SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brumar89 who wrote (34086)3/10/2013 12:10:23 AM
From: Solon1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 69300
 
If I was born there I would have been rational rather than superstitious--just as I am rational now. If necessary, I would have faked the belief system until I was able to escape to a place where reason and rational morality existed.



To: Brumar89 who wrote (34086)3/10/2013 12:17:18 AM
From: 2MAR$1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 69300
 
Now answer the main question without the dodge of "martyr" which i included knowing you'd take: 1). "The nature of human religious belief, seems very darwinistic in specified geographical locales,dont you think ?"

One sees without a flicker of an eye how Islam also drew extensively on older religions of Christianity & Judaism . From the obvious adopting of their prophets & prophecies, including its own budding emergence dominated with the same stories embedded in the blood of its own line of martyrs.

(It certainly doesnt stop there, the idea of judgement day, final battle between good & evil with God of light vs the fallen angel Satan was already highly evolved story in the great Persian empire from which Christianity does take)



To: Brumar89 who wrote (34086)3/10/2013 4:46:05 AM
From: 2MAR$2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 69300
 
Aside from the obvious fundmentalist nature of Pakistan's Muslim culture with strict & clear laws regarding blaspheme there will be these occasions of persecution naturally. But nothing can be more egregious than your feigned hysteria that Christianity is somehow being assailed & persecuted in general by atheistic science, liberalism & new age pagan pantheist movements. The fact is that Christians are very much privileged, an ideology in the US that has enjoyed an implicit, unrelenting, and uncritical acceptance .One would have to be a complete idiot to try to push the mythical delusion that Christianity is not dominant here & being persecuted. But this is the dishonesty at the heart of your fiction & drama .

For the same fundamental propganda purposes then & like you or greggy today, the early church writers felt they needed to wallow in graphic descriptions of virgins violated and gored to death by bulls, old men & women suffering horrific tortures to over-fed lions of the Colosseum as early as Nero's reign. No amount of sordid details written mostly centuries later were spared in this myth creation of the early church's descriptions of its martyrs:

The Fantastic details of the sufferings of the Christians - dressed in animal hides and torn apart by dogs, crucified, and used as human torches - fits the pornographic masochistic obsession of the early Church


The only problem is we find so much of this pure eaggerated bleeding heart fiction when examining historical writings , the Jewish historian Josephus says nothing about any "persecution" under Nero though he was in Rome for over a year from the first part of 64AD , the fire happened in July, but fails to mention it at all let alone any persecution of Christians.



To: Brumar89 who wrote (34086)3/10/2013 4:56:05 AM
From: 2MAR$1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 69300
 
Nero’s Fire and the Myth of Christian Persecution....

Cliff Carrington 8-1998/5-2000

That there was a fire in Rome when Nero was emperor is fairly certain; just about every emperor had one. It is mentioned in a few, very few, ancient references. The Tacitus reference is backed up by a contemporary of the fire, Pliny the Elder and by his own contemporary Suetonius. The legend, on the other hand, that Nero fiddled while Rome burned became a popular fiction.

The fire under Nero could not have been as extensive as Tacitus’ passage, and popular imagination, would have it. Historical and archaeological evidence somewhat diminishes the importance of Nero’s fire. His fire destroyed, at most, a tenth of the city. The important temples like that of Juppiter Captiolinus and Apollo, along with the major public buildings, private mansions and tenements survived. As did the Circus Maximus in the district where the fire started, which was in use nine months later. It had slight damage to the wooden upper story and stairs, but no major damage to the stonework. Nero’s recently completed palace was the major victim of the fire. He lost the most.

The Capitol and surrounding buildings survived to be burnt in the battle between the forces of Vitellius and Vespasian in December of 69 CE. The more serious fire, which burnt the Campus Martius and many major public buildings in the centre of Rome, happened in 80 CE, when Titus was emperor. The Christians were not blamed for this one.

According to Tacitus, alone, Nero blamed the Christians for the fire in Rome. Annals, XV. This passage is not referred to in any other pagan, nor Christian writings until 400 CE. The Fantastic details of the sufferings of the Christians - dressed in animal hides and torn apart by dogs, crucified, and used as human torches - fits the pornographic masochistic obsession of the early Church. The sordid details of flesh torn and blood copiously shed is repulsive to the modern mind. For some reason the early Church wallowed in graphic descriptions of virgins violated and gored to death by bulls, old men crucified suffering horrific tortures and not to mention the over-fed lions of the Colosseum. By the way, the Romans did not feed their lions exclusively on Christians, any old mal-content would do; and more often did.

Eusebius, when the Church was triumphant in the 4th century, after the ‘persecutions’ could only find 146 martyrs in the history. As we shall see, in Lactantius, between Domitian in the nineties and Decius in the late 3rd century there was a long peace where the Church was not persecuted. There was then a brief period of political persecution, especially under Diocletian, before his successor formed an alliance with them in the beginning of the 4th century. Constantine defeated his political opponents with the assistance of the Christians and recognized the fact when he held power. This period, of the Ante & Post-Nicene Fathers, knows nothing of Nero’s fire and its Christian victims.

Pliny the Elder, [26-79 CE] In his N.H. XVII, 1. 5. Pliny mentions, in passing, that in his youth he had seen some remarkable trees on a Roman estate which were famous for their longevity, they lasted “down to the Emperor Nero’s conflagration.” That is the sole mention of the ‘great fire’ by one who lived through the period. Pliny was to die, in 79 CE, at the eruption of Vesuvius. This was a year before the serious fire in the reign of Titus which burned a much more important area of the city; in which many of the temples and other public buildings were destroyed. The Christians were not blamed for that fire in 78.

Although Pliny does not anywhere mention Christians in his work, he does write about the Jewish sect of the Essenes, in N.H. V, 15. He locates them: “On the west side of the Dead Sea, but out of range of the noxious exhalations of the coast, is the solitary tribe of the Essenes...” Pliny then describes their celibate and isolated existence.

Josephus, [41-100] He was in Rome, for over a year, from the first part of 64, [Life, 3]. The fire happened in July, but, he fails to mention it at all. Josephus’ attitude to Nero was such that he would have mentioned it in the passage in the Jewish War XX. vii. 2-3. Instead he takes other biased historians to task, “some of whom have departed from the truth of the facts, out of favour,... while others, out of hatred to him, have so impudently raved against him with their lies.” Surely, out of some kind of consideration for his home city, Jerusalem, which was burnt to the ground, he would have made a comparison with the Capital of the world being burnt?

DIO CHRYSOSTOM, [40-120] Discourse 21, On Beauty, 9-10. Loeb, vol II, p. 281. Dio is writing about the corruption of absolute power:

“This is indeed true of Nero, and no one contradicted him in anything, what ever he said, or affirmed that anything he commanded was impossible to perform, so that even if he ordered anyone to fly, the man promised that too and for a considerable time he would be maintained in the imperial household in the belief that he would fly.”

Now, Dio goes on to the passage describing Nero’s end and popularity:

“Indeed the truth about this has not come out even yet; for so far as the rest of his subjects were concerned, there was nothing to prevent his continuing to be Emperor for all time, seeing that even now everybody wishes he were still alive. And the great majority do believe that he still is, although in a certain sense he has died not once but often along with those who had been firmly convinced that he was still alive.”

This refers to the numerous ‘resurrections’ of ‘false’ Neros, mentioned in Tacitus H. II, 8, 9, Suetonius, Nero, 57. and Dio Cassius, 64. 9, see Loeb footnote #2, p. 280.

Plutarch, [46-120] As a contemporary of both Tacitus and Suetonius he does not mention the fire in Rome, nor anything about the Christians for that matter. Plutarch did not write about Nero directly, but does mention him in his Life of Galba, and his mis-rule as the excuse for Galba’s rebellion, which ended with Nero’s suicide, 20 December 68 CE. Nowhere does he blame Nero for the fire which he likewise does not mention.

Epictetus, [50-130] The best known Stoic was a slave, whose master was Nero’s secretary. The translator of Epictetus, Mrs. Elizabeth Carter, is baffled that he was not a Christian. “There are so many of the sentiments and expressions of Christianity in it, that one should be strongly tempted to think that Epictetus was acquainted with the New Testament,..” [p. xxii] Well, he was not and never even so much as mentions Christians in passing. He lived in Rome and as a slave to Epaphroditus, a senior member of Nero’s government would have known of the fire and the Christian sacrifice in the aftermath. However, all he has to say about Nero is his persecution of some good men who refused to attend his performances.

Tacitus, [55-117] Annals XV. 37 - 41 Nero’s fire started 19 July 64 CE. This is the famous passage which mentions Nero’s fire and his persecution of the Christians to disguise his own guilt. It is only in this passage that the fire and the Christians were connected. Other pagan writers mention the fire, in passing, but not the Christian persecution. Christians writers mention the Persecution, but, do not connect them with the fire.

Tacitus has an account of terrible damage: “Of Rome’s fourteen districts only four remained intact. Three were leveled to the ground. The other seven were reduced to a few scorched and mangled ruins.” However, the only other account we have, an interpolation in a forged Christian letter from Seneca to Paul: “A hundred and thirty-two houses and four blocks have been burnt in six days; the seventh brought a pause.” This account turns out to mean about a tenth of the city was burnt. Rome contained about 1,700 private houses and 47,000 apartment blocks.

Tacitus is the only writer to connect the fire with the Christians. Nero was blamed, both at the time and in all other subsequent writers on the fire, and supposedly blamed the Christians for arson. He then condemned “large numbers” of them to be crucified and torched during the night. This must have been a big affair and there must have been “large numbers” of so-called Christians.

In his earlier ‘Histories’ Tacitus has a different attitude. The person in charge of persecutions in Rome was the City Prefect, Police Chief of Rome. Under Nero this was a man described by Tacitus in his ‘Histories’ bk. 3, #65, #75 - “His gentle character made him hate bloodshed and killing... His honesty and fair-mindedness are beyond question.” Flavius Sabinus, brother of Vespasian, was City Prefect of Rome from 56-69, covering the Neronian period of the disputed persecutions! Would a man of this character do the things described in the ‘Annals’ and Sulpicius?

The big question is why the Church Fathers know Nothing of this important information from Tacitus? The two partial manuscripts were found in the Medici library dating from 1313 to 1375. It is only after this time, much after, that the story became almost an Article of Faith about the early Church.

Pliny the Younger, [61-113] There is only one more early source to the Christians, or the Anointed Ones, and it is found in the Letters of Pliny the Younger, X. 96, 97. He corresponds with the emperor Trajan, in 115, asking what to do with the Christians in his province of Bithynia, near the Pontus. He describes their worship in detail. This passage is so theologically highly developed that it seems to come from a time when the church was well organized. The tenth book of Pliny’s letters, to Trajan, were not published by him. An anonymous person published them after Pliny’s death.

Suetonius, [69-140] Live of Nero, 38. Writing very soon after Tacitus, Suetonius knows of no Christians connected with the fire? He and all subsequent writers firmly blame Nero for the fire, and continue the rumour that he ‘fiddled while Rome burnt’.Suetonius, in his Life of Claudius, 25, has one, confusing, word about a Chrestus. “Because the Jews at Rome caused a continuous disturbance at the instigation of Chrestus, he (Claudius) expelled them from the city.”

The sense of the passage is that there was one ‘Chrestus’ at Rome stirring up the Jews. That can hardly fit Christ, the Anointed One. It was a proper name in those times. Eunapius, the 4th century biographer, mentions a philosopher/sophist named ‘Chrestus of Byzantium’, but nothing else in known about him other than his name. Also ‘Chrestus’ often meant - a ‘handy man’, a slave.

The only reference to ‘Christiani’ in the Life of Nero is between nut sellers and chariot drivers, along with Mime actors: “Punishment was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition.” [Nero, 16] This sentence is completely isolated and could very possibly have been inserted later. However, this is in No way connected to Suetonius’ romantic description of Nero’s fire, found in ch. 38. No Christians are blamed! Indeed Nero is given all the blame for the fire. Worse, he is damned by the accusation that while viewing the conflagration; “he sang the whole of the ‘Sack of Ilium,’ in his regular stage costume.”

Christian Apocrypha, [3rd. century CE]: Acts of Paul, Acts of Pete, Acts of Peter and Paul. All have variations on a theme of the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul. This was because they taught chastity and led the wives and lovers of important people, including Nero, astray. Therefore, Nero executed them. However, in all of these apocryphal Acts there is no fire and Nero refrains from attacking the rest of the Christians after killing Peter and Paul.

1 Clement, [c. 95-160?] This ‘letter’ is the only evidence, if we can call it such, for the martyrdom of Peter and Paul in Rome. The letter does not mention Nero nor the fire, nor any of the circumstances of their ‘martyrdom’. Nor does it identify any particular ‘persecution’, Nero’s or otherwise.

Lucian, [120-190] The famous satirist of the ancient world. In his *Death of Perigrinus* Lucian mentions a group of ‘Christiani’ in Judea. From the description they would date to about the 130’s. Peregrinus was an old man when he self-immolated in 160. He is described as having been one of the Christians in his youth. After some time Peregrinus, or Proteus as he was also known, got into trouble over food laws and was expelled.

Lucian’s description of these early Christians is somewhat condescending, but, not hostile. There is nothing connecting them to the fire, or persecution. This is the first truly Independent reference to Christians in Pagan literature, written about 160.

Tertullian, [145-220] Apologetics v. 3., To the Nations; “It was Nero who first condemned the Christian religion.” He goes on to say that, ‘whatever Nero condemned must be good’. Again, no mention in his works of the fire, nor the Christian persecution being connected with it in any way?

Dio Cassius, [163-235] He wrote a *Roman History* in eighty books, only twenty-six have come down to us. Dio mentions the fire, bk. XLII, but puts the blame squarely upon Nero. There is no mention of Christians in the surviving books of his history, and definitely no connection to Nero’s fire.

Philostratus, [170-244] He wrote the Life of Apollonius of Tyana, a first century philosopher who died at an advanced age in the reign of Nerva [96-98]. Apollonius had several encounters with Nero’s secret police when Nero had banned philosophers from Rome. He lists many of Nero’s crimes and enormities, but not the fire and nowhere are there any Christians. Apollonius thought Judea to be too polluted to have anything good come from it. He associated with Vespasian in Egypt in 69 and several conversations with him are about the government of his predecessors, but, Nero’s fire never comes up.

Origen, [185-254] written in 249 CE. Contra Celsus III. 8., “In order to strengthen the faith of the pusillanimous and to teach them to brave death, a few martyrs from time to time offered them the example of their consistency.” No great martyrdom by Nero is mentioned, or later for that matter.

Lactantius [260-330 CE] As to the Christian persecutions after Domitian, Lactantius is an authoritative source. He was not only favoured by Diocletian but a learned Christian historian, but, also the tutor to Constantine’s son Crispus. He was a contemporary of Eusebius of Caesarea and a favourite of Constantine’s court. In the beginning of the 4th century [313], he wrote about the past persecutions, but no Nero’s fire:

“Thus the commands of the tyrant [Domitian, d. 96] having been rescinded, the Church was not only restored to her former state, but shone forth with additional splendour, and became more and more flourishing. And in the times that followed, while many well-deserving princes guided the helm of the Roman empire, the Church suffered no violent assaults from her enemies, and she extended her hands unto the east and unto the west, insomuch that now there was not any the most remote corner of the earth to which the divine religion had not penetrated, nor any nation of manners so barbarous that did not, become mild and gentle.” [Alaric the Goth was a Christian when he destroyed Rome in 410!]

“This long peace, however, was afterwards interrupted. Decius [249] appeared in the world, an accursed wild beast, to afflict the Church.” (Lactantius, Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors of the Church Died, chapters 3 & 4.)

The earlier persecutions were political if anything. What is the favoured creation of one emperor is anathema to another. With no Eastern experience Domitian had a special hatred against the Jews, many of whom were in the Imperial service of his father, Vespasian, and brother, Titus. He removed them from their offices and had them heavily taxed. When Domitian, who persecuted the Jews, had been assassinated in 96 CE, Nerva became emperor. He rescinded the laws against the Jews and stopped the abuses of the annual Jewish tax.

Ante-Nicene Church Fathers, 10 volumes, [150-326]; In the thirty or so writers from the period of the growth of the early Church there is no mention of the fire in Rome, or the Christian blame.

Porphyry, [233-304] He wrote a work *Against the Christians* towards the end of the third century. What we have of this work comes mainly from Eusebius. Porphyry is quoted to condemn him and his work. Nowhere in the surviving fragments is there any mention of the fire, or persecutions. His work must have been effective; as by the end of the fourth century anyone found with Porphyry’s work was burned along with his book!

Eusebius, [260-339] The first great Church historian whose work has survived. He also wrote a chronography of the Church with all of its martyrs from Stephen, of Acts, up until his own day. Following Lactantius, Eusebius has Nero as the first emperor to persecute the Christians, but nowhere mentions the fire in Rome, nor the Christian blame. Eusebius was supposed to have written a Martyrology naming all one hundred and forty-six of them he knew about, but, nothing about Nero’s fire and martyrs of it.

Epistle of Seneca to Paul, 12. [5th century?] “...The source of the many fires which Rome suffers is plain. But if humble men could speak out what the reason is, and if it were possible to speak without risk in this dark time, all would be plain to all. Christians and Jews are commonly executed as contrivers of the fire. Whoever the criminal is, whose pleasure is that of a butcher, and who veil himself with a lie, he is reserved for his due season; and as the best of men is sacrificed, the one for the many, so he, vowed to death for all, will be burned with fire. A hundred and thirty-two houses and four blocks have been burnt in six days; the seventh brought a pause.”

This is interpolated into a late Christian forgery, Seneca never wrote like this and certainly not to St. Paul. As mentioned in Tacitus the amount of the damage given here is about a tenth of the City. The damage bill does not tally with Tacitus’ figures. Both do mention the fire lasting for six days. The Letter has the fire end on the seventh day, as a good Christian would have it. However, Tacitus states that it broke out again, in another part of the city and burned on, tradition says it lasted nine days. So, it is doubtful that the Christian author of the forged letter is directly following Tacitus.

Augustine, [354-430] St. Augustine does not mention Nero’s fire in his list of calamities that befell Rome before the Christian era. The City of God was written expressly to demonstrate that the fall of Rome, in 410, to the Arian Alaric the Goth, was not due to the Christian state suppressing the pagan religion in the reign of Theodosius in 392.

Severus Sulpicius, [c. 410] The only other, possible, mention of Christians being persecuted for Nero’s fire comes from a ‘Sacred History’ of Severus which disappeared from history. This was never used by the Church until after the 14th century and the discovery of Tacitus’ Annals.

In his biography of ‘Nero’ Gerard Walter examines the Sulpicius passage. On p. 174 Walter makes the three following points:

“1. Even if we admit that the text of the Annals contained the disputed passage in 400, we could not be sure that nothing had been interpolated into one of the copies during the interval of 285 years. This might very easily have happened during the second half of the fourth century when Christianity, now triumphant, was engaged in creating the heroic chronicle of its first beginnings.”

“2. The similarity of the two texts does not necessarily prove that Severus Sulpicius borrowed his from a contemporary copy of the Annals. The copyist who interpolated the passage into Tacitus might just as easily have added it after the publication of the Sacred History, using this work for his own ends.”

“3. Whichever hypothesis we adopt, one thing remains certain: of all the Christian authors who wrote before and after Tacitus up to the year 1000, Severus Sulpicius is the only one to make use of the version implicating Nero, and, if we admit the authenticity of the passage of the Annals, we have to find some explanation for the ‘conspiracy of silence’ which surrounded it during the first ten centuries of the life of the Church.” [Gerard Walter, Nero, George Allen & Unwin, London, 1957, chapter IX, ‘The Fire of Rome’, p. 174.]

Eunapius, [d. 414] He wrote histories of other pagan philosophers of his period. There are some descriptions of triumphant Christians gleefully destroying the Pagan temples of Egypt and Greece!

Boethius, [475-524] The Consolation of Philosophy, book two, says, “What murders, what ravages were not committed by Nero, that detestable monster who burnt the Capitol of the world, strangled its senators, poisoned his brother, ...” Here is a slight exaggeration Nero did not exactly ‘burn the Capitol of the world’, it was burnt in 69, in the battle for Rome well after Nero’s death and five years after Nero’s fire was supposed to have happened. There is no mention of the Christians taking the blame and being executed on mass for the crime.

And there is nothing for the next 1000 years of Christian or other literature connecting Nero’s fire and the Christian persecution. There is a biography of Nero which questions the Christian report of the fire. [Gerard Walter, Nero, George Allen & Unwin, London, 1957, chapter IX, ‘The Fire of Rome’, pp. 144-174.] Mr. Walter, casts doubt on the account of the fire in Tacitus’ Annals and notes the lack of contemporary evidence that connects the fire with the early Christians. As we have seen Pliny the Elder mentions it in passing, but no other contemporary pagan author even mentions a fire at all.

It is only Tacitus and Suetonius who mention Nero’s fire and they are writing for the same masters, the Flavians. The Flavian emperors experienced fires in their reign. The Capitol was burnt in Vespasian’s successful bid for the purple; and his son, Titus, had a disastrous fire in his time. But, the Flavian writers play down these events while exaggerating Nero’s fire. Especially the Tacitus passage seems more like propaganda than an accurate report of a widespread conflagration, which, incidentally, is not historically nor archaeologically verifiable. Suetonius mentions Nero’s fire but does not connect it with the Christians, he blames Nero without qualification.

Both Gerard Walter and I think that Nero has suffered from extremely ‘bad press’. Reading between the lines we can find evidence that, contrary to the stories of his enemies, Nero was quite popular for his good works. The population reacted favourably to the several ‘false’ Nero’s who impersonated him after his death, mentioned in Tacitus H. II, 8, 9, Suetonius, Nero, 57. and Dio Cassius, 64. 9.

Both Otho and Vitellius were happy to be known as ‘Nero’. There is a fair amount of evidence of Nero’s good rule and works, if we ignore the outrageous slanders Nero suffered from the time of the Flavians throughout history. [‘Nero’, pp. 255-256] He could be rehabilitated.

More interesting is the fact that no early Christian writer mentions the fire, and the Christian connection for over 1.300 years. This is not an argument from silence as they had plenty of good reasons to use the evidence if it existed. For example, Augustine wrote a whole book on the disasters of Rome under the pagan emperors, yet he nowhere mentions Nero’s fire and persecution. Eusebius, the church historian, likewise does not record the incident nor the connection with the early Christians.
carrington-arts.com

evol meme



To: Brumar89 who wrote (34086)3/10/2013 4:59:27 AM
From: 2MAR$2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 69300
 
"Lying for God & Forgery "


There is nothing so easy as by sheer volubility to deceive a common crowd or an uneducated congregation.’
– St. Jerome (Epistle to Nepotian, Lii, 8.)

Would the partisans of Christ have set out deliberately to lie? Were they such barefaced charlatans that they concocted falsehoods and deceits merely to advance themselves and their designs? By their own admission, YES they were. They may well have been believers, in that they held to a certain faith. On this was built the fanaticism either to die, or to kill others, for that faith. But faith absolves the believer from any fidelity to objective truth.

God's Truth – Lies

Religious fantasy advances in small steps by which those who already ‘see a higher truth’ help the less gifted to achieve that sublime state by using various devices. In Jewish tradition, one such a device was ‘midrash’, the teasing out of new, contemporary meanings from antique, sacred texts. By such means, the scribes could resolve a current issue by interpreting what the scripture had ‘really meant’ all along. Was that a lie?

False accreditation was another much used method, common practice during antiquity. Most of the texts in both the Hebrew bible and the New Testament were forged in the names of their authors to give them ‘authority.’ This merely helped others recognise 'the higher truths' presented to them. Who could argue with Solomon, say, or Apostles of the Lord?

A Labyrinth of Deceit

One of the most inveterate forms of imaginative creation was the invention of sayings and whole speeches which, just as fiction-writers do today, they put entire into the mouths of the personages of whom they were writing. Thus, in the Gospel of John, chapters 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 are almost one continuous verbatim monologue – all three thousand six hundred words of it! – supposedly uttered by the godman, a truly remarkable instance of total recall by the fabled octogenarian author!

The authors of Christianity were fond of allegory and parable. Few people have a head for pure theology. Popularising a convoluted point of theology for the unlearned by an illustrative story gets the point across. What perhaps is missed is that Christian theology is several levels deep: it uses fictional characters to tell fictional stories to make doctrinal points. Some dogmatists no doubt believed (still believe) that one day, long ago, a real whale swallowed a real Jonah. After all, Jesus supposedly said:
"For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." – Matthew 12.40.


The whole point of Jonah was not about God’s ability to conjure up man-swallowing fish; it was that Yahweh loves even the depraved folk of Nineveh (and their cattle). The 6th century BC scribe who wrote Jonah used the name of a prophet mentioned in 2 Kings to make a point about the worthiness of evangelising to the heathen. He has his reluctant hero sail from Joppa and encounter a storm. Cast overboard somewhere out at sea, the big fish is a literary device to get Jonah back to Joppa, from where, more enthusiastically, he can set out again for the big, bad city of Nineveh.

The theological point could be made simply – ‘our god loves all who repent, don’t be reluctant, go and tell it to the heathen’ – but would that entertain the crowd? Simple folk of course would start to take the entertaining story as a literal truth. Then, several generations later, when the story falls into the hands of the author of Matthew – who may well believe that the Jonah story is ‘true’ – he has his own fictional Christ figure quote Jonah to give authority to a different theological point: ‘death can be conquered.’

Deception

Thus by small steps a complex weave of fantasy is woven. As indeed the Church Fathers cheerfully admit:

"I will only mention the Apostle Paul. ... He, then, if anyone, ought to be calumniated; we should speak thus to him: ‘The proofs which you have used against the Jews and against other heretics bear a different meaning in their own contexts to that which they bear in your Epistles.

We see passages taken captive by your pen and pressed into service to win you a victory, which in volumes from which they are taken have no controversial bearing at all ... the line so often adopted by strong men in controversy – of justifying the means by the result."

– St. Jerome, Epistle to Pammachus (xlviii, 13; N&PNF. vi, 72-73)


Was Saint Paul an unabashed liar? From this verse in Romans it would appear so:

"For if the truth of God hath more abounded by my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?" – St. Paul, Romans 3.7.


However in context Paul is actually censuring other Christians who say "Let us do evil, that good may come" (that is, from God's judgement). But like Paul we can "take the passage captive" to make a point.

Luminaries of Deception

Jerome is not alone in his candour. Bishop Eusebius, the official propagandist for Constantine, entitles the 32nd Chapter of his 12th Book of Evangelical Preparation:

"How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived."


Eusebius
is notoriously the author of a great many falsehoods – but then he does warn us in his infamous history:

"We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity."

– Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2.


Clement of Alexandria was one of the earliest of the Church Fathers to draw a distinction between "mere human truth" and the higher truth of faith:

"Not all true things are the truth, nor should that truth which merely seems true according to human opinions be preferred to the true truth, that according to the faith."

– Clement (quoted by M. Smith, Clement of Alexandria, p446)


John Chrysostom, 5th century theologian and erstwhile bishop of Constantinople, is another:

"Do you see the advantage of deceit? ...

For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up for the defects of the mind ...

And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived."


– Chrysostom, Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1.


'Golden Mouth' John is notable for his extensive commentaries on the Bible which emphasized a literal understanding of the stories; the style popular at Alexandria until then was to acknowledge an allegorical meaning of the text.

Thus eminent ‘believers’ added falsehood to the beliefs of later generations. ‘For the best of reasons’ they ‘clarified’ obscure points, conjured up characters to speak dialogue that could have been said, invented scenarios that could have happened, borrowed extensively from a wider culture. And this all before they became the custodians of power and had real reasons for lies, inventions and counterfeits. As we shall see, god’s immutable laws became as flexible as putty.

The 5th and 6th centuries was the 'golden age' of Christian forgery. In a moment of shocking candour, the Manichean bishop (and opponent of AUGUSTINE) Faustus said:

"Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since – as already it has been often proved – these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them."


In the ferocious battle for adherents, the propagandists sought to outdo each other at every turn. One example: by the 5th century, four very different endings existed to Mark's gospel. Codex Bobiensis ends Mark at verse 16:8, without any post-crucifixion appearances; it lacks both the 'short conclusion' (of Jesus sending followers to 'east and west') or the 'long conclusion' – the fabulous post-death apparitions, where Jesus promises his disciples that they will be immune to snake bites and poison.

Once the Church had grabbed mastery of much of Europe and the middle-east, its forgery engine went into overdrive.

'The Church forgery mill did not limit itself to mere writings but for centuries cranked out thousands of phony "relics" of its "Lord," "Apostles" and "Saints" … There were at least 26 'authentic' burial shrouds scattered throughout the abbeys of Europe, of which the Shroud of Turin is just one … At one point, a number of churches claimed the one foreskin of Jesus, and there were enough splinters of the "True Cross" that Calvin said the amount of wood would make "a full load for a good ship." '

– Acharya S, The Christ Conspiracy.



Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), the tireless zealot for papal authority – he was the founder of the Society of Jesus (the Jesuits) – even wrote:

"We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to be white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."


The Reformation may have swept away some abuses perpetrated by the priesthood but lying was not one of them. Martin Luther, in private correspondence, argued:

"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church ... a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them."

– Martin Luther (Cited by his secretary, in a letter in Max Lenz, ed., Briefwechsel Landgraf Phillips des Grossmüthigen von Hessen mit Bucer, vol. I.)

The Forgery Mill

Notable Christian forgeries include:

The Donation of Constantine'Without doubt a forgery...' Catholic Encyclopedia
A two-part document purporting to be from the first Christian emperor to Pope Sylvester I (314-35). In the 'Confessio' Constantine thanks Sylvester for his Christian instruction and baptism (and consequent cure of leprosy!) In his 'Donatio' Constantine confers on the pope and his successors primacy over all other bishops, including the eastern patriarchs, senatorial privileges for the clergy, imperial palaces and regalia, Rome itself and the western empire!!

In truth, this monstrous 8th century forgery (peppered with anachronisms) was almost certainly written by the future Pope Paul I (757-67) while his equally ambitious brother Stephen II (752-57) sat on the papal throne.


The False Decretals
(aka Pseudo-Isidorian Forgeries) – A riot of more than a hundred fake letters and decrees attributed to pontiffs from 1st century Clement (88-97) to 7th century Gregory I (590-604). Now attributed either to 'Isodore Mercator', a supposed 9th century master forger and papal aide, or to a group of Gallic forgers trading on the name and reputation of Isodore of Seville. Like the Donation, the Decretals conferred rights and privileges on the papacy.

A similar collection, the 'Dionysiana', was named for a 6th century monk 'Dennis the Little' ( Dionysius Exiguus), inventor of the BC -AD dating system. Dionysius provided the papacy with Latin translation of the canons the Eastern Church. This ripe collection included fifty canons from the very Apostles themselves.


'Thundering Legion' Decree of Marcus Aurelius
In this fabricated letter from the emperor to the Senate, Marcus is said to have forbidden persecution of Christians because, in a battle with the Quadi in 174, prayers from Christian soldiers brought on a thunderstorm which rescued the Romans from thirst and dispersed the barbarian opponents. The emperor is said to have accorded the Twelfth Legion the suffix fulminata or fulminea, that is, 'thundering.' Tertullian (c.160 - c.230), north African theologian, made up this nonsense; the twelfth legion had had the suffix legio fulminata from the time of Augustus. The stoic Marcus Aurelius had nothing but contempt for the Christians.


'
Letters' of Emperor Antoninus Pius to the Greeks – More fakery, this time from the pen of 4th century Bishop Eusebius (Ecclesiastic History, IV, 13). He has the pious 2nd century pagan forbid 'tumults against the Christians.'


The Clementines
– These fancies, twenty books of 'curious religious romance' (Catholic Encyclopedia), masquerade as the work of 1st century pontiff Clement I. Written in the 4th century, their purpose was to bolster Rome's claim to be the primary see: here we have the 'Epistle of Clement to James' which originated the notion that St. Peter was the first Bishop of Rome.


Correspondence between Seneca and Paul
- a 4th century invention of 1st century letters. They alluded to fires in Rome and to the persecution of Jews and Christians.


Acts of Paul and Thecla
– "Love for Paul" was the justification for this particular compendium of fable. None other than Tertullian condemned his rival's handiwork.

"If those who read the writing that falsely bears the name of Paul adduce the example of Thecla to maintain the right of women to teach and to baptize, let them know that the presbyter in Asia who produced this document, as if he could of himself add anything to the prestige of Paul, was removed from his office after he had been convicted and had confessed that he did it out of love for Paul."

– Tertullian, De batismo, 17.


'Testimonium Flavianum
' - The infamous 'passing reference' to Jesus Christ supposedly written by the 1st century Jewish historian Josephus (he adopted the family name of the imperial house).

We know in graphic detail the course of the first Jewish War because – remarkably – the history recorded by Josephus somehow survived. Whereas whole libraries of antiquity were torched by the Christians, curiously, this testimony of a Jew made it through the centuries. A subsequent work by Josephus, The Antiquity of the Jews, which iterated and extended his story of the 'chosen people' also survived.

The survival of these two overlapping works was no coincidence because they rather too well 'confirm' from a 'non-Christian source' the existence of the godman. In short, sometime in the 4th century, while most else of ancient scholarship was being thrown into bonfires, a Christian scribe – probably Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea– 'rescued' the histories of Josephus and 'doctored' them to provide convenient 'proof' that Christ had been flesh-and-blood and was neither a fiction (as pagan critics maintained) nor solely a spiritual being, as gnostics reasoned. (See full discussion: The authentic pen of lying Christian scribes!)
Mother of All Fakes The Shroud of Turin
Modern science signalled the decline in the wholesale manufacture of Christian forgeries. The freethinker Leonardo da Vinci had the last laugh on the Church when he put his own face on a fake so clever that it remained 'authentic' for five hundred years! Shrouded in Deceit


The Chronicle of Sulpicius Severus
- a 5th century disciple of Bishop Martin of Tours invented the lurid story of the Neronian persecution. The Jewish historian Josephus says nothing about any "persecution" under Nero, though he is not slow to describe him as "acting like a madman" who "slew his brother, and wife, and mother, from whom his barbarity spread itself to others that were most nearly related to him; and how, at last, he was so distracted that he became an actor in the scenes, and upon the theater." (Wars, 13.1) If a bonfire of Christians had actually happened Josephus would have mentioned it – but he does not, and nor does any early Christian writer.
"In reality, the Neronian persecution never occurred. It is a fiction of the Church, invented for its greater glory."

– Arthur Drews, The Legend of St Peter, p63.



Chapter 16 of Life of Nero by Suetonius. This is the origin of the 'Christians burnt as torches' nonsense.


The Lentulus Letter
For this pious fancy the forger created a fictitious predecessor to Pontius Pilate, governor of Judaea, calling him "Publius Lentulus". The forger has his creation write to the Roman Senate, reporting Christ's "raising of the dead". He describes Jesus as "the most beautiful of the sons of men."

The letter was first printed in the "Life of Christ" by Ludolph the Carthusian (Cologne, 1474). It was probably composed in 13th/14th century, based on an earlier Greek forgery.


Report of Pilate to Caesar –
Pilate's conversion to Christianity – and even the debauched Emperor Tiberius a closet-Christian! Another gem from the pen of Tertullian!
‘All these things Pilate did to Christ; and now in fact a Christian in his own convictions, he sent word of Him to the reigning Caesar, who was at the time Tiberius. Yes, and even the Caesars would have believed on Christ, if either the Caesars had not been necessary for the world, or if Christians could have been Caesars.’

– Tertullian Apol. xxi and Anti-Nicene Fathers, iii, 35.



Letter of Jesus to the King of Edessa
Nothing less than the handwritten note of the godman himself! This fabrication was supposedly delivered by the apostle Thaddeus, together with a self-portrait by the artist – Jesus Christ (he wiped his face with the canvass)! Actually, the text is borrowed from the 'concordance' of Tatian, compiled in the 2nd century, and known as the 'Diatessaron'. The forgery is almost certainly the work of Eusebius, Christian propagandist of the 4th century. He was the first to mention the letter and claimed to have personally 'translated' it from Syriac (Ecclesiastical History I, xii).


The Virgin Birth Fraud

The most colossal blunder of the Septuagint translators, the mistranslation of the original Hebrew text of Isaiah, 7.14, allowed deceitful early Christians to concoct their infamous prophecy that somehow the ancient Jewish text presaged the miraculous birth of their own godman.

The Hebrew original says:
'Hinneh ha-almah harah ve-yeldeth ben ve-karath shem-o immanuel.'


Honestly translated, the verse reads:
'Behold, the young woman has conceived — and bears a son and calls his name Immanuel.'


The Greek-speaking translators of Hebrew scripture (in 3rd century B.C. Alexandria) slipped up and translated 'almah' (young woman) into the Greek 'parthenos' (virgin). The Hebrew word for virgin would have been 'betulah.' The slip did not matter at the time, for in context, Isaiah’s prophecy – set in the 8th century BC but probably written in the 5th – had been given as reassurance to King Ahaz of Judah that his royal line would survive, despite the ongoing siege of Jerusalem by the Syrians. And it did. In other words, the prophecy had nothing to do with events in Judaea eight hundred years into the future! Justin ‘Martyr’, a pagan Greek from Palestine, fled to Ephesus at the time of Bar Kochbar’s revolt (132 -135 AD). He joined the growing Christian community and found himself competing with the priests of Artemis, an eternally virgin goddess. Justin successfully overcame the sentiments of established Christians and had Mary, mother of Jesus, declared a virgin, citing his Greek copy of Isaiah as 'evidence' of scriptural prescience. The Greek priest who then forged the 'Gospel according to St. Matthew' went one stage further, taking the word 'harah' – in Hebrew a past or perfect tense – and switched it into a future tense to arrive at:

'Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel.'

– Matthew 1.23.


All this to arrive at the monstrous fiction that ancient scripture foretold of the arrival of an infant actually called Jesus!


Still Lying in 21st century


The Pope has chosen to canonise Juan Diego, supposedly a sixteenth century Mexican Indian who had the good fortune to have the Blessed Virgin (in the guise of 'Our Lady of Guadeloupe') impress her own image onto his cloak. Not surprisingly, Diego was a paragon of Catholic devotion, completely submissive to Spanish colonial authorities. Mind you, the story only surfaced a century after its alleged occurrence, at the height of the campaign to eradicate indigenous religions.

Commented David Brading, Professor of Mexican History at Cambridge University:

'When the Pope canonises Juan Diego, he will have elevated to sainthood the hero of a religious work of fiction.'

The Times, 31 June 2002.


Continued The Times:
'An interview with the man given the task in 1947 of restoring Diego's cloak, on which an image of the Virgin appeared, revealed this week that the image was not a miracle. Instead, he said, it had been painted on.'



Whether we look at the Middle Ages and the Reformation, the first centuries of the Christian era or even today, Christianity has always been a fabrication, layer set upon layer of lies and nonsense, a fraud from its very inception.

Sources:
Graham Phillips, The Marian Conspiracy (Sidgwick & Jackson, 2000)
Marina Warner, Alone of All Her Sex (Picador, 1976)
John Shelby Spong, Liberating the Gospels (Harper, 1996)
John Shelby Spong, Born of a Woman (Harper, 1992)
Robin Lane Fox, The Unauthorized Version (Penguin, 1991)
Leslie Houlden (Ed.), Judaism & Christianity (Routledge, 1988)
W.H.C. Frend, The Rise of Christianity (Darton Longman Todd, 1984)
Riane Eisle, The Chalice & the Blade (Harper Collins, 1987)