, then, and here is the point to which all this speech is directed, Zerubbabel consolidates the New Jerusalem and the law of the flesh begins to impose its golden rule, the multiplication of families, this same Jerusalem becomes the Mother Colony from which peacefully, but imperturbably, extend this new blood by the Biblical inheritance of the children of Abraham and make theirs what belonged to them by Divine Decree.

Here, at this point, is where the colonization of Galilee by a Davidic nucleus begins, which, starting from Jerusalem, seeks a settlement from which to radiate its blood and its law and, in time, give birth to a clan united to the Mother House by the indefatigable bond of blood.

This is the true origin of Jesus, Peter and Andrew, John and James, the sons of Thunder. The five, the same Jesus as Peter and James, had their blood origin in the prince of Judah who, born of the thigh of Zorobabel, once finished the work of the reconstruction of Jerusalem, extended their horizons in the time and directed their steps towards the North, where looking for land they found the hills of Nazareth, and buying the land, they raised what would be the First Davidic House in the middle of Galilee. The natural and spiritual head of this founding House of Nazareth and of the Davidic Clan of the Galileans would be Abiud, son of Zerubbabel, the bearer of the Genealogical Scroll of the House of Solomon, and therefore, the legitimate heir of the Crown of Judah, points on which I expanded in the Divine History speaking of the Doctrine of Alpha and Omega.

The point to be discussed in this area would be the veracity of the blood connection between Jesus and his Disciples.

First: going back to the beginning, the speech of the Galileans is not found in Jesus, but in Peter. And hence historians have never seen this connection. But these historians forget that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judah because Joseph, his father by the Law, was from Bethlehem of Judah and his family did not experience at any time the effect of the Galilee suffered by the descendants of the founders of the Clan of the Jews of Galilee. It will be objected at this point that the predominance of the land of upbringing is superimposed on genetics and being raised in Galilee Jesus would have had to demonstrate his origin in his speech. However, the historians again demonstrate their ignorance when they eliminate from this upbringing the Flight from Egypt and the Return to Israel, a period of a decade during which Jesus was already raised as far as the genetic disposition of speech is concerned.

It will be objected, again, that this Egyptian period of the Infancy of Jesus is pure legend. Truth opposes to this irrational interpretation the Episode of the Child in the Temple and the Conversation of Jesus with Pilate. The Child is heard in the Temple, at the outset, by his perfect diction of the purest Jerusalemite Jew. Had the "child" opened his mouth in the ordinary Galilean, no matter how much of a child he might have been: his chance of passing the first sentence would have been cut short by the genetic contempt of the upper-class Jerusalean environment against the Galilean mentality. Not only does the Child surpass the first sentence, but he hallucinates the whole Intellectuality. And this perfect Diction of the born Jew, that the Child inherits from his father, Joseph, would be, at the same time, the shield against which any attempt to find out where that creature phenomenon lived, would crash. Let us take into account that after being rescued by his parents, those men, once they had recovered from the hallucination, had to devote themselves to looking for him, and, blinded by the Child's speech, they would concentrate their inquiries on the Jewish families of pure stock, that is to say, Jerusalem and its surroundings. The oblivion in which this Episode fell among the Jews was due to their impossibility to believe that the Child lived in Galilee. His disappearance, like his appearance, remained just that, a phenomenon.

On the side of the Conversation with Pilate the Language in which Jesus and the Roman governor exchanged words highlights the knowledge of Jesus of the International Language of the Empire, the Greek.

In those times, as in all times, the Empire is the one that imposes its Law and its Language. The Spanish, the British and the French extended their Languages to the rest of the world and not the other way around. The same happened with the Roman and Hellenic Empires. The particularity of the Classical Age, however, made Greek the International Language in the Republican period, and only during the Empire as such did Latin supplant Greek as a means of international communication.

The Raising of Jesus in Egypt an event supported by the impossibility of finding his Whereabouts after the Episode of the Temple, and this impossibility supporting his Raising in Egypt, and because Egypt was subject to the Law of the Empire and to the Language of the Hellenes since the Foundation of Alexandria, when Joseph and Mary fled to Egypt they settled in the City par excellence Jewish, Alexandria of the Nile, in which its population, dominated by the Ptolemaic court, that is to say, Hellenic, used the Classical Greek as a communicative reference. It is from this City that Jesus would preserve his knowledge of the most Classical Greek and would allow him to astonish a Pilate not accustomed to find such a Dialect, Classical Greek, in a simple country bumpkin, who, curiously enough, did not speak the dialect of the Galileans either.

Moreover, the Old Aramaic Language of the Hebrew Scriptures was preserved in the Synagogues of the Dispersion with more jealousy than in those of Israel itself - as is seen from the Bible Translation of the LXX. Educated in the synagogue of Alexandria the Child Jesus would preserve all his life the Knowledge of a Sacred Language in which from his Cross he would open his mouth to expire the Word of the Davidic Prophecies

All of which leads us to definitively settle the discussion and make it clear that the return of Joseph and his Family did not take place until the end of the period of Archelaus' government, and to consider as unreal the Date that has been imposed in recent times on the Birth of Jesus, which is placed after 4, 5 or six years after the death of Herod. In some phase of the readaptations of the Calendars a false step has been taken and its consequence is the impossibility of reconciling the Divine Scripture with human chronology. Now, every man, from the fool of the people to the wise man who sits on the Pope's Throne, every man errs. God alone is infallible. So that when faced with the choice between Chronology from the Scriptures or chronology from men, Intelligence does not hesitate and puts its hand in the fire in favor of the former. In this Century we shall see how this Dilemma is solved.

Regarding the Second Point, speaking of the Consanguinity between Jesus and Peter, the analysis of the Gospels is enough to discover between the Mother-in-law of Peter and the Mother of Jesus an intimate blood relationship that, undoubtedly, went back to the deepest degree, that of Sisters. Peter's wife would be a cousin of Jesus, niece of his Mother. And consequently Jesus and Peter had known each other all their lives. This aspect that, returning to the Davidic mentality, presupposes and puts before this political relation an origin in the Davidic nucleus that left Jerusalem in the times of Zorobabel, founded Nazareth and began to extend its blood by all the Galilee on horseback of the law of the endogamic clans.

It is not, therefore, of a morning rooster to affirm that Abiud, son of Zerubbabel, started his way to the North surrounded by other pure-blooded Davidic families with whom to marry his sons and daughters, keeping his Messianic Legacy perfectly united to the Prophetic Trunk. Nor is it unfounded scholarly to assure that with time branches of this trunk were breaking off, diluting the generations among the Galilean population. Inevitable process that, nevertheless, precisely by its nature, elevated among the following generations the ascendant of the Carnal House of Abiud, resident in Nazareth, remaining its Heirs as spiritual reference of the families that conserved their union to the tree of the children of David.

Jesus, Son of Mary, daughter of Abiud, daughter of Zerubbabel, daughter of Solomon, daughter of David, daughter of Abraham, daughter of Noah, daughter of Abel, daughter of Eve, was, in this context, a very particular Galilean.

Peter, on the contrary, was a Galilean of his time. Raised among Galileans from his childhood, except for his Davidic heritage, Peter was a Galilean, in speech, in mentality, in costume, in his way of living and even of dying, or were not the Galileans the rebels without a cause all their lives?

Conclusion

For a long time the Davidic clan of Galilee had been waiting for the time of the Manifestation of the House of Solomon, whose Headship corresponded to the House of Mary, daughter of Jacob, daughter of Mattan, as I have already extended in the Divine History. As it happens with everything and it could never be otherwise as long as we live subject to the Science of Good and Evil, as time goes by the strength of the bonds is reduced. It is not that it disintegrates, but it reduces its circle until a remainder remains in the nucleus of the origin. And this remainder is intimately linked to the Origin of the movement. In the case at hand, the leadership of the House of Abiud over the Davidic clan of Galilee, did not escape this rule, fading with the passage of centuries to be encompassed in the inner family circle of our Mary, which included, as I will show, Peter as a close relative of Jesus because of the marriage of a daughter of Mary's sister to our Peter, which is why the chapter we know as the Healing of Peter's Mother-in-law was written for us, which I copy here to start from the fact and not from my imagination:

Coming out of the synagogue he went into Simon's house. And Simon's mother-in-law was in a great fever, and they besought him for her. And coming to her, he commanded the fever, and the fever left her. And immediately she arose and ministered to them.

Let us not forget that Jesus and his Mother went in and out of Capernaum as one moves about his house. Immediately after the Wedding of Canaan, John says: He went down to Capernaum with his mother, his brothers and his disciples, and they stayed there for some days. Many people, as we can see, to be lodged in a house other than that of a very near and dear relative and in which Jesus, his mother, his brothers and his disciples feel at home. In what other house than that of Peter himself, in the person of his mother-in-law, could he have found such a lodging group? Let us remember that Capernaum is on the shores of the Sea of Miracles, also called the Sea of Tiberias, in whose waters our Peter used to go fishing every day of his life.

And not only does the whole group stay in Capernaum, but they stay for a few days. And they stay because they are in the house of Peter's mother-in-law, none other than one of our Mary's sisters.

This is proven by the information about the Healing of the mother of Peter's mother-in-law. I specify.

Let us not forget that Jesus had just started to walk and his fame was in its beginnings. Although Matthew places the Healing of Peter's mother-in-law immediately after the Sermon on the Mount, Luke centers the episode before the Beatitudes, which occurs as a harvest of the Fame already won by Jesus. It is not that Luke corrects Matthew but he is aware, the first Apocrypha already in scene, of the Need that the Future would have of sufficiently clear keys to move with firmness in the dynamic reconstruction of the Acts starred by our Hero and King. Matthew is the first and writes his Gospel on the fly; Mark, who is none other than John himself under whose Custody Jesus placed his Mother, takes the stand so that the Law is fulfilled, that is to say, that by the testimony of two a Testimony is valid. Luke places his own on the Table of Testimony, taking the Heart of Mary as a special source and that of the Apostles as a general one. John, already made man, and educated in that Jewish school that had in the memorization of the texts its forte, returns to the subject contributing particular specifications and adding the Doctrine of the Word that the Son of God himself engraved in his Memory. Taking into account the sacred character of the preceding texts, John punctuates and, except for the episode of the Expulsion of the sellers from the Temple, which he consciously extrapolates from the End to the Beginning, because the Beginning implied the End, John clarifies that the first stay of Jesus in Capernaum lasted a few days and was immediately after the wedding of Canaan. Which, by now, we already knew.

The fact is that Luke returns to the Healing of Peter's mother-in-law based on the testimony of the Mother, from whose living voice he notes everything concerning the Birth and Infancy and the in principle unimportant data that the Mother lived with her Jesus and his Disciples. He corrects Matthew, without any error on the part of his colleague, placing the Healing of Peter's mother-in-law before the Sermon on the Mount. This final point serves as a starting point for us to see in Peter's mother-in-law the aunt of Jesus, who was perfectly aware of the Messianic Identity of the son of her older sister, and in whom she believed without the need to see his miracles, and hence "without faith", as Jesus demands to receive his Power, but by the Knowledge that comes from Faith, Peter's mother-in-law benefited directly from the Divine Grace of her nephew, her Jesus, the firstborn and only begotten son of her sister Mary.

Which brings us to the kinship between Jesus and Peter. Jesus being the nephew of Peter's mother-in-law, what bond united Peter and Jesus, second cousins? If Jesus was the nephew of Peter's mother-in-law, Peter's wife was the niece of Jesus' Mother, and therefore, Jesus and Peter's wife were cousins.

The union between a house descending from David by direct line limited to blood and excluding any marriage with a non-Davidic house, and since our Mary was a direct descendant of Solomon, as can be seen in the Genealogy of her Son, the mere idea of marrying Jacob to a daughter of his with a non-Davidic line did not enter her head, as it never entered her parents'.

The House of David and the House of Aaron maintained this type of blood growth during the centuries. The latter, because the Temple demanded it; and the former, because the Messianic spirit demanded it. It is true that as the centuries opened the gap, this requirement was limited to the genealogical nucleus, the blood of David becoming diffused in space with the passing of time.

This nucleus had its center in the House of Mary, which had lived from this requirement during the past centuries from Abiud, son of Zerubbabel, to Jacob, father of Mary. And this requirement remained a law of the House until the time of the Messiah arrived, whose birth would take place, as it was of faith in the house of Abiud, from a daughter of this nucleus.

Jacob, father of Mary, although dead, but alive in his Widow, marries his daughters within the Davidic clan of Galilee. A clan that, since the reconquest by the peaceful colonization of the Galilee, had given each other sons and daughters following an endogamic pattern, maintaining the blood tie through the ages. As we have already seen in the Divine History, Cleophas, Mary's younger brother, meets his Mary, the Mary of Cleophas of the Gospel, over this sea of relationships, which would lead Mary's sisters to marry outside Nazareth, a daughter of one of these sisters of Mary being the one who would eventually marry our Peter, her father a relative of the house of Jacob of Nazareth from the dawn of the return of Zerubbabel and his settlers from the Babylonian Captivity.

Returning then to the episode of the healing of Peter's mother-in-law, she, as sister of Mary and aunt of Jesus, was invited to the wedding of Cana, celebrated among relatives of the Davidic clan of Galilee, to which all the participants were related in a more or less close degree. That the Headship of the Davidic House of Nazareth under the days of Mary and her Son was enjoying a celebrated prosperity among her acquaintances and relatives, is shown to us in the Obedience that the master of the hall made to her, executing her command: "Do whatever He tells you". The Lady Mary of Nazareth was not a distant and unimportant guest, but the authority of the legitimate heiress of the House of Solomon went with her in the person of her Son, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Jacob, son of Abiud, son of Zerubbabel, under whose hand her House rose to a prosperity, never lost but fallen to less during the last centuries of civil wars between the empires under whose banners the armies made the Galilee their eternal battlefield.

Thus, without opening his mouth to object to any word, as would have been the case if it had been a guest who had entered through the back door, the master of the hall executes the order of the Lady Mary of Nazareth with the promptness due to an irresistible Authority, both for her Spiritual Fame and for the economic position of her Son within the Davidic Clan in the midst of the wedding celebration between two of its members, the bride and groom of the Wedding of Canaan.

Concluding: The Lady Mary of Nazareth is at the wedding of Canaan with all her family as a blood relative and of high rank in the Davidic clan. The idea of a poor Mary and of a worker Jesus without material resources we can begin to throw it to the trash can. He who asked others to leave everything, to sell all property and follow Christ, was the first who left everything and went after Christ, for Christ was in Him, and He was the Christ.