Evidence that neither Jesus nor Peter could work any Wonder - except Hypnosis and Sorcery
1st: Neither Jesus nor Peter could work any miracle
2nd: How sorcery and thus „working miracles“ instigated by Jesus "Christ" ends in death - Believing in Christ means risking one’s life!
3rd: Where is the exact evidence that neither Jesus nor Peter could do any miracle?
1. Neither Jesus nor Peter could work any miracle
Let’s have a look at a “miracle” purportedly worked by Jesus "Christ" :
Mt 14:17-21 ASV
17 And they („disciples“) say unto him, We have here but five loaves, and two fishes.
18 And he (Jesus) said, Bring them hither to me.
19 And he commanded the multitudes to sit down on the grass; and he took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake and gave the loaves to the disciples, and the disciples to the multitudes.
20 And they all ate, and were filled: and they took up that which remained over of the broken pieces, twelve baskets full.
21 And they that did eat were about five thousand men, besides women and children.
Jesus "Christ" allegedly is able to feed more than 5000 individuals (as usual, woman and children are not in that number!) only by five loaves of bred and two fishes... He even orders to pick up the crumbs. More over, this gathering produces twelve baskets of crumbs. That means far more than five loaves of bread.
However, if Jesus could produce foodstuffs that terrifically, why his disciples had to break into a grain field to rob somebody else’s grain in order to prevent themselves from starving! And that even on Sabbath!
Mt 12:1-2 ASV
1 At that season Jesus went on the sabbath day through the grainfields; and his disciples were hungry and began to pluck ears and to eat.
2 But the Pharisees, when they saw it, said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which it is not lawful to do upon the sabbath.
Therefore, if Jesus really were able to work the above mentioned “wonder” and not only to fake it by sorcery, why did his accomplices („disciples“) find themselves forced to break into other’s cornfields and eating raw (and stolen) ears of grains in order to prevent themselves from starving?
If he really were able to produce food by wonders, his accomplices („disciples“) never would had been caught in such a hunger so that they stole and had to eat raw grains.
The gospel writers fail to see that by mentioning how Jesus and his accomplices („disciples“) quenched their hunger they convict their „god’s“„miracle of feeding 5000 individuals“ of sheer sorcery and brazen deception.
Unlike Jesus "Christ's" and his henchmen insinuations the Jews did not exalt the “Ten Commandments“ that way that they even accepted cruelties with them. Although stealing is forbidden according to the “Ten Commandments” the Jews eased that law in that manner that one had not to starve to death because of this commandment. For instance, one could take grapes from a vineyard or grains from a cornfield and eat oneself fill. However, one was not allowed to take something in stock, e.g., in a bag (see: De 23:25-26).
Here is about an unpunishable offence, one would say today in juridical terms. Even if this assistance in emergency is allowed to the Jews, it does not alter and camouflage Jesus "Christ's" and his accomplices’ („disciples’“) wretchedness and pitiableness and that the conjurers are convicted of deception.
A rogue that really is able to feed five thousand men (women and children are not included in that number) by five loaves of bread and two fishes so that everybody is filled does not need to invade in other folks’ cornfields to prevent himself and his henchmen from dying in miserable death. That one was able to conjure up groovy meals …
I.e., the liar, rogue, sorcerer and deceiver one’s more is convicted. Hereby objections are confirmed ancient Greek philosopher Celsus (178 C.E.) already demurred to this underhand foul players’ god:
“But if, then, this (Infanticide) was done (by Herode) in order that you (Jesus) might not reign in his stead when you (Jesus) had grown to man's estate; why, after you did reach that estate, do you not become a king, instead of you, the Son of God, wandering about in so mean a condition, hiding yourself through fear, and leading a miserable life up and down?”[i]
No matter if he was to punish as thief or not, if he really could have worked wonders he never would have felt force to invade other folks’ cornfields in order to prevent himself from dying a miserable death. In that case, he would have been able to produce an abundance of food for his henchmen and for himself instead of fighting against starvation (to death).
Therefore, he only wanted to bluff and deceive by such sorcery. If Jesus did not believed in " transcendent " spooks, then all his juggling and sorcery were sheer arms of the psycho-terror, i.e. applied psychological terror, to frighten and intimidate his alas so much "beloved" (next) conspecifics worshiping him as the god.
The previous expositions of this subject -- especially the example of the Simon Magus -- has proven that - assumed Jesus really would had performed those miracles his warriors allege - that in contrast with Jesus deceitful statements no evidence of any deity would had been given about him. No miracle is the appropriate means to give evidence of that – even if some bird brains or other cerebellums think: Or (barbaric) faith shifts mountains and the truths anyway.
In the “Acts of John” (§ 96) he openly admitted being a deceiver.[ii] Here Jesus indirectly confesses being a swindler by demanding acknowledging for himself as mock-god or slaveholder (that is same in Christian sect) because of his alleged wonders on the one hand (see John 14:11), and on the other hand he demands to refuse the same acknowledgement to others even if they outdo his “miracles“, e.g., Simon Magus (see Mt. 24:24). So, he admits that all his “wonders” are nothing but swindling.
Gospel writer Luke allows a Freudian slip among others but this one remarkably does not occur to his fellow gospel writers:
Lu 10:1 RSV
1 ¶ After this the Lord appointed seventy others, and sent them on ahead of him, two by two, into every town and place where he himself was about to come.
Why do the other gospel writers withhold this fact that the Jesus gang consisted of approximately hundred people – and not twelve men like the other evangelists try to give impression? Because everyone can imagine how easily one can work „miracles “if one has incognito available approximately hundred people.
One never knows how rapidly and all of a sudden “lame” ones, “blind” persons, “invalids”, yes even “dead” ones that are incognito mixed among the crowds of folks are able to go, respectively to see, to go or even the dead ones abruptly bright and cheery liven up… Of course that all after the query: What is easier to presume the competence to remit sins or to fake “miracles"? " I (Jesus), your boss, your god and slaveholders, say to you (my obsequious “disciple”): Stand up and go…”
And quickly the obedient “disciple” that fake to be lame or blind gets up as if he is newborn – not a trace of any disease or disability ... and the crowd as any Christian is overwhelmed not knowing at all that the "heal" is a member of the man’s deceiver gang …
Thus he indirectly admits that miracles only serve the purpose: deceits and corresponding crimes. Even if the mock "miracles" really would have happened that way those mendacious, depraved (Christian) adherent – that even did not recoil from denying the truth by the felony of perjury as it is already proven in the foreword to this treatise.
Those “wonders” would never prove any deity of a Jesus as those “miracles” of Simon Magus are no appropriates means to give evidence that this guy had been a god. In both cases, the “wonders“ only give evidence that Jesus and Simon Magus are rogues, rascals, tricksters, magicians and swindlers at the utmost.
Nevertheless, there is still compelling evidence that Jesus in fact could lie and swindle excellently but never could accomplish even one miracle – the same pertaining to his warriors, above all Peter. Jesus was strikingly stigmatized by hideous ugliness – a heavy cross he had to bear -- what the early Christian foul mouths zealous tried hide and kept secret until the took over political power and put upside down – not only pertaining to the abominable appearance of their golden calf.
If they did not consent that a god is that ugly the devil is according to the Christian foul mouths’ doctrines they never would have beautified him! Beside the circumstances of his shameful birth and his homosexuality those stigma of misshapenness Jesus strangely marked had made him driven - - to an ideology of hatred and revenge of the lastagainst the first and – getting stuck on madness of faking a god.
That misshapenness became that blatantly obvious and known that even Simon Magus -- a contemporary and competing Jewish sorcerer of Jesus – referred to it when he disputed with Peter in a public contest of sorcery in ancient Rome.
Jesus outward appearance was that shattering and traumatic that the Christian chroniclers do not report what rival Simon Magus really reported what the Christian foul mouths’ golden calf (Jesus) looked like. They rather prefer to withhold that and to give just the answer of Peter on Simon Magus relating to this.[iii] So, if one reads the “Acts of Peter” one gets the impression Peter insanely talks about topics nobody is questioning.
In order to avoid repeating me I recommend another treatise “What did Jesus look like”. That is why the Christian wanted to get rid of the “Acts of Peter” forever. That scripture belongs with those that were regained in Nag Hammadi.
Indirectly, the chronicles (Christians' cant: "gospels") admit the quite disastrous physical defects of Jesus in that way that the big “miracle worker” feels compelled to respond to the objection strikingly speaking out of the eyes of his spectators:
23 And he said to them, "Doubtless you will quote to me this proverb, 'Physician, heal yourself...’
That means that the shamming “miracle worker” at fist was in need of a miracle if he really would have been able to accomplish one. Before anybody else needed a miracle he firstly needed one in order to get rid of his marked ugliness – by the way, a stigma of the devil according to the Christian foul mouths’ doctrines.
Jesus looked like a barbarian, behaved like barbarian and was a barbarian. That defect of him his warriors (Christians) solely could get rid of by lies, forgeries and fabrications. However, isn’t that the stuff all Christian “wonders” are made of? Admittedly he could bluff outstandingly, but “miracle” -- that also prove nothing but a rogue and gangsters with abnormal abilities and nothing else – man’s deceiver that called himself man’s son -- could not do.
Until the middle of the 20th century, a story in fragments was known that an unknown early Christian woman should have preferred to be paralyzed and consequently being deformed to sexuality. Well, there were and are many mad persons among those early Christian barbarians like, for instance, the here more frequent quoted early sectarian Origen (185-254 CE) who castrated himself.
However, since the Christian scriptures inadvertently were retrieved in Nag Hammadi (
) -- as it is reported in the next –- the 6th -- part of our preliminaries we know the true and entire facts of this matter. Since then, we also know why the Christian “the sick needing a physician” (Lu 5:31) wanted to get rid of the “Acts of Peter” for ever – not suspecting that a clever Egyptian outwitted that felony and deceit of the Christian foul mouths in the middle of the fourth century by a trick. Egypt
He did all the scriptures the Christian foul mouths wanted to get rid of forever in a jar and that jar into cave at a graveyard near Nag Hammadi (
). He presumably hoped that these jar like a ”bottle post" would get to posterity when Christian barbarian sect has no power any longer to suppress the writings and to destroy them. You read correctly: The Nag Hammadi scriptures are about Christian writings, partially even about chronicles (Christians' cant: "gospels") of Jesus’ disciples and none of the Christian foul mouths’ opponents. Egypt
In Nag Hammadi, “The Acts of Peter” were recovered, too. Therefore, we now know that those said and miserable woman was the daughter of the Peter.
Since that time life of that young woman was one long lifelong torment or her life just a process of dying for several score of years. The servants of Ptolemaeus brought her home to Peter’s family.[vi]
Now, a true miracle was needed to heal that miserable woman. Peter, his god Jesus and all the other disciples that allegedly performed countless wonders could demonstrate their capability of doing miracles.
However, nothing happened. Nobody was able to help that woman suffering at the utmost – certainly much more than Jesus (all deceivers’) Christ ever did.
Peter’s god Jesus also could demonstrate his reputed ability of accomplishing miracles to the benefit of that suffering one because -- as we will still prove in the treatise of the alleged crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus respectively his stuntman – Jesus was still (secretly) alive and had not gone to heaven (or hell where he really belongs with) as the Christian foul mouths deceitfully claim.
However, not only one of those (Christian) barbarians, terrorists and psycho terrorist could transact only one miracle to her. Instead of helping by a “wonder” the Christian barbarians helped themselves as they ever used to doing so: By brazen lies, deceit and self-deception.
Peter now quibbles that those stroke of apoplexy and that consequent suffering of that already married woman – sufferings that was almost past belief – was a blessing or expedient for her otherwise she would have got too much sexual intercourse with her husband.[vii]
And as you all know catamite Jesus (all deceivers’) Christ did not like those pleasures of couples… ah, ah, ah! Do not make me laugh! Do you still doubt that Christendo(o)m is a totalitarian sect of and for barbarians as well lunatics or for both?
That is the juggler of lies or the rock, on which the Christian totalitarianism is built… Firstly, the married woman was already “defiled” and secondly she was married with a good-hearted man – never that depraved than "
St." murderer Peter is. Because of his wife’s calamity he should have wept that much that he finally became blind.[viii]
When he died he bequeathed an acre to his impecunious, wretched and wasting away wife. xii However, Peter – who already murdered two members of the Christian foul mouths’ early community (Ananias and Saphira) because they passed not all the money to him (Peter) they got from selling an acre of their own (see Ac. 5.1:10) – did not respect the legacy of his miserable daughter.
Thereupon "God’s deputy on earth" sold the acre and distributed the money not to her but allegedly to have given it to the poor.[ix]
This one shall believe a murder that does not respect what his daughter was bequeathed and who already murdered several human beings because of sheer greed. Do not make me laugh…!
Do not you still know why the Christian foul mouths wanted to get rid of “The Acts of Peter” forever? Peter, Jesus or any other disciple of the Jesus gang could not accomplish only one miracle at all. All is swindling. All is fraud.
On the contrary, Peter passed his bad genotype that possibly made him a protagonist, series-killer of a sect of barbarians with a barbaric individual as the god of the very last ones desiring to wage war on the first one and really became the first perpetrating crimes, barbarity, atrocities and barbarity that are past belief.
Who wonders that Christian foul mouths wanted to get rid of the “Acts of Peter” because they give evidence that all claimed miracles of the Jesus gang are nothing but bluff and deception?
2nd: How sorcery and thus „working miracles“ instigated by Jesus "Christ" ends in death - Believing in Christ means risking one’s life!
Pompously Jesus "Christ" brags about what miraculous power he allegedly can bestow to his accomplices provided they believe in him as their „god“. Of course, Jesus does no business without business in return:
17 And these signs shall accompany them that believe: in my name shall they cast out demons; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall in no wise hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
19 Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall in any wise hurt you..
Ah, ah, ah – the conman is using his big mouth and promises his slave abilities he even himself does not have.
Oh yes, – about the corpses those boasting produces this perfidious and foul creep n’ crook or spiteful little devil does not think about. The one that was bitten by a snake and afterwards died cannot complain any longer because corpses cannot do that. However, other saying even caused much more corpses than this.
Indeed, in his first letter to the Corinthians Paul admits that this saying of Jesus "Christ" caused a number of corpses among early Christian foul mouths. According to the penal codes of mostly Christianly enslaved countries of today a perpetrator acting like Jesus "Christ" would be charged with instigation to murder for that:
1Co 10:9 AV
9 Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.
At first, the very deceiver pretentiously promises a thing or two to his schmucks what sorts of things they can do in “his name”. And applying that what the big mouth told ends up in snuffing it, i.e. in a grave and “eternal rest”, because they “tempted him”… So, do not believe him!
The “promise of the snakes” is only one example of Jesus’ entire credibility. As this promises of snakes, which allegedly does not hurt his adherents, turns out to be a flop, every promise, e.g., that one of doomsday, heaven, hell, eternal life etc. of his is a flop because everything is a lie and/or deceit for advantage of his own being worship as “god.” All is fraud, everything deception! In order to achieve this, Jesus stops at nothing.
Imagine one of a Christian sect’s rival would preach sayings that entice into such casualties (of corpses)… Prohibition, prohibition the Christian foul mouths would scream as loud as possible and the Christian foul mouths would not rest before this rival would be jailed, charged with evasion of taxes (they do not pay!), slain and forbidden… Those are the measures the Christian foul mouths are used to measuring others but never themselves!
Those are the measures Jesus and the Christian foul mouths are used to measuring others but reject to be measured themselves.
At least, Jesus had to warn of his sayings that they can peril the lives of their believers in order to make clear that he refrains from inveigling into murdering. It is a matter of course for him to put up with others’ death.
That is what Christian sect until today means when feigning “protection of lives” or shamming “Pro Life” …
In order to exonerate from gulling others into murdering Christian sect should print on each page of their chronicles (Christians' cant: "gospels") clearly: Danger! If you believe and exercise everything that is written here then your life is in jeopardy. You may snuff it. Please, believe only that Jesus attempted to be „god“ and do not attempt Jesus.
If Christian sect does not do that, then once more and again it is guilty of murders.
Again, this is evidence that believing in that spiteful little devil called Jesus "Christ" does not only bring forth death and destruction to non-Christian foul mouths but also to Christian foul mouths. Jesus spares nobody, even not his closest adherents. Each of his “disciples” except John he drove to death penalty and John to suicide.[x] His twelve “disciple” were his twelve victims as well as his first accomplices.
3rd: Where is the exact evidence that neither Jesus nor Peter could do any miracle?
Jesus allegedly can do magic if it is about to feed five thousand men by only five loaves and two fishes. However, his fellow schmucks („disciples“) have to invade a grain field and eat the (stolen) ears of grain in order to prevent themselves from starving. On that condition Jesus should had been able to fill his fellow schmucks up by only one (stolen) ear of without any ear, at all! However far from it!
The gospel writers fail to see that thus they convict their “god” (Jesus) of sorcery, lying and deception, in retrospect.
Moreover, Jesus convicts himself of sorcery, lying and deceits because he was not able to remove or even to reverse the marked ugliness (the deformity) of his own. (That was another reason for the early Christian foul mouths to conceal it).
Jesus ugliness – besides the mentioned shameful circumstances of his birth according to his own and his time’s standards – insidiously made him man’s instigator of hatred and revenge among human beings disguised in Trojan horses of each reverse.
Peter could not accomplish any miracle because he turned out to be unable to put his daughter out of her misery. Peter’s daughter was the first needing a miracle but nobody of the Jesus gang could help that wretched one. Even the gang’s boss (Jesus) could not help the daughter of his closest fellow schmuck, Peter. So, Peter’s daughter provides evidence that neither Jesus nor Peter or any other fellow schmuck of Jesus could work any wonder but deceits.
A deceiver that presumes to fake his “resurrection” of the dead even is able to fake any other “wonder”… That is all what is to say to Jesus Christ's"“miracles”… Faking to be able to work wonders is just an essential part of Jesus "Christ's" perfidy of faking to be “god” in order to enslave all human beings to himself… Inadvertently and indirectly the Christian foul mouths admit it by striving for getting rid of the “Acts of Peter”, once forever. Infamy, perfidy, all over fiendishness!
© 2002 HANS HENNING ATROTT - All rights reserved. - Reproduction only for private use and/or purposes of studying and archiving by research and library institutes - otherwise without permission strictly prohibited. This site is still under construction.
[i] Celsus – in: “Eight books of Origen contra Celsus”, book I, 61 on: http://www.gnosis.org/library/orig_cc1.htm, Last call: 06/14/2008
[ii] THE ACTS OF JOHN, From "The Apocryphal New Testament", M.R. James-Translation and Notes,
: Clarendon Press, 1924, Scanned and Edited by Joshua Williams, Oxford Northwest Nazarene College, 1995, http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/noncanon/acts/actjohn.htm (last call: 09/06/2006, § 96
[iii] See: ACTS OF PETER, From "The Apocryphal New Testament", M.R. James, Translation and Notes
Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1924, Chapter XXIV. Electronically published on: http://web.archive.org/web/20001209070000/http://www.gnosis.org/library/actpete.htm last call:04/03/2013
[iv] ACTS OF PETER, ibidem, Chapter I, The Coptic Fragment,
PREVIOUS | HOME | TABLE OF CONTENTS| NEWS | THE CROSS DECEPTION | CHRIST AND ANTI-CHRIST | WHAT DID JESUS LOOK LIKE? | THE ) STAR OF BETHLEHEM | MY STUFF |NEXT | © 1998 -2003 HANS HENNING ATROTT - All rights reserved. - Reproduction only for private use and/or purposes of studying and archiving by research and library institutes - otherwise without permission strictly prohibited.