»Thomas, brother of Jesus ?«

Usually I don't make religious analysis but I found that interesting text that may interest some of you :

The Gospel according to THomas were found in 1945 in Egypt. Jude Thomas was supposed to be the hidden twin brother of Jesus. It was a copy of a document supposed to have been written in 105 AD.

The text is introduced as being a secret revelation made by Jesus, that only gnostic believers could understand. Those who were able to understand it were promised to "never taste the death".

Thomas was supposed to have found those secrets and thus is supposed to live nowadays.
Of course, Thomas Anderson (Anderson means son of the man, wich was one of Jesus' name) fits perfectly to that theory. Any comment ?

A lot of people were comparing Neo to Saint Thomas, but it seems to me that the W. brothers were rather referring to Jude Thomas. Didn't they say that Matrix was definitly containing gnostic theories ?

source :

I forgot to add the relation I see in that :

The lyrics say that Neo was going from the death to the immortality. When Jude Thomas understood the secrets of the agnostic texts, he became immortal.
When Neo understood the secrets of the matrix, he became immortal too (according to me, Neo's mind has been copied and he's a program now).

Jude Thomas is not the original Messiah, but he's supposed to have a link with immortality like the Jesus. Neo is not the original One too and yet he followed the path of the One to the Source.

Anderson means "son of the man", wich is the name given to Jesus in the apocryphal texts.

A few things that might help here.

First of all, a minor detail, an 'agnostic' is someone who does not believe that it is possible to gain knowledge of God. You will probably recognise that a theist is someone who believes in God while an atheist is someone who does not. In the same way 'gnostic' refers to religious knowledge and agnosticism is the denial of religious knowledge.

The point being that I think you probably meant to say "the secrets of the gnostic texts" not agnostic texts.

The second point is that Jude Thomas could not have been Jesus twin. You may well have stumbled across a common error on this forum since we all presumed the Gospel of Thomas was written by the disciple rather than one of Jesus' younger brothers. The fact that Thomas the disciple had been responsible for spreading Christianity to India had caused this mistake to develop.

The reason Jude Thomas could not have been Jesus' twin is that this would make Jude another 'Son Of God' and therefore there would have to be a fourth hypostasis (person of the trinity) (maybe you wish to assert that this is the case but I doubt it). It is more likely that, like James, this is another of the children had by Jospeph and Mary once they were married.

Third point. When it says that he who understands the gospel of Thomas "shall not taste death", it does not mean that they shall not die. What it means is that, like with Christ, death shall have no hold over them and they shall be resurrected at the second coming. Jesus is seen to have 'conquered' death. (Do some interpret this phrase in the Gospel of Thomas as literal immortality? I did not know about this.)

I haven't been able to read the link you posted because my French is not good enough. However, I went to the following site to check out the details:

Cool Apoc that you found the Twin-path!

"Jude Thomas" was his full name, mostly known as just "Thomas". Compare "Simon Peter", mostly known as "Peter".

First point above: agree, though there is debate upon if the gospel of Thomas is really gnostic. Some would say it is "pre-gnostic", about in the same degree as the letters of Paul are "gnostic-colored".

Second point: Several Christians, (some churches of the East and maybe some orthodox churches) has held (and still do?) to the view that Apostle Thomas really was the twin of Jesus. I don't know how they got around the theological consequences of such a statement, but apparently they did. (And we can't just say that our theology is more advanced today. Their theology was probably just as advanced as ours).

Third point: agree


As someone who has studied (Gospel of) Thomas for several years now, I sense how Neo's name Thomas is a clear parallel to Thomas, the author of this gospel. For example, the "Know thyself"-theme has these parallels in this gospel:

Quote:

When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and you will understand that you are children of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty. (logoi 3)

or

Quote:

Jesus said, "Those who know all, but are lacking in themselves, are utterly lacking." (logoi 67)

Here's a parallel (though not an exact parallel) to "beginning and end"-theme:

Quote:

The disciples said to Jesus, "Tell us, how will our end come?" Jesus said, "Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is. Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death." (logoi 18 )

Btw, "Thomas" means twin, and this meaning could have been given to him as a disciple, since "Thomas" can also mean "thyme" in Aramaic. Many see Thomas as the disciple that resembled Jesus in more than one way. Some traditions say that he was a carpenter, as Jesus was. Others see also a more spiritual affinity to his Master. Some traditions say that they almost looked alike, and accordingly, in the Acts of Thomas, Jesus sees to it that he sold himself as a slave to slave merchants. When they see Thomas they take for granted he's the slave they just bought (since Thomas looks identical to Jesus). In that way Jesus sees to it that Thomas gets transported to India (to mission there, which Thomas before disagreed upon).

There is one passage in the gospel of Thomas that is an expression of this total spiritual affinity Thomas has to his Master:

Quote:

Jesus said to his disciples, "Compare me to something and tell me what I am like." Simon Peter said to him, "You are like a just messenger." Matthew said to him, "You are like a wise philosopher." Thomas said to him, "Teacher, my mouth is utterly unable to say what you are like." Jesus said, "I am not your teacher. Because you have drunk, you have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring that I have tended." And he took him, and withdrew, and spoke three sayings to him. When Thomas came back to his friends they asked him, "What did Jesus say to you?" Thomas said to them, "If I tell you one of the sayings he spoke to me, you will pick up rocks and stone me, and fire will come from the rocks and devour you." (logoi 13)

! ! !

This is in any respect the essence of the Twinness of Thomas and actually the message of his Gospel: Jesus has pathed the Way, and we are called to go as his twins that same spiritual path!


/z

**edited by myself 00:17 Big Ben Time June 11 2004**

Fatpie42 wrote:

First of all, a minor detail, an 'agnostic' is someone who does not believe that it is possible to gain knowledge of God.

Thanks for that sum up to both of you, it's always interesting since I suck at religions. In fact I just wrote agnostic instead of gnostic once. Just a typing error. There are a lot of gnostic theories, and many are different one from each other, according to what I read.

For the rest, I didn't want to debate about Jude's legitimacy but about the fact that the W. brothers were maybe referring to Jude rather than to Saint Thomas when they gave the name of Thomas Anderson to Neo. My purpose was rather to make a Matrix oriented debate and not really about whether those scripts were true or not (even if it's still interesting).

Most of characters are referring to old deities that we know never existed, so why should Jude Thomas be required to exist in order to be mentioned in the movie ? See what I mean ?
Jude being or not the twin brother of Jesus is not important, what matters is to know wich signification the brothers gave to that allusion.

zynxamek wrote:

"Thomas" means twin

Actually, according to Fatpie's link, in the triple name Didymus Judas Thomas, Didymus is Greek for 'twin'.

But all your post is very interesting, indeed the path of Thomas is so close to Neo's. Your post reinforce my belief that the brothers were referring to Jude Thomas and not Saint Thomas like many stated before. Thanks zynxamek

(yeah, Fatpie42 is right, Didymos is "twin" in Greek; Thomas is "twin" in aramaic or hebrew: the same name translated into different languages)

(compare with Peter (or Petros) which is "rock" in Greek. But Peter is also called Kefas which really is the same name since it means the same, but in Aramaic/Hebrew)

(bottom line: Didymos = Thomas = Twin = Person finding the twin path of the Messiah = Thomas Anderson !)

(I guess people in those times had a Greek name besides their native name, since Greek was the international language in those Hellenistic times. Similar to how Chinese today take on English names besides their Chinese names)

gotta make me some coffee soon!
/z

(whose chinese name is Ruihua, but whose english name is ... well, I'll let people guess that!)

(100th post! Great!)

I connected the name Thomas as a parallel to the doubting Tom. The scene when Tom Anderson is given the tracer pill in M1 and touches the mirror with two fingers reminds me of when, in the Bible, Thomas said he could not believe that Jesus was risen until he put his own to fingers into the wound of his side. -Hence the name doubting Tom and I connect the doubting Tom to the unacceptance of the Matrix of Thomas Anderson.
I don't know if that is the same disciple Thomas you mean but it is a connection I thought I'd add.

Yes, the Doubting Thomas is identical to Apostle Thomas. You can read about that in the gospel of John. (Actually, the other disciples doubted too prior to seeing Jesus face to face). The term itself, "doubting Thomas", is never found in the bible texts: it's only due to tradition.

That's very interesting indeed Agent M! And when he doubts later, when he says something like "Get me outta here!", he's actually doing what Trinity advised him before: "be honest". This is of course what Thomas is also known for: total honesty.

The question is if Jude Thomas (who wrote the gospel of Thomas) is identical to the Apostle Thomas. Episodes from this gospel do give an impression of being first hand accounts, especially the (non-)confession of Thomas which I quoted above. But this, of course, doesn't exclude the possibility that the gospel was put together and written by another disciple called Thomas, more specifically "Jude Thomas".

Maybe "Jude Thomas" was the legendary Twin of Jesus? But one doesn't need a separate Thomas for that, since the Apostle Thomas had precisely this legend applied to him. But, of course, this doesn't either exclude the possibility that the Twin was another disciple called Thomas.

Maybe "Jude Thomas" was this Saint Thomas? But isn't Saint Thomas synomous for the Apostle Thomas? I'm not catholic, so I'm not very good at Saints and their identity, so I am not 100% sure who Saint Thomas is supposed to be. But if there is a church called St Thomas Church, I think 98% would persume that it is the Apostle Thomas who is refered to, (at least 98% of protestants).

Sure, the WachBroth could be refering to "Jude Thomas", but how would that be different from refering to "Apostle Thomas"? Is it reference to the Apostle Jude who commited suicide, or the other Apostle Jude, or the brother (read: near male relative) of Jesus called Jude (who could be identical to the apostle)? Please fill in if you have any idea of what the WachBrothers could have thought of if refering to some "Jude"...

The WachBrothers are Jewish aren't they? ? ? (I've only assumed this) In any case, "Jude" could be a reference to jewishness maybe? "Jude"="Judah" the tribe = "Jew" someone coming from the province of "Judah".

Incidentely, I was just going to add in the thread on eastern and western world-views that Judaism could be a wonderful example on how East and West actually meet! Maybe "Jude Thomas" is the Jewish Messiah for the future mankind (and machinekind) at year 2199!

/z

Since the wachowskis never mention Jude, making the connection to Judah seems a bit premature. I think what we are coming to realise here is that the Wachowskis may be referring to both Thomas's and not simply one of them.

Many lines in the matrix have been noted as having double meanings.

Refering to both Thomases, or simply to the "Thomas Legend" or to "Thomas" as the symbolic representative of the "Gnostic Christianity", which maybe one would want to call the Know-Thyself-Christianity or One-with-the-All-Christianity!

The WachBroth must have had known a pretty good repetoire of ideas. I mean the Nag Hammadi discovery is not as well known as the Dead Sea Scrolls. But maybe "Gnostic Chrisitanity" is gaining greater and greater momentum? The Anomaly is growing?


/z

If I may offer an alternative explanation, (and one that makes a bit more sense, to Occam) the Gospel of Thomas (just like the other gospels) was most likely not written by a disciple of Christ inasmuch as that means 'one of the twelve' -- Thomas and John are generally accepted as the oldest Christian gospel texts, but also generally accepted that the writers of the texts were probably not John the Apostle, nor Thomas the Apostle. (In fact, some scholars argue that the original attribution of the Gospel of John, 'The Gospel of the Beloved Apostle', actually refers to Mary Magdalene. Try reading John with this in mind sometime -- it can be rather enlightening!)

Didymos Judas Thomas is indeed the name to whom the Gospel of Thomas is attributed, and nowhere does this full name occur in other Christian texts (to my knowledge). If we look at this name symbolically, it makes a little more sense. As discussed, Didymos is Greek, and Thomas is Hebrew, and both mean 'Twin.' The original intent of the earliest Christians was most likely to enlighten their Jewish brethren, many of whom were Hellenized, that is, brought up in Greek society, remnants of the Greek Empire that existed before the Romans took control of the Western world. Greek was still a very common, universal language -- as you probably are aware, most of the New Testament was written originally in Greek. So, 'Didymos Thomas' was probably emphasizing the point in two languages, the two languages of the people the early Christians were trying to reach.

But what of 'Judas?' We know Judas Iscariot, in the Jesus stories, the betrayer of Jesus. But I should explain another Gnostic idea first -- that of the Daemon and Eidolon.

Gnostics (I have said before on these forums) were not only Christians; there were gnostics (lit., 'knowers') in all religions: Pagan (gnostikoi), Hindu (gnani), Buddhist (Buddha='enlightened'), etc. Pagan gnostics were initiated in esoteric schools -- such as the one at Eleusis -- which today we tend to call 'Mystery schools.' At the heart of the Mysteries is the idea of essence and appearance: syzygy. Two necessarily appearing as one. Essence (Daemon) and appearance (eidolon, from which we get the English word 'idol,' among others) are at the centre of all Gnostic thought.

Eidolon is the 'twin image' of Daemon. In more modern, human terms, we could think of Daemon as 'soul' and eidolon as 'body.' Essence and appearance.

Now, back to Judas. In light of Gnostic thought, it would seem that the author(s) of the Gospel of Thomas are trying to tell us that their Judas Thomas is linked to Judas Iscariot, and therefore that the Iscariot of the Jesus stories is the eidolon, which betrayed the Daemon Jesus (remember that the negative connotation of 'daemon' did not show up till much later in history, lest we think the Gnostics to be anti-Christian, which is absurd). The eidolon (body) betrays the Daemon (soul) in many ways, which I won't go into here. You can sort that out on your own.

Remember the television set in the Construct in M1? The brand on the front and back (you kinda have to squint, or have a huge screen, to see it) is 'Twin Image.' Eidolon also could describe the Matrix itself, Baudrillard's map, RSI....

There are many other Christian references to the 'Twin' or 'Brother' of Christ, including James, Thomas, others I don't recall at the moment and don't have time to look up right now. The fact that they all are purported to be Jesus' brothers or twins (in itself an obvious fallacy) points to the fact that it isn't meant to be taken literally, but instead refers to the eidolon.

From a gnostic perspective, then, I believe Neo -- Thomas A. Anderson -- refers to the fact that he is a 'Twin,' the eidolon of every one of us who watch the films! He is the 'Son of Man,' as Jesus was, for us in a new society, a new milennium. (Don't you dare think that I am suggesting that we set up a religion of Neo! 'Son of Man' was used not only for Jesus; Enoch was also called 'Son of Man.' It is a term used to represent the 'Universal Daemon,' or Primal Man, the One Consciousness, the Logos [embodied by Jesus, but existing for all time].) From a gnostic perspective, in fact, the whole Matrix Trilogy is an imaginative retelling of the universal and perennial stories of the ancients.

... to the first question and, having all of you answered really well about the nature of "Thomas" "Didumus" and the several "Judas" that may be linked to the story of Jesus (and some could even recall another example of the eidilon/Daemon paradigma in the trial of Jesus vs Bar-Abbas, whose first name was... Jesus!) I would only add that, the fact that Thomas means "twin" (interpreted by some of you as "brother" in a blood line tipe) could mean simply someone who was a "neofite", an iniciated in the path of Mysteries a cadidate to "enlightenment" - a brother of "awareness" more than a brother of "blood"... so to speak.

lusiada wrote:

... the fact that Thomas means "twin" (interpreted by some of you as "brother" in a blood line tipe) could mean simply someone who was a "neofite", an iniciated in the path of Mysteries a cadidate to "enlightenment" - a brother of "awareness" more than a brother of "blood"... so to speak.

An excellent point (if I interpret correctly, and I believe that I do). 'Brother' is a term used in many many many fraternal societies to this day, to show relationship among the initiated. In my own fraternity, Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia Fraternity of America Inc. (the full name -- sometimes I just like to say the whole thing, sorry! -- of the oldest music fraternity in the USA) for instance, we call other members 'Brother' from time to time, and the term applies only to initiates. I can only assume that this nomenclature applies as well in other fraternal organizations; there are many of them out there, and most of their origins can be traced back to Freemasonry, which can be traced back to the esoteric Mystery schools. (Not being a Mason, I cannot tell you how much they actually have in common with the Mysteries.... Actually, I'm not so sure I could tell you even if I WAS a Mason!... That is sort of the whole point of the vow of secrecy the initiates of the Mysteries [as well as fraternal organizations of today] took. No initiate could disclose the sacred teachings of the initiation rituals to any non-initiate. Punishment was severe. The reason was nothing more or less than the fact that -- recalling the words of Morpheus -- no one can be told the nature of the Mystery; you have to experience it for yourself.)

The New Advent website has newadvent.org... to say about the Brethren of Jesus. From a Catholic perspective, it seems to make plain the fact that Jesus had no true 'brothers' in blood; but let us not forget that the Gnostics were far from 'Catholic,' (i.e., 'Universal,' as the term implies) and that their teachings had far more in common with the perennial philosophy of the Mysteries than with the Literalist Christianity of Constantine's Empire. Therefore, we should seek the symbolism in words such as 'Twin,' and 'Brother,' rather than trying to sort out bloodlines that may or may not have any basis in fact whatsoever. Gnostics (of any and all persuasions) used symbols -- such as a name -- to show connections, 'for those with ears to hear.'

annaerullo wrote:

The fact that they all are purported to be Jesus' brothers or twins (in itself an obvious fallacy) points to the fact that it isn't meant to be taken literally, but instead refers to the eidolon.

You mean that for you, the fact that it is written in several books is the proof that it's not true ? You read a lot annaerullo, that's a good thing, but knowledge without self-questionning is irrelevant.
Why should it be an "obvious fallacy" ? Jesus' famly has been mentioned several times in different gospels and till the proof of the contrary, these gospels are as well worth than any other for what concerns me.

Also, the way you easely change word's signification is frigthening, does it mean that any word that you see and that does not fit your personal views will be interpreted as being an "image" of what they basically mean ? Brother becomes "friend", Jude becomes Judas, etc. You're loosing it dude.

-------------------------------------------------

But back to Matrix : I believe that the brothers were referring to Jude because they called Neo "Anderson" wich means "son of the man". Jesus has been called son of the man in the bible or a gospel, I can't remember exactly where but I'm sure of it.

Apocryphe wrote:

the way you easely change word's signification is frigthening, does it mean that any word that you see and that does not fit your personal views will be interpreted as being an "image" of what they basically mean ? Brother becomes "friend", Jude becomes Judas, etc. You're loosing it dude.

Have you ever heard of the term 'brotherhood'? Referring to someone as 'brother' is often a term of closeness. Jesus' teachings are all about getting close to God. If we do not think that Thomas is necessarily a literal brother then there is nothing strange about imagining the term to signify brotherhood rather than blood relation.

Also, if you check on the link I gave earlier you will see that Jude is another way of writing Judas (just as James is another way of writing Jacob - check your dictionary for details).

Fiirst, thank you Fatpie; you saved me the trouble of responding to a couple of things.

Second, Apocryphe, you are correct to say that 'knowledge without self-questionning is irrelevant.' I don't think my knowledge is infallable. In fact, the more I learn, I believe the less I know. I'm just offering alternatives.

Third, in response to, 'Why should it be an "obvious fallacy" ?' ...I was referring to the idea that Jesus could have more than one literal twin; By definition, twins are TWO, so Jesus and ONLY ONE OTHER could possibly be twins. We cannot accept that he could have more than one twin brother by blood.

Jesus' family is detailed at the beginning of two gospels, and both trace Jesus' lineage back to David, but with two totally different lines. Did someone get it wrong? Or is it meant to be symbolic?

It is unacceptable that both genealogies can be literally correct (which is what we have to accept if we say that the Bible is God's word, and God's word is infallable -- there's another fallacy for you). Now, both genealogies trace Jesus' lineage through Joseph, though this is clearly incongruent with the idea that Jesus was the Son of God and Mary, and NOT of Joseph (though Luke says, '(as was supposed) the son of Joseph' and Matthew simply washes over it, saying 'Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus,' etc.).

The Jewish Messiah was supposed to be of the line of King David. The dying and resurrecting Godman Osiris-Dionysus was the 'Son of God,' in every single 'incarnation' of the legend. Symbolically, then, Jesus is the Messiah, the great king who comes to lead his people (the Hebrews) to victory in their most desperate times (the Roman Empire's treatment of Jews was pretty bad, especially in Judea, where Pontius Pilate ruled -- if the Messiah didn't come then, in their most desperate hour, well, he simply couldn't be the Messiah) -- and, he is also the dying and resurrecting Son of God, who can lead ALL humanity to the greater Kingdom of Heaven.

My point is that the writers of the story of Jesus took things from Jewish myth (the Messiah), Pagan myth (Osiris-Dionysos), historical fact (Pilate, the Romans, and probably a real rabbi who preached in Galilee, whose name may or may not have been Yaohushua [Yeshua] ben Yoseph) and synthesized it into the story we know today. This does not make the stories any less true, on the contrary: in myth and allegory are the greatest truths revealed.

Fourth, on the subject of changing words.... The more I study philology (both meanings) and etymology, the more I realize just how fluid language is. Both Greek and Latin can be traced back to Sanskrit, for example, and some words have cognates in many other languages. In almost every language in the world, the word for 'mother' begins with the same sound, and 'mama' or a similar word can be found to be spoken by children in all parts of the globe. Words and names are altered by culture and history in small steps. So Jude can be the same as Judas, Matthew can become Annaerullo, and Thomas and Didymos can mean the same thing.

And finally, Jesus is referred to as 'the Son of Man,' usually by Jesus himself, many times in the gospels. Refer back to what I said before, though: Enoch was also called 'the Son of Man.' In Greek, the word for 'man' is 'andros' (cf. 'Anderson'). In fact, the name 'Adam' comes from the Hebrew word for 'Man.'

Quote:

It could be ultimately derived from Hebrew adam meaning "to be red", referring to the ruddy colour of human skin, or from Assyrian adamu meaning "to make". According to Genesis in the Old Testament Adam was created from the earth by God (there is a word play on Hebrew adamah "earth"). (-from the website behindthename.com...

Quote:

Now, both genealogies trace Jesus' lineage through Joseph, though this is clearly incongruent with the idea that Jesus was the Son of God and Mary, and NOT of Joseph

In the bible, they call Jesus "son of man", "son of God" but they also say that all the humans are "son of God". So now, you see that I could interpret Jesus being the son of God as being a symbolic term, right ?
My point here, is that we could talk for hours but pretending that one or another fact is true, would be irrelevant because the sacred texts are not very explanatory.
I saw once a documentary in wich they said that it was never said precisely that Jesus was God made flesh.

annaerullo wrote:

Jesus is the Messiah, the great king who comes to lead his people (the Hebrews) to victory in their most desperate times

Btw,that's little off topic, but was the prohpecy fullfilled ? After all, the Hebrews didn't stay in Jerusalem very long and right now, their "promised land" is a country surounded by ennemies and moreover the only one without petrol. God was not very cool with them about that promise.
What was the promised land supposed to be exactly ?

annaerullo wrote:

whose name may or may not have been Yaohushua [Yeshua] ben Yoseph) and synthesized it into the story we know today.

I read on internet once, that there was a very popular myth at the time of Jesus, except that it was a Roman one. The myth was telling a very similar story to Jesus (death, return, scarifying himself ofr humanity etc.).
Whoever wrote the bible, maybe they were inspired by that legend to beter "sell" it.

annaerullo wrote:

does not make the stories any less true, on the contrary: in myth and allegory are the greatest truths revealed.

Well, see above what I said about the promised land prophecy

It was a nice post Annaerullo... but my opinion is still (for now) that Jude is the allegory for Thomas Anderson

Fatpie42 wrote:

Also, if you check on the link I gave earlier you will see that Jude is another way of writing Judas (just as James is another way of writing Jacob - check your dictionary for details).

In fact, if I remember well it said that it was possibly Juda but I read on that page (or maybe a link, I can't remember) that it didn't make a lot of sense to think that Jude standed for Judas, because of the way Jude was described in the apocryphal texts.

Apocryphe wrote:

I read on internet once, that there was a very popular myth at the time of Jesus, except that it was a Roman one. The myth was telling a very similar story to Jesus (death, return, scarifying himself ofr humanity etc.).

You may be talking about Mithras, which was a popular 'cult' in the Roman Empire for about 350 years, before the 'cult' of Christianity took hold. It was actually a Persian myth (modern day Iran). Mithras was born of a virgin on the winter solstice (then December 25), died by crucifixion, rose from the dead after three days, and was said to be the Son of God, sent to save mankind from our sins (or something to that effect).

Other regional myths with the same essential storyline include Attis (in Asia Minor), Adonis (in Syria), Marduk (in Mesopotamia), Osiris (in Egypt), Dionysus (in Greece) and Baal (in the area around Judea). There is actually a Goddess that most people ignore when talking about Christ (Mary is often her name, but she's also called Sophia) and she has her counterparts as well: Cybele, Aphrodite, Ishtar, Isis, Persephone, and Asherah, respectively; Mithras' Goddess is the Magna Mater (great mother). But as that's far more off-topic than talking about whether the prophecy of the Messiah was fulfilled, (most Jews today believe that it wasn't, while most Christians believe that it was) I'll leave off for now.

Yes it was that Mithras! I thought that it was a roman myth because they used to accept any new belief as long as it helped them to beter control the conquered lands

But I'm very interested by what you said about Persephone... what are the common points between her and Mary ?

Each of the godmen and goddesses I mentioned were the central myths of the Mystery schools in each region. As I may have mentioned before, in various other threads, the Mysteries used their myths in two ways: first, to advance moral and ethical ideals for the masses; anyone was welcome to take part in these Outer Mysteries, and their respective rituals... second, to encode the secret, esoteric teachings of the Inner Mysteries for the initiated; these teachings basically amount to the perennial philosophy -- All is One; the psyche's descent into the body, and the way out, back to the One/God/Consciousness.

Dionysos is the godman of the Mysteries at Eleusis, and his Goddess was Proserpine, or Persephone. I believe Plato mentioned that the name Persephone contains the root 'sophia,' which means 'wisdom' in Greek. Sophia is also a name commonly used by Christian Mystery initiates (Gnostics) for the Goddess.

The Goddess myth is all about the psyche's fall from the perfection of the One into identification with the body. In the Greek myth, Persephone (psyche) is seduced into the underworld (the body) by Pluto. Her mother, Demeter (the higher aspect of the Goddess, which is the perfect psyche) searches for her, and she is eventually found. Pluto, however, secretly gives Persephone pomegranate seeds in the underworld, which forces her to return there for half the year. Symbolically, this encodes a mythical explanation for the seasons of the year in the Outer Mysteries - Demeter's sorrow for the six months Persephone is in the underworld creates winter on Earth; but for those initiates 'with ears to hear,' this means that the psyche is doomed to repeat its descent into the body until it is able to understand the Mystery and ascend perfected to be reunited with the One.

You can read the Gnostic version of the psyche Sophia's fall in gnosis.org....

Mary the Mother of Jesus and Mary Magdalene represent the higher and fallen aspects of the goddess, respectively. Read the Exegesis, and notice that Sophia (for a time) and the Magdalene both are prostitutes; this signifies that the fallen psyche experiences and identifies with the pleasures and temptations of the body; the higher psyche (the once and future Virgin) has no need for such things, because she identifies her 'self' with soul, spirit and the Mystery.

Spot on about the Romans. I hate the Romans, already.

The Empire pre-Constantine basically accepted any myth or religious system that was reasonably popular, so as to keep the people relatively happy.... They still persecuted pretty much anyone who wasn't a Roman, but they were more lenient with any larger group -- the bigger the group, the bigger the threat of rebellion. Then Constantine converted his empire to Christianity, killed his wife and son, and then waited till he was on his deathbed to be baptised himself. Evidently, he wanted to be free to carry on his atrocities, but still get into heaven in the end. Kinda makes Saddam look good by comparison, if you ask me.

It was common - on those that were near to death- to be baptised as a means to go "pure" in to "the other side".
Constantin baptism was the same as many others that fallowed the new rites of the christian theology. No big deal about it.
You could say that he was baptised under Arian influence - but that's another issue.

About the wifes of Constantin and his step son - If you dig deeper, you'll notice that treason was commited and lifes were at risk.
As an emperor, he only applied justice equally to every one - conspiracy agains the roman empire - "seditio" - had a pain of death...

I'm not defending Constantin as a Saint, I'm just saying he was a man - nor good or evil - just a man.

But, one thing is for sure - he was a clever man and his cleverness made the difference towards his enemyes and marked his name on the empire's history...

The whole theory that Thomas was the twin of Jesus is shaky at best. The only support or evidence for the assertion is that he is named "twin" (albeit twice as Thomas and Didymos). In no other way is it even implied that Thomas is Jesus's twin. I think a better explanation is that he is called a twin for indentification purposes. His real name is Judas, and as we all know, there was another Judas named Iscariot. So to identify Judas Thomas, they call him Judas the Twin, meaning that he is somebody's twin, which was still pretty uncommon and notable back then. And they name him twin twice because those were the two big languages for christians back then and not everyone spoke both.

However, I do believe that the name Thomas in Thomas Anderson has a meaning. Anderson, of course, denotes the Messiah or "Son of Man". I think that Thomas is kind of a tribute to Thomas's gospel or a reference that Neo is like Jesus but he's like Thomas's version of Jesus, the Gnostic Jesus. The Wachowski Brothers were much more subtle in the first movie about their hidden meanings than they were in the sequels.

Hmm, I don't know annaerullo, the link between Persephone and Mary is far stretched.

bachsoffice, from what I read, there was more than the name in the twin theory.

I wonder if the ability of Merv to go in/out of the Matrix is not linked with Persephone. Maybe that she was the only one program allowed to go there at will, and that he built his system after that gateway.

Apocryphe wrote:

Hmm, I don't know annaerullo, the link between Persephone and Mary is far stretched.

Not at all. You simply have to dig deeper. Get more information. I just gave you a very bare-bones, summary description of what I have discovered. Read more for yourself, if you like. I recommend the books by T.Freke and P.Gandy, The Jesus Mysteries and Jesus and the Goddess.

Apocryphe wrote:

bachsoffice, from what I read, there was more than the name in the twin theory.

Absolutely. Much more. The very fact that it is included twice, in two languages, is indicative of the importance of the 'twin'-ness of the attributed author of the text; the 'twin'-ness itself, when viewed in light of the perennial philosophy, and its mythical language, says much about the text itself. That it is used for Neo also says much about the nature of Neo, that he himself is a 'twin.' Of what or whom is up for debate, but I believe he is meant to be the 'twin' of each of us; as he experiences the events which take place in the movies, we watch and share in that experience. As our 'twin,' he accepts our fate as his fate - he saves mankind in the movie, and in understanding his choices, we can save ourselves as well. (don't try thinking about this literally; it isn't meant to be.)

Apocryphe wrote:

I wonder if the ability of Merv to go in/out of the Matrix is not linked with Persephone. Maybe that she was the only one program allowed to go there at will, and that he built his system after that gateway.

That's interesting. Where/how did you come to this idea? I can't think of any part which suggests that she has this ability, but maybe I missed something?