Taking John Away
The Revelations of John Presco
A Novel by John Presco
The most deceptive stratagem invented in any religion, is the lie that John the Baptist was only born to point to Jesus, as the Jew who had a much better, and more important message and mission. When I first read the Bible at forty years of age, I soon realized that John’s Job was to point to Saint Paul, and anoint him the head of the church that John founded, that allegedly Jesus inherited. John was a historic figure who was murdered. There had to be several people who claimed they inherited his prophecy and prophetic powers, after all, it was clear to many common Jews, John was the embodiment of Elijah. Even Jesus says he was Elijah come again.
With the reversal of Roe vs. Wade, some can see how clever Christian leaders are – once again – to render a group of people – The Opposition! Such was the fate of members of the Firt Church, who became JUDIAZERS in the warped thinking of Paul.. The pro-abortion, and LGBTQ, are the New Judaizers – and most do not know it – because most are not into the Bible. Millions of Democrats are, but they will be lumped in with those who OPPOSE the life affirming teaching of Jesus, because, this is ALRADY the terms this latest Holy Crusade has REVEALED, as they revel in their religious victory parade. This is about Republicans – GETTING MORE VOTES!
With the discovery of The Church of Christ with the Elijah Message, I now own another religious base to SET my revelations upon. But, more than that, I believe I have the book that Pro-Abortionist – NEED in order to combat the Christian-right, the Supreme Court, and the Pope!
In my book, it will be The Holy Ghost of John the Baptist who confronts Saul on the road to Damascus, and not Jesus. Apparently John appeared to two Mormons, thus, it is possible for John to confront Paul who I suspect INVENTED a controversy over circumcision in order to CUT OUT the original apostles and those they gathered. Paul was not a Apostle, and never met Jesus. Did he hear about the Birth of John the Baptist? Did he see him when he was alive? Consider Saul-Paul condoning the murder of Saint Stephen? Would John forgive Paul for killing a Christian Saint – and make him the head of the Christian church? Why Paul. Paul is – THE GREAT USURPER – who played both sides of the Circumcision Controversy that is the mirror image of the Contrived Abortion Controversy that is poised to Usurp this Democracy! It was Peter who relaxed the requirement for circumcision. Saul was the strict Pharisee who is depicted in a Ruben’s painting – inheriting THE FACE OF STEPHEN, a name that means “crowned”. Here is the Real Anti-Christ!
I am considering taking two weeks off to complete my book that will give me a vast audience. Those who are being persecuted IN HIS NAME will not know why they are THE ENEMY of Jesus. When I take John away, Jesus and the Christian religion – will hardly exist! The Virgin Birth, will be the first thing to go away, away with John. Away, and, gone with the wind!
To be continued
A usurper is an illegitimate or controversial claimant to power, often but not always in a monarchy. In other words, one who takes the power of a country, city, or established region for oneself, without any formal or legal right to claim it as one’s own. Usurpers can rise to power in a region by often unexpected physical force, as well as through political influence and deceit.
The Church of Christ with the Elijah Message is the name of three related church groups and a denomination of the Latter Day Saint movement, headquartered in Independence, Missouri. It split from the Church of Christ (informally referred to as the “Fettingites”) in 1943 in a dispute over claimed revelations given to its founder William A. Draves. Draves, an elder in the Fettingite group, claimed to be receiving messages from an angelic being who identified himself as John the Baptist—the same person who had allegedly appeared to Fettingite founder Otto Fetting, a former apostle of the Temple Lot Church of Christ. While many Fettingites accepted these new missives, some did not, leading Draves to form his own church. His adherents claim it to be the sole legitimate continuation of Fetting’s organization, as well as that of the Temple Lot church. As of 1987, the church had approximately 12,500 adherents spread between Africa, Europe, Asia, Australia and the Americas.
The Judaizers were a faction of the Jewish Christians, both of Jewish and non-Jewish origins, who regarded the Levitical laws of the Old Testament as still binding on all Christians. They tried to enforce Jewish circumcision upon the Gentile converts to early Christianity and were strenuously opposed and criticized for their behavior by the Apostle Paul, who employed many of his epistles to refute their doctrinal positions.
The term is derived from the Koine Greek word Ἰουδαΐζειν (Ioudaizein), used once in the Greek New Testament (Galatians 2:14), when Paul the Apostle publicly challenged the Apostle Peter for compelling Gentile converts to early Christianity to “judaize”. This episode is known as the incident at Antioch.
Most Christians believe that much of the Old Covenant has been superseded, and many believe it has been completely abrogated and replaced by the Law of Christ. The Christian debate over Judaizing began in the lifetime of the apostles, notably at the Council of Jerusalem and the incident at Antioch. It has been carried on parallel to continuing debates about Paul the Apostle and Judaism, Protestant views of the Ten Commandments, and Christian ethics.
Four people have gathered on the ground in the shelter of a rock grotto. The lady in the center, Mother Mary, is arranged highest and also forms the top of the pyramidal compositional form. To her left and right are two infants, one of whom is gently supported by an angel.
In a sense, the group of people has arranged itself around an empty space in its center. The viewer’s line of sight jumps back and forth between the eyes and hands of the four people. The left child has his hands closed in prayer, the right one hand formed into a gesture of blessing. The angel points to his counterpart with his outstretched finger and Mother Mary unites both sides by seeming to lead the children towards each other with her open posture. Her gaze is devoutly lowered. She sits, like all the others, on the floor and is thus based on the type of the “Madonna dell’ humilita” – the “Madonna of humility”. Only the angel makes direct eye contact with us and thus acts as a mediator. The halos, as was slowly becoming customary at the time, were dispensed with.
It is quite unanimously assumed that a scene from an apocryphal source – the Protoevangelium of James – is alluded to here, according to which John the Baptist as a child is accompanied by the angel Uriel to protect him from Herod’s infanticide. As is well known, Jesus and his family were fleeing to Egypt at that time. Meanwhile all are to have met each other. But which of the boys is now which saint? Is Jesus, as one should expect, the slightly taller one, the higher-ranking one, who is also closer to his mother? And is John, who will baptize Jesus and thus also “bless” him, the child closer to the angel Uriel? Surely one might expect the archangel to point to the Savior and not, say, to the third most important in the picture? A second version of the painting shows that these plausible conclusions were not laid out by da Vinci. Jesus is the boy on the right and consequently the boy of John is on the left of the painting.
The Confraternity of the Immaculate Conception have been proven to have commissioned the work, and the contract between them and the artist survives to this day. Nevertheless, the history of the two paintings is not clear. It is assumed that the just mentioned aspects of the brotherhood bitterly offended – the danger of confusion of the two children, the size of the John boy and his place next to Mary irritated the visual habit and the religious statement. Possibly for this reason, a second, modified version was created. Originally, the work was to decorate the central part of a polyptych, but was probably never placed there. There it would have taken the function of a “lid picture”, which hid the actual cult image. In this case, it was a figure of the Madonna, which is no longer preserved. Many indications suggest that the first version was acquired by Louis XII shortly after its creation, and is still in the Louvre today. Another tradition tells that the brotherhood did not pay Leonardo enough for the first version, so he sold it elsewhere, took 20 years for the second version and had it continued by his pupil Ambrogio de Predis. As an indication of the foreign hand, the plants and natural elements of the second version are repeatedly mentioned, which lack the precision and scientific detail of a Da Vinic.
In the second work, the environment remains faithful to its predecessor version, but within the group of persons, small but remarkable changes have taken place: the boy John has been made quite clearly identifiable by his attribute – the cross staff – and a band with the inscription “”Ecce A/GNIVS””, which is only darkly recognizable. He thus receives his blessing from Jesus in the scene. The prominent pointing gesture of the angel was taken out without further ado. Also, he probably has no desire to contact us anymore and instead looks dreamily over to the other part of the picture. Everyone except him has had a halo added.
Why did Leonardo choose to depict the people in a rock grotto? On the one hand, this shows his fanatical passion for nature and its study. Of course, it can be interpreted that the recognizable plants also have a symbolic character. The highly poisonous wolfsbane could refer to the imminent fate of the children, and the iris was associated with God’s covenant with man. Also the conscious bringing together of the two children with the help of the other persons seems like a “providence”. Mary could thus express her total devotion to the greater plan. In this rapt and protected natural landscape, the persons insert themselves and experience a moment of devotion. The abyss in the foreground of the painting is sometimes interpreted as a visualization of impending destiny, and the still, unmoving water could also allude to the immaculate conception. In addition, of course, this foreshadows the baptism by John.
Leonardo’s genius is also evident in the background. The perspective shows a clear blurring and increasing blurriness towards the back. Both stylistic means to achieve a lot of depth and which were not known in the Middle Ages. In the first version, the deep-space view appears natural and homogeneous. Not least because of this, there is a certain qualitative difference between the two versions, which has led to the first version enjoying more attention to this day.
Leonardo da Vinci – The Madonna in the grotto
Oil on canvas, between 1483 – 1486, 199 cm × 122 cm, Musée du Louvre in Paris