Customer Reviews

The Mystical Life of Jesus

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Among other things, "Mystical Life of Jesus," cites many fascinating factoids about Jesus and His native land that the average theologian, and the more puerile/credulous factions of New Age spirituality, seem wholly ignorant of even to this day.

For example, Lewis asserts that reincarnation was a well-known doctrine to the general populace-including Jesus and his followers. Unaffiliated scholars agree, for Christianity accepted reincarnation until 553 AD, when it was dropped from the doctrine at the Fifth Ecumenical Council at Constantinople for reasons that may have been far more political than theological. Consequently since the Synoptic Gospels date from 66-74 & 132-135 AD, certain Biblical passages suggestive of reincarnation may indeed be subtle remnants of Christianity's original reincarnation doctrine. That may also explain why Jesus spoke well of the Samaritans despite the fact that they believed in reincarnation as revealed in their Taheb doctrine. The Gnostics who refused to forsake reincarnation after 553 AD were suddenly overnight "heretics," but was it actually the Church that was guilty of heresy insofar as Jesus' original teachings were concerned?

Insofar as Judaism and reincarnation are concerned the Zohar, the Manasseh Ben Israel & other Jewish books all affirm reincarnation. The Hassidic Jews still believe in reincarnation, as does mystical Judaism (Kabala). Moreover, according to Flavius Josephus, Eleazar, commander of the garrison at Masada before it fell to the Romans, gave speeches that radically departed from modern Judaism. They were astonishingly Essene, & even *Gnostic*, in nature with concepts like pre-existing immortal souls & reincarnation.

Ever heard of the Essenes? Back in 1929 Lewis did. He wrote at length of the Essene sect and in great detail. And consider this: The Dead Sea Scrolls that mentioned the Essenes for the first time in modern history were not discovered until 1945! Therefore Lewis wrote of the Essenes sixteen years before the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered! Such is easily verified and cannot simply be summarily dismissed by even the most obstinately entrenched of scoffers or dogmatists.

So does it mean anything that in the original verse Jesus was referred to as "Jesus the Nazarene" rather than "Jesus of Nazareth?" Is there physical evidence that Nazareth existed during the time of Jesus? Lewis says `no,' and provides intriguing references to support his contention. Interestingly unaffiliated scholars point out that Roman maps & papers; the Talmud; St. Paul, & even Flavius Josephus never mention Nazareth.

Is Jesus the first and only "son of God," or is there precedent for differing but equal Christs or Christos "myths" throughout the world? Lewis points out that the Christian fathers were aware of previous Christos myths that occurred on December 25th that there were heralded with the well-known signs and portents: A star in the east, virgin birth, wise men in attendance and etc...

So what does it all mean?

While dogmatists and atheists have their own theories, according to mystics like Lewis, previous Christs of all races, faiths & philosophies --like Jesus-- all came from the same Creator and were all equal but different based on the needs and idiosyncrasies of the times and cultures. The implication is that orthodox Christianity could be vastly different--even incompatible--with what Jesus actually taught or indeed ANY species of intolerant orthodox religious belief.

Could Jesus have been a Gentile instead of a Jew? Was He celibate? Lewis seems to think both. Unaffiliated scholars point out that if a Rabbi, Jesus would have been expected to obey the Mishnaic Law that required all Jews to marry before teaching, thus he have been expected to have children. Judaic orthodox culture rigorously condemned celibacy, yet there's absolutely no mention of Jesus' presumed celibacy in the Bible.

Otherwise could humanistic references to Jesus have been expunged from the Bible because they contradicted the Nicene Ecumenical Council that voted Jesus equal to God? The vote was not unanimous.

Perhaps most astonishingly, Lewis asserts that Jesus survived the crucifixion and points out some intriguing points to support his theory. Unaffiliated scholars point out that even Bishop Irenaeus of Lyons held that Jesus survived the crucifixion and lived to be an old man. According to some, the "Apocalypse of Peter" (Greek) asserts that Jesus survived the crucifixion. However others assert that the Dead Sea Scrolls, Hebrews 5:7-8 and Gospel of Barnabas reveal the crucifixion to be a hoax. Is that necessarily a contradiction?

Furthermore any Judaic historian should be able to tell you that Judaic law forbade the Sanhedrin to convene at night & only allowed execution by stoning. The "custom" of releasing prisoners during Passover *NEVER* existed. The vinegar given Jesus wasn't a torment but a common stimulant. And finally any Greco-Roman historian will tell you that the crucifixion routinely took days, or even weeks, to kill--not mere hours. And the crucifixion "cross" was actually a T, and the crucified were nailed through the wrists-not the palms.

In the original Greek, Joseph of Arimathea asks for the body of Jesus with the word "SOMA"--a word that applied ONLY to *LIVING* bodies. According to Roman law back then, the crucified were denied burial & left to decompose on the cross as a warning to others. And Roman Centurions, as a mercy, only broke the legs of the crucified *BEFORE* death to induce suffocation. It would be senseless to break the legs of a corpse. And quite pithily, Lewis points out that dead bodies-even crucified ones-thanks to gravity cannot bleed.

"Why do you seek the living among the dead?"

Could that quote have a startling alternative interpretation? Lewis certainly thinks so.

And finally, yes, there is a single illustration of an ancient swastika, several references to an ancient Asian "Great White Brotherhood," and the theory Jesus may have been an "Aryan." While perhaps perfectly innocent back in 1929, after a recent rereading even I winced at some of Lewis's somewhat archaic phraseology. While the entire logic of the book clearly refutes the one-star reviewers' criticisms, if however only the very beginning of the book is read--or the entire book merely skimmed-- there is the potential for misunderstanding, or willful misrepresentation, if certain things are taken out of context. Therefore I urge AMORC to consider a new revised edition to perhaps better reflect the sensibilities of the post World War Two age.

Keep these four points in mind as you read the one-star reviews and decide for yourself if they're logical and fair...or something else altogether:

First of all Lewis cites several Christ (Christos myths) from several times and cultures that predated Jesus the Christ as being equal in nature to Jesus, although Lewis considers Jesus to have been the last and greatest in degree to date--a view any reasonable person can see is totally incompatible with racism or Nazism.

Second, the "Swastika" is cites as being of ancient Asian origin, as well as Buddhist, East Indian, and even American Indian that precedes nazi Germany by centuries if not millenia. Any World War II historian can tell you that Hitler appropriated the swastika for Nazism-not the other way around-- as Hitler had a mania for mystical symbols.

Thirdly, the "Great White Brotherhood" and "Aryan" terms Lewis refers to are attributed to an *Asian* mystical organization named the former. Therefore, (I cannot believe that I actually have to actually point this out...) the "White" in "Great White Brotherhood" obvioulsy(!) wouldn't refer to skin pigmentation. Asian skin pigments tend to be on a continuum from yellow to tan or dark brown--hardly Nordic (or Nazi) lily white as some of the more, ah... obtuse would seem to think if such can actually be called thinking.

And fourth and finally no, this book has no bibliography as such. Considering the fact that Lewis wrote of the Essenes sixteen years before any university scholars even knew that that the Essenes had existed, such a scholary bibliography would have been impossible to create. Again, many subsequent scholarly works now support many of Lewis's contentions, some of which are in my readers's guide.

So read the book, *THINK*, and then decide for yourself.

Dr.Lewis reveals the largely unknown facts of the life of Jesus and the mystical nature of avatars. This book cleared up, for me, questions about why such a powerful "Son of God" would willingly lay down his life, why he almost dared the outcome to occur. Other reviews here make mistaken and unfair statements about Aryans and Nazis, nowhere is there made a statement that all great teachers are Aryan. Dr Lewis discusses teachers with similar births, deaths, and messages of enlightenment who have come from China, Central America, Europe etc. It is held, very assertively in this book, that Jesus is the lastest, greatest, and most loving teacher of mankind ever seen. This book made Him larger in my eyes than any church teachings, and more understandable. Highly recommended reading.

I wish more people would read this book. On one hand HSL's book contains fascinating information that rings very true. On the other hand, I wouldn't exactly describe the book as being "scholarly." It has a frustrating lack of references and often refers to archives of the Rosicrucian Order and the Brotherhood in White which apparently have never been made public. Even so, it would be better to have more specific references to works in such archives, photographs of such documents and records and such.

With respect to references to Naziism, when I read this book I wrote to AMORC's Grand Master and received a very nice letter in response. No, the Rosicrucian Order does not teach racism or Aryanism and totally repudiates such thinking. Still, it would be wise to print a clarification and disclaimer explaining this in the foreward.

Yet, as controversial as The Mystical Life of Jesus has been since it was published, many of the more modern and more scholarly works on the subject seem to validate many of HSL's unsubstantiated statements. In particular, The Templar Revelation is one recent example of these types of books.

Dr Lewis' research reconciles amazingly well with that of the dead sea scrolls which were discovered some 17 years later! The book is extremely well documented and very challenging.

Many of us have studied Christ's work through the teachings of the Bible. The Mystical Life of Jesus gives a deeper insight into the life of Jesus which in some instances does not reconcile with what is recorded in the Bible, but in other instances does. Although contraversial to some religions, the open and enquiring mind will find this book stimulating and most likely somewhat enriching.

I have read a review with references to Nazism due to the book suggesting Jesus' Aryan genetic origins. I suggest the reader makes their own opinion by reading the logic of this book with a rational reasoning mind.

I found this book to answere many of my own questions, and bring me much closer to His teachings.

Most people that have something negative to say about this book is because their religious believes make them angry to think that Jesus' life can really be more than what is learned at church.

I have been a Rosicrusian member for many years and I am now studying Kabbalah and I can only say from personal experiences that as time goes by the world is getting ready for big secrets to be revealed. Secrets that the church had concealed for many, many years. It does not matter what is your religion this book only opens new doors into the spiritual life of Jesus, if your heart and mind are open to the concepts discussed here, then you are ready to continue learning new spiritual lessons, the main reason why we are here in this world.

Mr. Lewis has a lot of really wonderful things to say, and I happen to believe much of it to be accurate. However, he does not deliver at all in the area of proof. Now, it is one thing if a person is speculating, or hypothesizing...but Mr Lewis continually states there are 'records' and 'documents' that prove what he is saying, yet he never shares any of it with the reader. I find this to be more than frustrating. Honestly, I have little respect for authors or people in general who do this sort of thing. Either state it is speculation, or provide proof that one states they have. It is obvious that the leaving out of this supposed proof is intentional. As I said, I happen to believe much of what he states is true (due to other books I have read over the years that do a much better job), I just don't like the way he handles it at all.

Lewis's book is well written. It flows nicely and is easy to read, something that cannot be said for most religious or mystical books. The book even makes common sense to anyone who has a mind that is open enough to consider what it says. The problem is the lack of evidence for Lewis's claims.

We live in an age where the public is constantly bombarded with news stories about the corruption of politicians, religious figures, CEO's, and our sports and pop stars. We now have strong evidence that a lot of the "truths" on which we and our forefathers were raised are actually myths, fables, and outright lies. Consequently, we are sceptics. We need evidence. Dr. Lewis's constant referrals to secret archives do not constitute evidence. Without evidence, a book that could otherwise be very interesting is, instead, weak.

This book is well written and lets one know missing information of the life of Jesus. I found it to be very informative and credible. It makes sense. Glad I read it.

It is a well researched and well written book by an authentic and authority in Mysticism.

There's not much more to say other than read it and judge for yourself. Anyway, I just hope you guys make a kindle version of this book so I can read and bring it along my kindle dx library.

The author brings some new information about the life of Jesus. Somethings are interesting in the historic sense, like the tribes that existed at those days and that the Messiah wasn't only a jewish belief, but a big waiting of different races. The author doesn't give the real foundations, he only says something about ancient documents that are encountered in Tibet ... I would like to know more about these documents.