Biblical Aryans and understanding Biblical genealogies

In this study, we will find that multiple Biblical figures formerly assumed Jewish, whether appearing before or after Seth, Shem or Judah, are actually intended as Aryan figures. These Aryans include, again, Adam, Abraham, Esau and Jacob (particularly as father and after he becomes known as Israel), Joseph son of Jacob, Benjamin son of Jacob, the archangel Michael, Matthew the Apostle, King Saul, Jonathan son of King Saul, The Prophet Jonah, the Mother Mary and the Prostitute Mary.   These examples will be corroborated in this study by an examination of the Biblical works and by an examination of references made to them in contemporary JEM.

The reader may be wondering: how can Esau, Jacob, Joseph, Benjamin, Saul and Jonathan of the Hebrew Bible be Aryan? While ostensibly it is true that they are not officially Jews, as none are descended from Judah, the official primogenitor of Jewry, or Levi, the primogenitor of the Jewish priest class, it seems certain they are, at least, Semites.

After all, Joseph, like his brothers, like his father Jacob, like his grandfather Isaac, like his great grandfather Abraham, all are descended from Shem, the presumed patriarch of the Semites. More they are all descended from Eber, from whom it is typically believed the word Hebrew derives. Indeed, as this study explicates, Adam’s son Seth, ostensibly the father of all of who survive the flood, is clearly a Jewish or proto-Jewish figure. Therefore shouldn’t Seth’s descendants, including all persons thereafter appearing in the Bible, be inheritors of Jewish blood? Surely all those descended from Eber are at least proto-Jewish and thus in effect Jews.   Jacob, especially as contrasted with his “Aryanish” brother Esau, is a clear proto-Jew.

But these are incorrect assumptions. Jacob’s case is particularly interesting and it is an example our study will explicate. It appears that Jacob is actually indicated as transitioning from proto-Jew to Aryan upon being renamed “Israel.” [1] However, in general, the assumption that various key figures in the Biblical works are Jewish, when, in fact, they are intended esoterically to represent Aryans, is one of the key errors that has protected these works from any serious analysis.   This is a massive oversight of world-historical importance.   Indeed, what we find in the Biblical works is the repeated theme of Jewish figures succeeding over Aryan competitors whom have until now be mistaken as Semites.

More, as this study makes clear, Biblical writings function as a source of JEM, whereby both moralization and instruction vis-à-vis an Aryan adversary is gained. This, indeed, may be its primary function. Toward the Aryan, containing as it does esoteric descriptions of Jewish dominance over Aryans, it functions as JED. Likewise it provides a primary “Matter” which contemporary works of JEM may reference as a means of developing additional sources of JEM or JED.

Hence it becomes necessary to purge the notion that all the figures formerly assumed Jewish or proto-Jewish, whether the Biblical patriarchs of the Jews appearing before Judah or figures appearing after Judah are, in the esotericism of the Biblical writings, necessarily intended, in this or that instance, as Jews or proto-Jews. We already understand, for instance, as this study explicates, that Adam was not a Jew. Though, of course, without a careful analysis, who would ever guess this? Indeed, our first, naive instinct is to imagine Jews have naturally made both their God and their first man, Jews.

Here it is important to be clear. These non-Jewish figures appearing in the Biblical work are frequently Aryan and not merely non-Jewish. We say this because the Hebrew Bible depicts its figures traveling and existing amid Aryan peoples and among empires that are or were Aryan. Their Bible indicates that invariably Jews appear among empires when these people are at the height of their power, whether in Babylon, Persia, Egypt or, in the case of the Second Testament, Rome and Greece.

Whilst we understand the Bible primarily fiction and propaganda, we trust that settings depicted therein, are settings that Jews, a mercantile, wayfaring and seafaring people, have certainly inhabited, regardless as to when, precisely, their fabulous accounts were written, collated or revised. We understand, of course, that word-important civilizations have been in the past Aryan at their height if also, at that moment, also declining and losing an Aryan character. This is true whether or not they’ve adopted a Semitic language at some point in their development.

Likewise, Jews, with their unique, significantly Aryan genetics, may not exist for any period as a recognizable type removed from a wealthy, overly generous Aryan host. To function as a Bride Gathering Cult they must be amid Aryans. And to be sure, Bride Gathering is a primary subtext of the Biblical works.

As a recognizable type, as they appear in the Bible, they are ambitious, energized, cunning, zealous, excited, active, and power seeking. Again, we trust that forcibly separated from the enabling race of Aryans to which they owe half their ancestry and all their opportunities for power, a dominant Semitic gene would assert itself and they would quickly become virtually unrecognizable from the other Semites of the world. But such an inert people are not the people we encounter in the Bible, whether in Genesis, Exodus, the Ancient Kingdom of Israel or otherwise.

In the Biblical works, as elsewhere in mythology, fatherhood is often a metaphor for rulership. Hence Aryan children may be born to proto-Jewish fathers, for example, much as the Aryan Jupiter was born to the Semitic Saturn. Thus a proto-Jewish Noah may be the father of an Aryan Japheth, a proto-Jewish Isaac, the father of an Aryan Esau and a proto-Jewish Jacob may be the father of an Aryan Joseph and so forth and so on. Likewise, as elsewhere in mythology, we are dealing with microcosm.   Hence Esau versus Jacob is Apollo versus Mercury or Aryan man versus Jewry.

In the Hebrew Bible we repeatedly encounter “Emasculation Events” that sometimes entail renaming and appear to remove a proto-Jewish status and reduce father figures to cuckolded Aryans. With Abraham it is his covenant with the Jewish God that requires circumcision, with Noah its his naked exposure to Ham, with Jacob it’s a “wrestling match” with one of Yahweh’s Angels. This is akin to the Aryan Caelus’ castration at the hands of a Semitic Saturn.  What we should never forget as well is the omnipresence of an inscrutable, wily, deceptive, “invisible” Yahweh who can always be suspected as being the real father of the second born Jew or “virgin birth” in every generation.

Considering these things practically, we might guess that these Biblical characters and stories were developed as relatively short and discrete parables. Then, at a later point, the characters appearing in these parables and the events of their lives assembled into a genealogy and history, as a means of more securely compiling them in a sort of definitive anthology of collected wisdom and JEM. To wit, if one is intrigued by one character’s life, he’ll be interested in his son’s life or his father’s life and so forth. More importantly, all the important parables are given a central “location.” It is in many ways imitable. Canons are, indeed, of great use in forming the identity and character of a people.

This compilatory structure we glimpse perhaps especially with Jacob. Again, with Jacob becoming Israel it seems we see an effort to “reset” the clearly proto-Jewish figure as an Aryan primogenitor so as to allow a repetitive narrative to play out among his children. Indeed, as this study explores, Israel is certainly a reference to Aryans. Possibly this is also done to create a sense of separation from Judah and unsavory, proto-Jewish ancestors such as Jacob, at least exoterically.   After all, the duplicitous or “wily” Jacob is clearly venerated as a model in Judaism vis-à-vis his more “barbaric” brother Esau, nevertheless. Regardless, when Jacob becomes Israel, Judah is allowed to triumph in an Aryan milieu vis-à-vis an Aryan father, like Saturn versus Caelus. To wit, it allows Judah to assume the role of Jew as inheritor of Aryan “plunder.” Hence JEM and instruction vis-à-vis an Aryan primogenitor is retained.

Indeed, in the Hebrew Bible, we find thematically redundant parables, esoterically depicting Aryan and Jewish rivalry among “brothers” appearing in successive generations of Biblical figures. Hence perhaps the most coherent reading of Biblical parables comes when one considers each generation of characters on their own. On the other hand, these generational conflicts among “brothers,” however awkwardly cobbled together become in a manner fitting. After all, Jews, since Sumer, have dwelt perpetually among their “brother” Aryans, where conflict is thus necessarily generational.

Finally we should look skeptically at any indication of religious devotedness among Biblical figures as by itself proof of genetic Jewishness. It is meaningless, for instance, that Jonah calls himself a Hebrew[2] even if it is certain this effeminate figure has been deeply influenced by Jews or the Jewish God, as this study will explicate. Jonah does worship him thus, ostensibly, is by Religion Jewish. Ostensibly Abraham, also cowed by a Jewish God, can be said to be in some final way Jewish. Yet racially both Jonah and Abraham are indicated Aryan in the JEM.

This provision is particularly true among female figures in the Biblical works who are often esoterically indicated as Aryans particularly by references to their beauty. To misread Jewish devotedness in this context among women, is to misunderstand the Jewish faith, which, as we glean especially from the JEM, is little more than the worship or adoration of the Jewish God Man, by whatever name. With women, it is the lover Inanna/Venus adoring Dumuzid/Adonia/Yahweh or the mother Maia/Terra adoring Mercury/Saturn and so forth.

In other words, Jewish faith, as it appears among women, for example, may be defined as little more than a sexual availability toward Jewish men particularly for procreation. If symbolic costumes, symbols and rituals appear, as devotion to this race of men solidifies and women are born from Jewish fathers or mothers and actually take on Jewish genes, become “Priestesses of Sin,” this does nothing to disrupt my premise.

To the extent primogenitureship in the Bible is indicated as designating this or that Aryan figure Jewish in hindsight, the primogenitureship is better understood as retroactively developed. To wit, being descended from Shem, for example, indicates less descent from Semites but rather absorption among Semites.   In other words, King Saul, for example, is clearly an Aryan figure. Yet through the usurpation of his line by King David, he becomes retroactively a Jewish king, absorbed or converted into the vine of Judah. Regardless, when reading Biblical works one should always be mindful of the deliberate vagueness of Jewishness. What is clear here as well, is that the story of the Hebrew Bible, is our story as well, yet told from the calculating perspective of a Semitic adversary that is surprisingly earnest in its assessment of itself or at least its intent vis-à-vis Aryans.

 

[1] Genesis 32:22

[2] Jonah 1:9