Freethought Nation

I am currently in a discussion with numerous people on the inception of Christianity, and how we contend that such a thing was formulated in Alexandria in an attempt to create a state religion.

However, this does beg the question; if Rome created Christianity for this purpose, why were Christians persecuted about the time of first emergence?

Thanks

i have thought about this myself. and well the only thing i could come up with is that, yes, at first the thought of a monotheistic (sp) religion was repulsive to the so called polytheistic believers of the time, the so called pegan believers. so they were persecuted until there were enough christian believers to basicly elimate any nonbelievers.

then of course there is the theory that its all made up in order to show that if you dont believe, then those that died, died for nothing. remember, jesus suposedly died for our sins so it only would make sense that christians would have to die in order to spread the word.

Such conjecture wouldn't stand up to scholarly scrutiny however.

As far as I can remember - Acharya doesn't cover this anywhere in her books, and it seems to be one gaping hole in the proposition.

The Alexandrian hypothesis consists of having a mystical collaboration of Jewish and Pagan writings which turn the ancient mysteries inside out - from what I gather. In other words, while it was forbidden to divulge the mysteries to the profane masses the early Christians were doing just that - and suffering the resultant penalty. It was a sort of poor mans mystery school - on that broke the state rules in some cases. Later on, an orthodox tradition arose and came to power and essentially put all of the focus on literal / historical interpretation so as to try and put the mysteries back into secrecy. With all of the symbolism interpreted literally / historically one can not tell what the stories actually represent. The Roman state religion comes into play later yet, during the third century, well after the first orthodox movement of the second century had already come into play. Rome simply took over the role of being the head orthodox tradition and pretty much continued trying to reverse what had been done by the original mystics of the first century who were giving out too much information to the general public right after the turning of the Great Year (Aries to Pisces).

This has continued to the present day in that many people have no idea that the bible stories are simply mystery school allegories that most people don't understand correctly because we're taught to literalize and historicize the stories and therefore people never really get around to understanding them - just as the orthodoxy set out to accomplish right from the beginning. This great confusion started with the original orthodox movement of the second century that was basically trying to keep the meaning of the allegories away from public domain. Meanwhile, I assume that many of the top clergymen in the world today do perfectly understand the symbolism of the allegories and there were likely those at certain ranks who understood them throughout the entire evolution of orthodoxy Christianity dating back to the original movement aimed at literalizing the allegorical stories into obscurity.

Ultimately, this is one that FTL or Acharya might want to answer in much greater detail. I'll see if one of them would like to give it a go.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

Firstly, what "persecution" are you talking about? And who said that Rome created Christianity? That's a straw man.

I have laid out the steps as they were taken, one after another, over a period of decades to centuries. There is no "gaping hole."

The stories of "persecutions" are largely apocryphal - as I most definitely do spell out in my books, especially The Christ Conspiracy, in which I pretty much covered all bases. There is no evidence of the massive martyrdom claimed later by Christian apologists. During the first century, Christians were barely heard of, and the Neronian persecution is a myth unsubstantiated by any evidence.

It is not until the second century that we start hearing about Christians who are fanatical about their faith, writing long apologies and polemics. Naturally, the Pagan priesthood got its hackles up and shot back, and some Christians were evidently attacked for their "atheism." But still there were no real persecutions as depicted in dramatic Christian tradition.

Christianity was created largely at Alexandria by Jews/Therapeuts, not Romans, but was becoming a concerted effort in the loosely knit brotherhood throughout the Mediterranean. The Roman elite factored into the picture as part of a general effort to combine Judaism with Paganism, as apparently exemplified by Vespasian and his wealthy compadres. You can be sure that this elite faction was being opposed by many others within the Roman government both in Italy and elsewhere, including Egypt.

To see a "gaping hole" you would need to have the erroneous concept that Vespasian or some other wealthy influential person just woke up one day and decided to create a new religion, and then everyone went along with it. As I show in great detail in the long chapter in my book Christ in Egypt about Alexandria, there were many factions within this widespread brotherhood that extended around the Mediterranean. Many of these factions wanted to be top dog; hence, they jockeyed continually for position. The numerous conflicts between Orthodox and Gnostic Christians during the second century demonstrate this point - as well as the prominence of the Christian effort, without so-called persecutions. Many of these individuals were leaders of the Church, which was already powerful and had bases around the Mediterranean, such as I also clearly spell out in my books.

The notion of a widespread persecution of Christian peasants by the nasty Roman hierarchy is a myth that goes along with the purported supernatural genesis of Christianity from a Jewish messiah in the backwater of Judea. It didn't happen. If you're talking about the immediate apostles of Christ, such as Peter, purportedly dying for their faith, there is no credible evidence that any of them existed, and Peter, for one, appears to be a remake of the Roman god Jupiter. The god with the 12 was a common motif long prior to the common era, and there pantheons of 12 gods in both the Greek and Roman religions.

As I also spell out in my books, some of the "Christians" (brotherhood members) who were "persecuted" were likely assailed because they were blabbing the mysteries, the revelation of which to the vulgar populace constituted a capital offense.

If the scenario of poor, powerless Christians being attacked and stifled by the all-powerful Romans were true, how do we explain the prominence of Justin Martyr and all the rest of the early Church fathers, whose works we possess to this day, while their Pagan competitors' writings are all lost?

In order to understand the dynamics of this development, you must disabuse yourself of the Christian tradition of supernatural genesis as depicted in the New Testament and movies, followed by the dramatic depictions of people willing to die for their faith shortly after Christ's death, as well as the extraordinary springing up of churches all over the place, as in Paul's epistles. As I've demonstrated, this scenario is entirely unsubstantiated. The fact that there were so many "churches" already by Paul's time is indicative of the brotherhood's preexistence, as well as its wealth and power.

The struggles between factions came about significantly with the historicizing and Judaizing efforts, which were opposed by other factions, such as Gnostics like Marcion. Marcion was certainly persecuted - possibly even murdered - for his attempts at stopping these particular efforts within the Christian movement. But his persecutors were other Christians. In fact, Marcion was essentially the head of the Roman church for a time, producing the first New Testament. His effort was wrestled away and redacted to produce the Gospel of Luke, and, by the end of the second century, the rest of the canonical New Testament.

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

Well, I think Acharya just covered it quite thoroughly. For more details, she has written about this particular subject in nearly every book she has written.

The chapter titled "The Alexandrian Roots of Christianity" beginning on page 431 in Christ in Egypt explains much about this issue as well as the entire book, Christ Conspiracy.

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube

Thanks a lot for the clarification, Acharya.

I was working from memory, and as I asserted - I couldn't remember any instance in which you discussed the purported Christian persecution, except briefly in the 'Christ Conspiracy'.

My memory obviously stands corrected, and I shall go over those chapters again.

However, you seem to have mistaken my question for a knit-pick, which is certainly not what it was. I do much to spread the word in regards to your works, and have read each of them.

I was asking for clarification - that is all.

The abrupt reply may well be my fault. I asked the administrators to reply to this thread and they may have glanced at your initial post and saw it as a "knit-pick" and responded accordingly. There is quite a bit of knit-picking on these forums from time to time so I'm sure that you understand the reasoning behind the tone of her response. But in any case, hopefully Acharya's response gives you a better sense of direction in terms of dealing with the people you were dealing with previously when you were all going over the Roman role in the creation of Christianity.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

Hello!

My name is Littlejohn (Giannino in italian language). I'm from Italy and I live about 50 Km by Rome (N-E), in the historic Sabine country. I apologize for my not perfect english.

By over 14 years I am conducting studies and research much 'lockouts' about the true origins of Christianity, and after so many sacrifices and renunciation, which ended with the weigh on my family, today I feel legitimated to affirm that I understanding at least 95% of what there is to understand about the true origins of Christianity.

The cycle of my research has not yet concluded, as I expect to recover even more precious data, beyond those already recovered, in order fit out in a more complete way my exegetical reconstructions about the topic mentioned. Just such an effort will be completed, I think to put again my hands to the drafting of an essay 'ad-hoc', which began in late 2005 and subsequently interrupted for research needs.

With regard about that posted by kind lady Acharya, I must say that I am basically agree with she: at least on some points.

«..There is no evidence of the massive martyrdom claimed later by Christian apologists»

The 'catholic-christian' worship(*) was founded in Rome between 140-150s, and it was sponsored directly by the imperial power of the time, certainly in full agreement with the senatorial power: for once in 'love and harmony' with the imperial one!

The task of founding a new religion, initially called "Catholicum" (meaning 'universal') and later also 'Christian', for its obvious similarities to Judeo-Christianity, was entrusted to a 'team' of experts, which were certainly part Marcion, Valentinus, Aniceto, Polycarp of Smyrna, and others.

This team was equipped with about a fund of 200,000 sesterces, sent to them through Marcion: probably the head of the team, at least in the initial period, until it rose up the contrasts between Marcion and the rest of the team, who brought the same Marcion to move away from it. Thereafter, for almost similar reasons, Valentine also moved away from the team, which fell under the hegemony of Anicetus: first, true bishop of the roman catholic church.

On this basis, it is quite intuitive that the empire could never persecute the followers of a cult, like the catholic-christian one, whose birth had contributed directly! .. This would have been an absurd nonsense!

However, this does not mean that in the periods cited by the 'fathers' of the second century (also called 'forger fathers'), there were not actually of persecution: they simply weren't applied to the 'catholic-christian' followers, but those of the various gnostic sects, defined "heretical-christians" also.(**)

Forger founders of the catholic-christian worship, don't you limited only to 'plunder' the Bible of the Jews in an attempt to extract from it improbable prophecies about the 'Messiah' Jesus, but even the content of the doctrine of the gnostic world also, whom Jesus belonged by natural 'birth'! (Jesus was the founder of the 'jesuan-gnosticism ' and NOT of the catholic-christianity, with whom he never had anything to do, even because also such worship was born about 70 years after his death, happened around the 72 year)

All this provoked a reaction and protest of the gnostics, who saw themselves defrauded of their 'sacred' texts and, more importantly, of their charismatic figure of reference: namely Jesus of Nazareth! Moreover, almost as a defiant challenge to the world jesuan-gnostics, the forgers of catholic-christianity crucified Jesus in a literary way, causing more and more violent resentment in jesuan-gnostics. (however, Jesus was not 'taken up into heaven' as the Gnostics claimed, but he died stoned by the Jews, after the Sanhedrin had issued the death sentence)

Because of this reaction and this protest, the most prominent people of the Gnostic world, were made to capture by the roman power, to protect the lies of the Catholic Church, and later martyred. Later, the catholic counterfeiters took 'possession' of these victims passing them off as 'martyrs of catholicism' (sic!). A striking example is the so-called one of the 'Martyrs of Lyon', in southern Gaul.

For now I will stop here, but I intends to return to comment on other passages of the interesting post of Mrs. Acharya and others as well.


My best regards and greetings,

____________________________________

Notes:

(*) - specification absolutely necessary, because about 50 years before his birth, was founded in Antioch of Syria, around 85-90s, the 'Judeo-Christian' worship, who had nothing to do with the catholic-christian worship, if not for the fact that the founders of the catholic-christianity you inspired to the 'messianic' model of Judeo-Christianity.

(**) - is a misnomer, as these sects were not never 'christians', but, at most, 'jesuans'.


Littlejohn

.

Good work, Littlejohn!

Keep us posted on your work

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/user/theemptycross#g/u

Check out the above link as well Little John. It goes over much of what led into the evolution of Christianity from the first century into the second and beyond.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

"..Good work, Littlejohn!.."

Thank you, very much!

"..Keep us posted on your work"

Yes, of course.


Best regards,


Littlejohn

.

Thanks for your indication!

At the beginning of my research I read several reviews on the work of modern researchers and those of the past, even to get an idea of what to look exactly. However, I soon realized that all researchers, without exception, had been misled by the false path of research prepared about 19 centuries ago by the forgers who gave life to the catholic-christianity.

New Testament literature, in fact, was not composed to provide information about the real historical characters involved in the story of the Gospel, nor to provide real informations about this story also, but rather to mystify, before the eyes of the 'poor in spirit' (namely the plagiarized faithful), the truth then well known, both by Jews than by Gentiles, who were regularly informed by the Jews of the diaspora (see Celso): as to both the true identity of Jesus of Nazareth and that of his mother, known as the Virgin Mary (in the world Mariamne of Magdala), besides, of course, the identities of the other 'evangelical' characters, including so-called 'apostles'.

From all this one senses that to follow slavishly the research and studies of scholars who have followed the classic path of research, one inevitably ends up in another 'flop' yet. When I managed to discover one of the most important keys of exegetical research, I could even find a search path until to then unexplored, which runs parallel to the classic path.

This is practically the only search path that leads to the Jesus of the history, while, conversely, the one prepared by the 'founder' fathers of 19 centuries ago, leads to the Jesus of 'faith': totally different from the one of story! ..

This was an extremely complex character, characterized by lights and shadows, very extrovert and eclectic, which should have been of interest ONLY to historians and novelists, and not to theologians, who, after 'eradicated' him by his natural 'riverbed', namely the Gnostic one, they have 'stitched' characteristics and roles around him completely aliens (or almost) to the Man of Nazareth, starting with the fact that he, Gnostic teacher, had NOTHING to do with the world of catholic-christian worship!


Best regards,


Littlejohn

.

It should also be kept in mind that Greeks and Romans were also waiting for a godman, the phrasing of 'son of God' on their coins stands out. Right before the said of time of Jesus, Augustus Caesar with his Flamins were bent on making him the one god incarnate (Janus Quirinus). Here the historical record is strong as there are many secondary accounts of people or groups of people being killed for denying Augustus was the one god (the main writers avoid this--censored!!). To the best of my knowledge to recollect, when the Jews were asked to swear an oath affirming Augustus' godhood they, like the queen of Britain, firmly denied Rome, but neither were they looking for a fight.

Before Jesus, many Romans and others were so brainwashed that they thought Augustus had the power to heal anyone with his touch. They essentially made him a church and there are also many records of people leaving great sums of money to him. He and his priests spread about that he was born from the side of a virgin and by some accounts was anointed at the winter solstice. As it is said that he died around the year 18 we can also see that his son tried to do likewise as early accounts also speak of him killing those who would not worship him.

Anyone who doubts his influence need only look at our calendar to see how his followers added two months, and from this it appears that the Zodiac followed with 12 signs. The division of twelve months seems to come from the Jains and the Buddhists who had a clock with 12 divisions. Interestingly the Jains and Buddhists were also influenced by Greek astrology, in the earliest Pali texts Greek terms appear (horupatha). Dr. Lindtner has pointed out that the last chapter of the MSV (Sanghabhedavastu) states that the Buddha's disciple learned Greek astrology.

Around the time of Jesus Rome became too big for itself and Roman culture had not spread enough to protect it from its own citizens. With such turmoil no one was in control; "Caesar is no less in control of Rome then we are in control of him"-Cicero

A big problem for Rome was Egypt as Augustus thought that he synchronized his hero with that of EgyPT (learning from Alexander, PTolemy Soter, and other self proclaimed saviors) but this turned around to be bad for Rome as Jesus was the TheraPueTae hero he was the solar man who took Augustus' place because he was not a pompous figure. And so Christianity started as a revolt against Rome's religious dogma. Now one could also imagine the times, the people wanted a real a hero that was ordinary, a spark of reason developed even among the Aristocrats, more people started to question the existence of their own gods and so naturally the next godman would have to appear to be both historical and immortal.

Hi!..

What should be noted, is the fact that Catholics still maintain that their ancestors were martyred by the Romans because they were monotheists. This is a pure lie and proof is the fact that the Jews, as monotheists, were not subject to any persecution.

The reality is that the real repression against Catholics, began to occur only at the time of Emperor Decius, who, almost certainly, reacted to the arrogance and pretensions of the Roman Catholic clergy, who claim to positions of prestige and power, because he was aware that the Catholic Church was born through the direct intervention of the imperial and senatorial power by the first half of the second century. Before the 'persecution' of Decius, the victims of religious intolerance was mainly jesuan-gnostics, who, with their truth threatened the lies' castle built by the forger fathers, in order to give life to Catholic-Christianity.



"..As it is said that he died around the year 18..."

As far as I know, Octavian Augustus died in 767 AUC, which corresponds to 14 AD .... In the 18 year ruled his stepson and son in law also, Tiberius and, frankly, I never read that he did kill those who refused to adore Octavianus, though this can not be excluded prior ...



"..The division of twelve months seems to come from the Jains and the Buddhists who had a clock with 12 divisions"

It is possible ... However, the use of the sidereal year divided into 12 portions was ancient even in the West, and certainly before the advent of Buddha on the religious scenarios. However, what was typical of the East, was the so-called 'Wheel of Life' ( http://www.cultor.org/Orient/Iconography/WoL.html), which was usually divided into six parts, but could also have other subdivision, such as four, or eight or 12 parts.

In particular, the circle divided into four parts, which appears behind the head of Jesus in the earliest icons (see Christ Pantocrator), was reproducing, at the origins, just the wheel of life and not the 'solar wheel', as claimed by one part of scholars. Everything has a precise historical justification, due to contacts that Jesus, almost surely had with the Buddhist world, during his trip to Mesopotamia and, perhaps, also in Parthia. (there are patristic indications that suggests seriously it)



"..And so Christianity started as a revolt against Rome's religious dogma.."

I fear that there is a big mistake in this, due to the hallucinating lies 'coined' by the forger 'fathers' to build the catholic-christian worship ... Christianity arose because sponsored by the Roman power, both imperial and senatorial and therefore is practically absurd that Catholics Christians had rebelled against Rome ..

Those who rebelled against the Roman power, were the 'messianists' Zealots: namely, the rebels who fought to liberate Palestine Israel from Roman rule.

Messianism means 'messianic expectation', ie waiting for the appearance of the 'Messiah': a semi-mythological warlike figure, which, thanks to the 'divine' intercession, would lead the 'chosen people' to his redemption and his independence from foreign forces, that the Messiah would defeat restoring the 'glories' of the davidic kingdom.

The 'messianists' term in Hebrew is rendered by "meshichiyim". If translated into greek, this word becomes 'christianoi': that is to say the SAME attribute used for the followers of the catholic-christian worship! This is very important, as it allows us to understand many things, made extremely ambiguous by the falsehood and lies of the founder 'fathers'! ...


Best regards.


Littlejohn

.