A modernized version of the story of Jesus

The influence of Jesus story on a culture is a barometer of the knowledge associated about him. Yet alternative narratives to the story of Jesus have always been known, primarily by eastern historians whose cultures were ironically less affected by his revolution. While cultures which had less axes to this information or disregarded it all together were more affected by what then became Jesus' story in the west. It may be proposed then that the less a culture knew about Jesus himself the greater the possibility for his story to influence it. Why would this be? Perhaps this depended on the novelty of the message Jesus was attempting to deliver. According to many historical eastern accounts including Hindi, Buddhist and Muslim written documentations, Jesus or in their language Isa was already well known and written about before he ever set foot in Jerusalem as the messiah. It was Nicolas Notovich a Russian aristocrat, Cossack official and journalist who brought this information to the modern west. The "Life of Issa" begins with an account of the Israel people in Egypt, its deliverance by Moses, its neglect of religion, and its conquest by the Romans. Then follows an account of the Incarnation. At the age of thirteen the divine youth, rather than take a wife, leaves his home to wonder with a caravan of merchants to India (Sindh), to study the laws of the great Buddha. Issa is welcomed by the Jains, but leaves them to spend six years among the Brahmins, at Juggernaut, Benares, and other places, studying the Vedas.
         The Brahmins oppose him in this, and he denounces them and their sacred books, especially condemning caste and idolatry. When they plan to put him to death, he flees to the Buddhists, and spends six years among them, learning Pali and mastering their religious texts. He goes among the pagans, warning them against idolatry and teaching a high morality. Then he visits Persia and preaches to the Zoroastrians. At twenty-nine Issa returns to his own country and begins to preach. He visits Jerusalem, where Pilate is apprehensive about him. The Jewish leaders, however, are also apprehensive about his teachings yet he continues his work for three years. He is finally arrested and put to death for blasphemy, for claiming to be the son of God. His followers are persecuted, but his disciples carry his message out over the world.
In the Notovich translation, the section regarding Pontius Pilate is of particular note; in this version of the events around the death of Jesus, the Sanhedrim go to Pilate and argue to save the life of Jesus, and they are the ones who 'wash their hands' of his death, instead of the Roman Pilate. It was with some irony that Nicolas a Russian, would be the one to bring this story to the west. For Russia like the east did not have strong links to the west nor was this information given great significance in a culture keen on secular thinking.
         So once again the culture with the most information of Jesus is the one whoís least affected by him. The two may be similar but for very different reasons. The eastern cultures were not affected by Jesus not for their lack of knowledge of the man for they defiantly knew of him. It was more to do with what they knew of him. To the east Issa was a boy born of great status, who studied "with" them the great masters of "their" cultures. To the people of Kashmir and Tibet, Issa or Jesus was a student of their philosophy not a creator of one. His ideas were only new to the west. They were only revolutionary in the west. Having said that one my still want to ask, why such instant importance to this one man? It would seem at least that Jesus the real man from birth possessed the distinction of great importance in social status. Even as he appears seemingly from nowhere in the west he is instantly recognized by one John the Baptist. Yet what of the reasons for this instant recognition. A message from God perhaps? It would now be appropriate to mention the second side to this story of Jesus. An important piece of history carefully omitted by the roman historians.

       The story of Jesus has long had a strong link to the story of the Egyptian god Horus, and rightly so for Israeli culture has always been a derivative of the Egyptian belief system. The Egyptians believed in their sun god Horus. He was said to be the son of the father god Osiris and the mother god Isis. After Osiris was killed by the evil Set, Horus defends mankind against Set in a daily battle. In fact Horus was said to take 12 steps across the sky in hot pursuit of Set chasing the night away. We still to this day call them hours and set our clocks by those paces. So why was the story of Horus overlaid over the story of Jesus? Some would think it was a logical ploy by Constantine to unify all pagan religions under one roman banner. This may be true but still does not explain why one man "a son of a carpenter" of all things by biblical accounts came to command such instant gravitas. Some historians may even claim that Jesus the man didn't actually exist. That he too is but an amalgamation of different cultural icons. Yet the question still remains why him? Hindu text describes a young Issa from an important family, but surly other important families had sons. These did not however mount any revolutions. As for the fact that it was Constantine who helped fabricate one icon out of many, why then did Jesus beat out both Horus in Egypt and Mira in Rome for official poster child status? Why not the other way around. Is not one myth as valid as the other?  As so we can ask of the biblical accounts, why the instant recognition by John the Baptist along with the many who knew to fallow him? This all might remain ambiguous were it not for a little known fact understood by a minority of eastern historians. Issa or Jesus had indeed many names for his identity was wilfully concealed from childhood by the members of his own family. Yet to understand why one must look then to the story of Caesar.                                                              
         Julius Caesar was ruler and perceived at the time as a living god. As was Cleopatra seen by Egyptians as a living pharaoh and god of her people. This in fact was the case for generations. The king or queen were not simply head of the empire, but more precisely were considered living gods and were the head of their empire for that reason. It is important to know this for a specific reason. At the time Caesar and Cleopatra were joined, they produced an heir. An heir whose birth right entitled him to the throne of both Egypt and Rome. This would have made the young Caesarion the most powerful living god of all time. It is now important to understand that the roman senate understood this. This represented a time of great impasse for western society and humanity in general. After generations of living under the gaze of god like emperors, Romans through the senate continued the Greek experiment of democracy. It might have been at its infancy but the umbilical cord had been cut by the first movement towards a decentralization of power. The idea at this time in history, of ushering in a new super pharaoh must have been devastating to the senate and heads of influential families poised to take on great roles in their new social experiment. This is why it was now time to kill Caesar and show once and for all that the gods bleed. It was now time to take the next step in decentralizing the powers of the emperor to the senators. Thus bringing in a new pharaoh and god to most of the western world a monumental step backward for society. It was not necessarily Caesar who must be killed, but the very idea of a walking god. With a sense of urgency for if not Caesar, his son will be twice as powerful and so the entire linage must go. It is with this fact in mind Cleopatra is said to have given a young J C junior away to her servants Joseph and Mary so they may take him in exile in the east. His name then is changed for his protection to Issa.
        It is with this part of the story that we my clear many ambiguities in the story of Jesus. With this fact we understand why he was seen as the "Messiah" or "the next King". Why he would come to claim the kingdom of his father. It also explains why the tie in with Horus by their historians. We must remember that Cleopatra had proclaimed herself the incarnation of Isis and following his union with the Egyptian Queen, Julius Caesar proclaimed himself Osiris. Making the young JC junior or Jesus Christ, the incarnation of Horus. This indeed would make him very important to people who seek the old ways to return and very dangerous to everybody else. If Jesus was exiled to the east and given an eastern education to prepare for his reign, he would have returned to Jerusalem to find a world he did not recognize. Nor did he recognize the want of society to move on from the directions of a saviour king. The new Pharaoh might have found a new enlightenment which may change the world, but the time for saviours and Pharaoh's God had past. It was too little too late for Jesus. Society had already moved on from the totalitarian regime of monarchy and rule by living god. Unbeknownst to Jesus who spent his time in exile in far remote places. His message might have been unique to his new found audience but unfortunately for him his status or potential status was too much to bear for a society ready to move on from the past. Collectively saying at the time "thanks for the speech JC but itís too little too late".