The (cribbed) Star of Bethlehem
6th Part, Section 1
Joseph Panthera - The Father of Jesus Christ
How the Books of Moses back Celsus’ Information
The fact that as good as nothing is certain about the ancestry and Christian sect palms off life of Jesus, who is lifted up to “god”, indeed as a particular attraction, nowadays. However, this fact provides evidence of the (willful) lies and (unscrupulous) deception of the Christians. Hereby, wretchedness and ignominy of Jesus the shoddy, i.e. the Christian impostors& want to keep covering. more than nothing because the Christians distorted, forged, withhold, suppressed and burnt the embarrassing and debunking truths about themselves and that son of Satan (Jesus Christ). They did so for the advantage of their own and not for the disadvantage as they are used to feigning mendaciously.
In contrast with shoddy Ben-Pandera (thieves' cant: Jesus "Christ"), comparable personages like, for instance, Gautama Buddha or Islamic prophet Muhammad were impressive personages so that their followers do not to lie, deceive, conceal and contrive as the Christian apparently felt forced to do.
Minutiae they deemed to be in favor of them and their mock-up “god” Jesus, they boastfully preserved until today, e.g. that Jesus allegedly could speak with scholars when he was twelve years of age (see Lu 2:42ff). Those facts reveal more about the reasons why we know that little about him than the Christians try hiding, veiling and concealing. They did and do so, because the Christian liars, deceivers, felons, fiends and barbarians just can lose by knowledge, science and truths (what they had been gifted by lies, pretence, forgeries, crimes, psychological projections, barbarities and abominations).
There is no such uncertainty about the named other historical personages, because their adherents did not lie and fool – at least not as much - as the Christians do. Muhammad was a successful merchandiser, married and about forty years of age when he started preaching his revelations. (I presume: If there is any difference between the author of this treatise and prophet Muhammad about Jesus and Christianity, then certainly it is because Muhammad never had the written gospels in his hands).
There is no evidence that Muhammad -- not to mention Guatemala Buddha -- intended to deceive.
Greek philosopher Celsus (about 178) was the first – as far as we know – examining and researching the allegations of Christian terrorists about their foremost phoney.
He recognized deceit and fraud of the Christian barbarism obviously without having a scripture of that barbarism. Celsus gathered the Christians' allegations and then asked Jews, who allegedly should have experienced all those miracles the Christians purport. However, at that place, where everything should have happened and when everything should have occurred, nobody knows about those occurrences or the named witnesses know that something else happened. That is why Christian sect only could disseminate far from the place and far from the time of those incidents.
Celsus’( called his book “alethes logos” -- that means "true word” or “true discourse" -- as it is mostly translated into English. This title is honest and correct. Of course, the concerned liars and felons of deceit disagree. We are going to produce evidence that Celsus’ discourse is the only treatise of truths about the Christians’ mock-up “god”, hitherto. Satan’s words the Christians apostrophize as “god’s words” -- because Satan does not want to be regarded as Satan but as “god” -- are lies, deceits, forgeries, distortions, psychological projections and crimes from the very, very outset – the latter precisely is the definition of Satan according to the Christians’ doctrines of their own.
We can produce evidence about it, what Satan’s dastards’ (Christian) sect tried preventing by denouncing, fiendishness, stakes, murders, mass-murders, outrages, atrocities, barbarities and other abomination already since two millennia.
Celsus’ book partly survived just because a mad Christian desperado tried refuting him phrase by phrase. That Christian was called Origen (185 - 254 C.E.). This mad Christian had castrated himself. Hereby, he fooled himself getting closer to the topmost lunatic (Jesus) whom the Christian address and worship as “god”.
However, Christian Origen wretchedly failed to do so, quite in contrast with that what his Christian fellow phonies want him having done. His Christian accomplices provide the evidence. His fellow Christian phonies posthumously condemned and excommunicated Origen as “heretic” for making that attempt at Celsus. Christian perpetrator Origen himself became a victim of belonging to that hypocritical, dastardly, cruel and murderous (Christian) sect - no sane individual can please – and thus made a mess of his life, last not least since that fiendish sect inveigled him into castrating himself.
How many billions of lives this pernicious sect forced or inveigled into making a mess of their lives? Origen not nearly is a unique one that was enticed into ruin the life of his own! Even “favorite disciple“ John scored reproaches like that to Jesus! (
Of course, the book of Celsus became burnt. However, the nonsense of Christian jerk Origen survived in spite of the later ban, even on this Christian writer. Therefore, there is a possibility of reconstruction of Celsus in parts, today.
“(Jesus) invented his birth from a virgin…born in a certain Jewish village, of a poor woman (Mary) of the country, who gained her subsistence by spinning, and who was turned out of doors by her husband, a carpenter by trade, because she was convicted of adultery; that after being driven away by her husband, and wandering about for a time, she disgracefully gave birth to Jesus, an illegitimate child, who having hired himself out as a servant in Egypt on account of his poverty… 
Celsus further reports:
"…when she (Mary) was pregnant she was turned out of doors by the carpenter to whom she had been betrothed, as having been guilty of adultery, and that she bore a child to a certain soldier named Panthera…”
That is the "immaculate conception" of Christian rogues n' frogs with frocks and without frocks! That is its debunking!
By the way, as we already proved by Mt. 1:19 it is not denied that Joseph wanted to divorce from Mary due to adultery. Now, we are going to demonstrate that the Bible (of the Jews), Jesus himself shammed to fulfill, backs the information of Celsus and refutes the Christians’ purporting.
For the following reasons, the account of Celsus is credible and hence that of the Christians’ (gospels) misleading for deceitful intentions.
At that time, having an illegitimate child in no way was something harmless – like later on it was not in those times of dark Christian Satanism. Quite the contrary: Mary’s life and that one of their children were threatened with death. However, not by Herode as the Christians deceitfully purport for their advantage of their own!
Firstly, it is not to assume Mary believed something else but having born an illegitimate child and not by a virgin birth the Messiah of the Jews. The latter was that what the Christians belatedly concocted.
If Mary would have believed having born the Messiah of Judaism, she would have given the name that is designed according to Isa 7:14 to the Jewish Messiah (Immanuel) and not Yehoshua (nickname: Yeshu or Jesus) to her child. According to prophet Isaiah (7:14), the Jewish Messiah is to be identified by the name Immanuel (and not by Jesus).
As Jewish devotee, Mary would have obeyed the Bible. I.e., wherever the Bible (of the Jews) to which the Christians presume to refer their claims becomes concrete, the Christians’ sayings turn out to be off the point as well as deceit.
The Christian artists of lying and deception evenly cannot quibble that Mary did not give the correct name (Immanuel) to the „Messiah" in order to camouflage him, i.e. for reasons of the security of her own she named the child Jesus.
If god says that the Messiah is called Immanuel, then only he (god) could restrict his words but not the concerned Christians for the advantage of their own. I.e., an almighty and omniscient god can calculate the supposed or actual malice of the Jews for the situations he predicts and pertaining to the name of his Messiah, either.
Everything else provides evidence that the Christians trust in Satan (of their own) but not in god. (The question, whether Christianity is theism or atheism is the same as the one whether Satan believes in god or not... Anyway, Satan believes to know being a better when asserting that the name of the Messiah is Jesus and not Immanuel).
Totally, it is to rule out that Mary believed that she was giving birth to the Messiah of the Jews and would not have given the corresponding name to that child. One only can deny that according to the Christians’ slogan: Our (and Satan’s) belief shifts mountains and the truths, anyway! So, what is easier to shift mountains or to lie?
Christians should not forget that Mary was a Jewish and not Christian devotee and believed in the (Jewish) bible as god’s word and not like the Christians: that the bible is to “correct” by Christian “supplements” (“gospels”), quite to the advantage of their own. Moreover, those “supplements” did not exist at that time.
In favor of the Christian swindlers let us hypothetically assume that Mary supposedly was impregnated by god – in whatever way -- and from thence her finance (Joseph) is not the father of a her child. Whoever would have believed her that story (of having begotten by god), at all, if the Christian slaveholders already have to brainwash their slaves already as children in order to get them believing that fake?
I.e., whether or not - Mary willy-nilly had to behave as if she had an illegitimate child, and now we want to demonstrate what this meant at the then time:
De 22:22 - 24 RSV
22 "If a man is found lying with the wife of another man, both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman, and the woman; so you shall purge the evil from Israel.
23 „If there is a betrothed virgin, and a man meets her in the city and lies with her,
24 then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones,…
By the birth of her child, Mary was threatened with death (by stoning) - but not by the malevolence of the Herode, as the Christian belatedly and maliciously purported. It has already turned out an ignoramus and/or swindler to disregard or even to conceal this context when “evaluating“ the Christians’ cock-and-bull-story about the birth of Satan's son, pardon, "god's son"! I.e., due to the then moral standards that adultery punished by a death penalty, the information Greek philosopher Celsus delivers to us that Mary was cast off by her fiancé, disgracefully strayed and secretly gave birth to that know misshapen monster turns out to be credible and correct and the Christians’ allegations very typical of liars and deceivers.
However, this is not the end of Mary's and her son's (Yehoshua's) shame, disgrace and misery.
De 23:2 NRSV
2 Those born of an illicit union shall not be admitted to the assembly of the LORD. Even to the tenth generation, none of their descendants shall be admitted to the assembly of the LORD.
Since Ben-Pandera (thieves' cant: Jesus "Christ") is an illegitimate child, he is not only banned from the job of a Messiah but also from any admittance to the Assembly of God. Necessarily, if he preaches a certain "father" of his, this father only can be Satan, who apparently does not reject but accepted him... So, please praise the love" and "mercy" of Satan, which is also the "love" and "mercy" of the Christ and the Christians... God outcasts the liars, deceivers, blackguards, sinner, criminals, felons, rogues with frocks and without frocks, Mafiosi, murderers and mass-murderers but the trinity of Satan, his Anointed One (Greek: Christian) and their followers (thieves' cant: Christian) accept them all. So, praise this trinity...! They accept everybody of their ilk...! Mary transgressed god’s law in a shameful way, according to the standards of the then time and morals that are even Christians of today.
Hence, it maybe better, firstly, to study the circumstances at the time when Mary lived and gave birth to her child before "putting to high seas" and heading for the "thing-in-itself“. Provided that Herode ever would have had intended to slay the Jewish Messiah – like the evil Christians are used to insinuating on him by one of their heinous psychological projections – then, he at first would have asked about the name of that failure of creation that crept out of Mary’s womb. Moreover, if he was told that the name is Yehoshua (Jesus) but not Immanuel, he surely would have refrained from everything the Christians charge him having done (what the Christians are used to perpetrating against the adversaries and enemies).
Mary had to care for saving her life. She transgressed an iniquity that was worth stoning her, according to the moral standards of her time. Christians, cross my heart: In human history, Mary had not been the only woman who tried saving her life by claiming that the “man” lying with her was god …
As said, in a society, that terrorizes mothers of illegitimate children with death, concoctions of “virgin births” and of god as begetter of those children are very popular, especially if those fabrications are easily to crib from another (Mithraic) religion… In this respect, those cock-and-bull-stories the Christians later claimed were not unsuitable for Mary.
Finally, let us put two questions:
What is the Messiah of god called according to god’s word (bible of the Jews)?
In addition, what is the Messiah of Satan called?
One never knows how "wicked" the world is... It rejects addressing and worshiping Satan and his Anointed One (Greek: Christos) as "god". Only the Christians do so and acknowledge superiority of Satan's "love", "mercy" and "spiritual welfare" to that one of god and therefore, address and worship Satan "god"... Whatever crime and murder you have perpetrated, the top criminals, i.e. Satan, his Christ and all their Christians, "love" you (with a knife under the cowl)...
© 1998 - 2001 HANS HENNING ATROTT - All rights reserved.- Reproduction without permission is strictly prohibited.
 English excerpts of Celsus “alethes logos” are on: http://www.bluffton.edu/~humanities/1/celsus.htm. Full text on: “Eight books of Origen contra Celsus”, Last call: 06/14/2008 http://www.gnosis.org//library/orig_cc1.htm (The figure before htm marks the corresponding book of eight ones).
 Celsus ibidem, book I, chapter 44