One thing that is unique about Jesus seems to be the fact that he took it for granted that his words would be misinterpreted. "Not all that call me Lord will be saved." This also seems to be the basis of his parable about the wedding guests.

In short, the concept of Wordism was not alien to him.

He was a fully-fledged and recognized in electoral of his time and place but he did not stay inside the Temple. He went out to explain things to the people. As I understand it, he is the first religious leader to be referred to as rabbi, teacher, in the Bible.

The later the book of the Bible, the more it seems to have a hatred of women, an inheritance from degenerate Zoroastrianism, in it.

If the terminology were political rather than religious, we would call Jesus a Populist.

Those who wrote about Christian theology never noticed the giant chasm between Paul and Jesus. Brown made a great thing of this revelation in "the DaVinci Code."

Paul made being anti-women a major part of his Christianity Jesus did nothing of the sort, but it always assumed, through Paul, that Jesus rejected women, especially sex with them. There was never any questioning of the fact that Peter, whom the Roman Church claims as the first Pope, was declared the first Pope by Jesus in the full knowledge that he was married.

This is easy because we aren't comfortable with the idea of the Christ having carnal relations with a woman, in exactly the same way that we did not dwell on the fact that our own parents coupled.

Non-theological Wordists tend be automatic atheists, because to them words are everything, and the churches today are very different from Christ. But if you recognize THEIR religion, their Wordism, as merely the product of the same kind of Wordism that separates Jesus from the institutions that have evolved using his name, you don't need to reject the faith.

Thos who think they are too sophisticated for religion, as usual with people who think of themselves as "intellectuals," are just being childish.

The fact is that a much higher percentage of people in quantum physics are practicing Catholics and Baptists than of people who claim they are "social scientists" and claim that "science" makes them atheists.

As usual, Mommy Professor is being childish.

I am NOT recommending religion to you.

I am pointing out that if you do not understand Mantra Thinking, as in the case of Wordism, you have absolutely no way to separate what should be the obvious evolution of institutions from an absolute reliance on a set of words.