Historicity of Jesus - 2 - Printable Version

+- Forums (
+-- Forum: Indian History & Culture (
+--- Forum: Indian History (
+--- Thread: Historicity of Jesus - 2 (/showthread.php?tid=362)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - dhu - 06-03-2012

There is actually a reservoir, not an elite, a creative reservoir; in heathen society this reservoir encompasses the entirety of society, but this resrvoir is present even in a toxically transformed heathen society. In comparison, distinction, dependendence, and in initimate relation to this reservoir, concretized personality appears. importantly, this reservoir is susceptible to Shakespeare and an involution can be started therof. Alot of effort is expended to colonize this reservoir: the prophet messiahs only impinged on the reservoir, but with Jesus, a direct assault was made upon the reservoir.

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - dhu - 06-03-2012

The relational exists between any two entities: the relational compounded is culture.

Concretization appears with fragmentation and personality then emerges, formed of the edges of the relational; that is, personality is not basic.

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - ramana - 09-19-2012

Ancient Papyrs reveals Jesus had a wife

SO the identity was manufactured. By whom? When? Why? What does this do to the Roman Catholci Church and its Pope/Monk system? Was Martin Luther right after all about priests and marriage? What does this do to Latin and German Euorpe?

Quote:BOSTON: A previously unknown scrap of ancient papyrus written in ancient Egyptian Coptic includes the words "Jesus said to them, my wife," -- a discovery likely to renew a fierce debate in the Christian world over whether Jesus was married.

The existence of the fourth-century fragment -- not much bigger than a business card -- was revealed at a conference in Rome on Tuesday by Karen King, Hollis Professor of Divinity at Harvard Divinity School in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

"Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was not married, even though no reliable historical evidence exists to support that claim," King said in a statement released by Harvard.

"This new gospel doesn't prove that Jesus was married, but it tells us that the whole question only came up as part of vociferous debates about sexuality and marriage."

Despite the Catholic Church's insistence that Jesus was not married, the idea resurfaces on a regular basis, notably with the 2003 publication of Dan Brown's best-seller " The Da Vinci Code," which angered many Christians because it was based on the idea that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and had children.

King said the fragment, unveiled at the Tenth International Congress of Coptic Studies, provided the first evidence that some early Christians believed Jesus had been married.

Roger Bagnall, director of the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World in New York, said he believed the fragment, which King has called " The Gospel of Jesus's wife," was authentic.

But further examination will be made by experts, as well as additional testing of the papyrus fragment, described as brownish-yellow and tattered. Of particular interest will be the chemical composition of the ink.

The fragment is owned by an anonymous private collector who contacted King to help translate and analyze it, and is thought to have been discovered in Egypt or perhaps Syria.

King said that it was not until around 200 AD that claims started to surface, via the theologian known as Clement of Alexandria, that Jesus did not marry.

"This fragment suggests that other Christians of that period were claiming that he was married" but does not provide actual evidence of a marriage, she said.

"Christian tradition preserved only those voices that claimed Jesus never married. The 'Gospel of Jesus's Wife' now shows that some Christians thought otherwise."

King's analysis of the fragment is slated for publication in the Harvard Theological Review in January 2013. She has posted a draft of the paper, and images of the fragment, on the Harvard Divinity School website.

So Clement of Alexandria claimed Jesus wasnt married. So why?

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - Husky - 09-24-2012

The following looks like IS' own remark to the news. The bold bit is what I suspected.

Quote:End Note: Of course, we do not know if such a man as Jesus ever lived. The best Christian scholars have not been able to give us any proofs. And the history of the compilation of the Bible is now so well known that the Bible’s contents cannot be taken as factual. [color="#0000FF"]So whether Jesus had a wife — or two according to Biblical exegete and theologist Barbara Thiering – is really neither here nor there. He is described in pious tales as a rabbi and in Jewish society from ancient times till today, there is no such thing as an unmarried rabbi. But the evidence produced for Jesus’s wife — first or second we do not know — is not yet proved, and the scholars involved are feminists who may have a bone to pick with a misogynistic Church. Their perhaps unreal papyrus piece is timely evidence when there is a push to put ladies in the Roman pulpit. And there is the other angle: if Jesus had a real wife, then he must have been a real husband too. So a failing Christian Church in a Europe that has gone beyond belief gets an historical boon:[/color] a real historical Jesus and — never mind true believers! — a real historical wife too. As least she is historical and not hysterical. Socrates, the greater man altogether and the one we should follow, had to suffer a hysterical wife (who was also historical without need of a papyrus certificate). – Editor

In any case, how are they choosing to reconcile this with the previously "rediscovered" gospel about the homosexual jesus again? [IIRC the 'secret gospel of Paul or Mark' or something.]

Most convenient that there seems to be a jeebus for every minority/oppressed group these days*, just as in the not so distant past there was a jeebus for every majority/oppressor group (a Roman jeebus, an oryan jeebus among the nazis, etc).

* Recall such examples as:

- the South African movie - from within the last few years - by a European-origin christian who specifically chose a native African to play jeebus.

- the recent "jesus was a dalit too" concoction, that is peddled among its target audience and not in Europe or China, obviously.

Having said that, if they're now manufacturing new "evidence" for new jesuses in order to appeal to different groups of people, that would be exactly the same as what christian gospel manufacturers had done in the early centuries: a large number of apocryphal gospels existed, each specifically created to appeal to/convert different target groups in the Roman empire. (also ) Indeed, even the 4 canonical gospels and specific Epistles (and Acts and stuff) were created to convert different target groups.

Can compare with how the "new Indian bible" features not only jeebus dancing, singing - in order to use it to inculturate on Hindu dances and music, but also steals shlokas from Hindu religious texts to gift them to christianism. That is, the new Indian Bible is created to target Hindus and retain ex-Hindu sheep by manufacturing for them an "native" christian culture that is supposedly "Indian" when it actually particularly stolen from Hindu religion:

Quote:On the left is the dancing Jesus illustration in The New Community Bible (Catholic Edition) for India published by The Bombay St. Paul’s Society, 2008, and released by the Catholic Bishops Conference of India. The “Indian Bible” as it is called, contains invented and interpolated phrases such as “he will dance with songs of joy for you” for Zephaniah 3:17, and numerous quotations from the Vedas, Upanishads, and Puranas. These slokas are described as sourced from “Indian Scriptures”, not Hindu Scriptures.

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - dhu - 10-23-2012


Historicity of Jesus - 2 - ramana - 11-01-2012

dhu, still waiting!

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - Husky - 12-04-2012

^ Me too. Waiting.

Anyway, the following is not limited to the topic of the "historicity of jeebus", but is about the "historicity" of all such fables. Or rather, it's about How the Origins of All the Worst of Human Stupidity lie in Self-Delusions that turned into Mass-Delusions. <- That's too long for a book title, else I'd have sold the rights by now. But the short, snazzy title should be "Mindvirus".

Historical fact: Monogawdism = (repeatedly) the product of delirious and even diseased minds.

Back in September, New Scientist's (print) cover contained among its headings "The epileptic origins of monotheism". Fortunately, scanning wasn't needed as there's an online version.

(* Really, that was the print heading for the article as heralded on the cover of the issue, even though the online text has a different title.)


Quote:Tutankhamun's death and the birth of monotheism

05 September 2012 by Jessica Hamzelou

TUTANKHAMUN'S mysterious death as a teenager may finally have been explained. And the condition that cut short his life may also have triggered the earliest monotheistic religion, suggests a new review of his family history.

Since his lavishly furnished, nearly intact tomb was discovered in 1922, the cause of Tutankhamun's death has been at the centre of intense debate. There have been theories of murder, leprosy, tuberculosis, malaria, sickle-cell anaemia, a snake bite - even the suggestion that the young king died after a fall from his chariot.

But all of these theories have missed one vital point, says Hutan Ashrafian, a surgeon with an interest in medical history at Imperial College London. Tutankhamun died young with a feminised physique, and so did his immediate predecessors.

Paintings and sculptures show that Smenkhkare, an enigmatic pharaoh who may have been Tutankhamun's uncle or older brother, and Akhenaten, thought to have been the boy king's father, both had feminised figures, with unusually large breasts and wide hips. Two pharaohs that came before Akhenaten - Amenhotep III and Tuthmosis IV - seem to have had similar physiques. All of these kings died young and mysteriously, says Ashrafian. "There are so many theories, but they've focused on each pharaoh individually."

Ashrafian found that each pharaoh died at a slightly younger age than his predecessor, which suggests an inherited disorder, he says. Historical accounts associated with the individuals hint at what that disorder may have been.

"It's significant that two [of the five related pharaohs] had stories of religious visions associated with them," says Ashrafian. People with a form of epilepsy in which seizures begin in the brain's temporal lobe are known to experience hallucinations and religious visions, particularly after exposure to sunlight. It's likely that the family of pharaohs had a heritable form of temporal lobe epilepsy, he says.

This diagnosis would also account for the feminine features. The temporal lobe is connected to parts of the brain involved in the release of hormones, and epileptic seizures are known to alter the levels of hormones involved in sexual development. This might explain the development of the pharaohs' large breasts. A seizure might also be to blame for Tutankhamun's fractured leg, says Ashrafian (Epilepsy & Behavior,

Tuthmosis IV had a religious experience in the middle of a sunny day, recorded in the Dream Stele - an inscription near the Great Sphinx in Giza. But his visions were nothing compared with those experienced by Akhenaten. They encouraged Akhenaten to raise the status of a minor deity called the "sun-disk", or Aten, into a supreme god - abandoning the ancient Egyptian polytheistic traditions to start what is thought to be the earliest recorded monotheistic religion. If Ashrafian's theory is correct, Akhenaten's religious experiment and Tutankhamun's premature death may both have been a consequence of a medical condition.

"People with temporal lobe epilepsy who are exposed to sunlight get the same sort of stimulation to the mind and religious zeal," says Ashrafian.

"It's a fascinating and plausible explanation," says Howard Markel, a medical historian at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. However, the theory is almost impossible to prove, he adds, given that there is no definitive genetic test for epilepsy.

Orrin Devinsky, a neurologist at the New York University Langone Medical Center, thinks the theory must remain speculative.

"The exact timing of Akhenaten's religious conviction is not so clearly documented, and most cases of sudden religious conversion are not due to epilepsy," he says. "Monotheism could be related to epilepsy, or bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia, or drug intoxication from a fungus - but this paper does not sway me to any of these options."

Markel agrees: "Do we know that a seizure led to monotheism? It's a nice idea, but we don't know," he says. "It's a very interesting hypothesis, but it's just that - there's no definite proof."

As regards the dubitability exhibited in the final statements above: it turns out that back in 2001, a neuroscientist made a similar diagnosis but with even greater self-certainty - but about a purported biblical scribe of the OT instead:


Quote:Old Testament prophet showed epileptic symptoms

19:00 17 November 2001 by Alison Motluk

The Bible may contain the oldest recorded case of temporal lobe epilepsy. Ezekiel, the prophet whose visions are recorded in a book of the Old Testament, apparently had all the classic signs of the condition.

Earlier in 2001, Eric Altschuler, a neuroscientist at the University of California at San Diego, claimed that the Biblical strongman Samson may have been the earliest known sufferer of antisocial personality disorder. Now he says that records in the Bible reveal that Ezekiel, who lived about 2600 years ago, showed extreme classic symptoms of temporal lobe epilepsy.

People with the disease experience partial seizures, often accompanied by a dreamy feeling that things are not quite as they should be. Patients are often misdiagnosed with psychiatric problems. Neurologically, Ezekiel displayed some obvious signs of epilepsy, such as frequent fainting spells and episodes of not being able to speak.

The Biblical figure, who chronicled the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC, exhibited other peculiarities associated with the disease. For instance, he wrote compulsively, a trait known as hypergraphia. Altschuler points out that the Book of Ezekiel is the fourth longest in the Bible - only slightly shorter than Genesis. "It's impenetrable," he says. "He goes on and on."

Aggressively religious

Ezekiel was also extremely religious, another characteristic associated with this form of epilepsy. While many Biblical figures are pious, none was as aggressively religious as Ezekiel, says Altschuler. Other signs of epilepsy can include aggression, delusions and pedantic speech - and the man had them all, Altschuler told a meeting of the Society for Neuroscience in San Diego.

Understanding that Ezekiel may have suffered from epilepsy helps put his writings into perspective, says Altschuler. "Once you appreciate that, you can see where he's coming from."

[color="#800080"](Yes, *everyone* can see where he was coming from....)[/color]

It also serves as further evidence that this disease is genetic in origin. "If there were no old cases," he says, "we'd have to ask if there was something wrong in our environment."

Those aren't the only famous monogawd fictions fitting the profile:

3. Since the 7th century itself, people have argued that islam's Mohammed was - at best - a schizophrene. Over the ages, it's only been amended to 'a textbook schizophrene'.*

And was it Elst who had some writings on how Mohammed was no less delusional than the above cases, and that (from memory) Mohammed also suffered from epilepsy, with all his delirious "visions" brought on by his fits.

(* Apparently, people all over continue to point out the matter in everyday conversations:


"Jesus And Mohammed Were Schizophrenics, by: Charles Sabillon"

I've not read beyond the title (I don't need convincing), but it is itself a step in the right direction:

The title appears to show it has no time for Clive Staples Lewis'(?) famously woefully illogical ultimatum concerning jeebus - i.e. that of "liar, madman OR gawd". Note how Lewis conveniently forgot to list "non-existent", thus not allowing that - solely correct - option.

Indeed, there's no reason for anyone - including the just-posted link - to continue to pretend that jeebus has any historicity, since from the early centuries of the 1st millennium CE learned people have been pointing out that Jeebus Never Existed. His character may be schizophrenic as described, but it is nevertheless a fictional character.)

4. Remember how in the middle ages the christian church still continued to insist that people with epilepsy "were possessed by the devil". Or else, that the fits such people underwent were "in communion with satan".

Sadly, on account of this rigid belief of the church, people who had the disease were frequently rounded up, tortured, burned or otherwise killed.

For "possession".

Ironically, the examples given above (of [[color="#0000FF"]EDIT copy and paste error: didn't mean Tutankhamun but[/color]] Akhenaten, Ezekiel, Mohammed, etc) are indeed cases of people who were "possessed" - but by their own delirium. I.e. they were very much self-deluded. They *invented* evil monogawd religions - by *inventing* fictional monogawd entities (of evil character, but the two go together) - and then peddled these onto the masses (i.e. conversion), if not on pain of death, then by force and deception, thereby extinguishing existing authentic ancestral religion. And it's being triumphantly declared that their brute-force butchery (replacement scheme) was the victory of "the truth" of their invented "gawd" entity/entities. <- Human penchant for self-deception grows.

Anyway, I don't want to give too much of the plot away, but people can try to link the dots and discern the pattern for themselves:

Looney delusions and zealous (intolerant) monogawd fictions.

[Solution: => Deranged minds it IS.]

You'd think the self-evident moral behind all this would be that people should never mistake human invention for reality.

And yet, to think that billions of people over the centuries have been following the fictions that emanated from obviously deranged minds. True, that they were largely coerced. However, their descendants are plain-delusionally adhering to the frauds perpetrated on the human psyche, and are zealously entrapping further others still.

Now, if individuals *insist* on following inventions, each may as well follow something their own mind invented, rather than the fiction of someone else - let alone one made up by some person suffering from obvious mental disorders whereby the dangerous fiction is particularly a consequence of their disorder. Inventing your own fictions still won't make the invention *true* of course, but - all else being equal - it's the more sensible option.

(Of course, in contrast to both cases, heathens throughout the ages and throughout the world have preferred their own real Gods to any and all human invention.)

[Disclaimer: all the above is directed exclusively at incriminating the famous mindviruses and those who invented/propagated it.

Clearly not directed at anyone who coincidentally shares a similar illness, yet has nothing to do with inventing spooks let alone perpetrating such things on others.]

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - ramana - 12-06-2012

What about Abraham the founding father who started on monogodism by trying to kill his own son and offering his wife to the Pharoh? he too must have been similarly deluded.

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - Husky - 12-08-2012

[quote name='ramana' date='06 December 2012 - 02:29 AM' timestamp='1354740670' post='116331']

What about Abraham the founding father who started on monogodism by trying to kill his own son and offering his wife to the Pharoh? he too must have been similarly deluded.


Agreed, though I'm not a neuroscientist or even psychiatrist/ psychologist/profiler/historical character analyst.

Then again, no one needs to be any of this in order to draw straightforward conclusions.

Can leave it to the professionals to work out the detailed proof, but the conclusion/solution is:

All mono-gawd characters (i.e. all "gawd" charaters that insist on being a monogawd) - hence all monogawdisms - are inventions of the human mind, plain and simple. Of the delusional human mind, what's more.

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - dhu - 12-22-2012

[quote name='Husky' date='07 December 2012 - 08:27 PM' timestamp='1354929563' post='116337']

Agreed, though I'm not a neuroscientist or even psychiatrist/ psychologist/profiler/historical character analyst.

Then again, no one needs to be any of this in order to draw straightforward conclusions.

Can leave it to the professionals to work out the detailed proof, but the conclusion/solution is:

All mono-gawd characters (i.e. all "gawd" charaters that insist on being a monogawd) - hence all monogawdisms - are inventions of the human mind, plain and simple. Of the delusional human mind, what's more.


Jai Sri Ram

Finally, we have come down to the question.

Heathen narration is via convention and the relational and therefore all heathens are the truest aristocrats no matter the particular jati.

So for the heathen the starting point for each is actually aristocracy as long as the jati traditions are maintained.

Rajanyata is passed along the relational so to speak along with all other gunas..

I do have lots of things worked out including how social darwinianism and false elitism are generated at the level of the western psyche and will post these soon

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - dhu - 12-23-2012

Osho recommended Gurdjieff over Jung and predicted that the latter would be eclipsed. This is surprising because both were derived from Buddhist sources and Jung championed the his sources while Gurdjieff did not. Actually, it turns out that Jung was a description of the behavioral, while Gurdijeff was praxeological although motivation (but not intention) is certainly posited withing the system. Horney's reactive types actually capture the relational of the heathen. The "pure reactive" or the "triple reactive" type is the truest warrior the basis of attraction. This was the scandal for Freud that the heathen is the most sexual type. Jung did not understand Freud's christist bases apprehension and actually separated the two 'principles' in his own system: feeling versus thinking.

After Osho's recommendation the field was flooded by Jesuits. Even so, it is difficult to reverse the new dynamic.

At the trough of the Enneagram are elucidated the alientated types also described by Horney. This has been the monotheist project, to impute alienation in the types at the trough..

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - dhu - 12-24-2012

The 19th century ghost story "Green tea" by the Anglo-Irish author James Sheridan LeFanu shows the development of alienation in a clergyman: the clergyman is haunted by the apparition of a silent and hostile monkey: The heathen is hinted at overtly while the Darwinian seems to be imputed by latter critics. The clergyman commits suicide by knife at the story. I would suggest studying this story in extreme depth and modeling it.

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - ramana - 01-04-2013

A few posts from BRF GDF thread...


Quote:Sushuptiji,very good catch.The true nature of gora christism in its 'glorious' nakedness.Sikular Britain.Sikular West.

Christism by definition is political.

Watch out for this guy.Dr Richard Carrier.A Ph.D. in ancient history from University of Columbia.

Richard Carriers blog

Quote:my peer reviewed article on Josephus just came out: “Origen, Eusebius, and the Accidental Interpolation in Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20.200” in the Journal of Early Christian Studies 
(vol. 20, no. 4, Winter 2012), 
pp. 489-514.

The official description is:

Analysis of the evidence from the works of Origen, Eusebius, and Hegesippus concludes that the reference to “Christ” in Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20.200 is probably an accidental interpolation or scribal emendation and that the passage was never originally about Christ or Christians. It referred not to James the brother of Jesus Christ, but probably to James the brother of the Jewish high priest Jesus ben Damneus.

My proof of that is pretty conclusive. But this article also summarizes a sufficient case to reject the Testimonium Flavianum as well (the other, longer reference to Jesus in Josephus), in that case as a deliberate fabrication (see note 1, pp. 489-90, and discussion of the Arabic quotation on pp. 493-94). And I cite the leading scholarship on both. So it’s really a complete article on both references to Jesus in Josephus.

Further evidence that the longer reference is a Christian fabrication lies in an article I didn’t cite, however, but that is nevertheless required reading on the matter: G.J. Goldberg, “The Coincidences of the Testimonium of Josephus and the Emmaus Narrative of Luke,” in the Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha (vol. 13, 1995), pp. 59-77. Goldberg demonstrates nineteen unique correspondences between Luke’s Emmaus account and the Testimonium Flavianum, all nineteen in exactly the same order (with some order and word variations only within each item). There are some narrative differences (which are expected due to the contexts being different and as a result of common kinds of authorial embellishment), and there is a twentieth correspondence out of order (identifying Jesus as “the Christ”). But otherwise, the coincidences here are very improbable on any other hypothesis than dependence.

Goldberg also shows that the Testimonium contains vocabulary and phrasing that is particularly Christian (indeed, Lukan) and un-Josephan. He concludes that this means either a Christian wrote it or Josephus slavishly copied a Christian source, and contrary to what Goldberg concludes, the latter is wholly implausible (Josephus would treat such a source more critically, creatively, and informedly).

That, combined with the arguments I assemble in my article for JECS, spells the final death knell for any hope of restoring any part of the Testimonium Flavianum. It is 100% Christian fabrication.

WE need to understand the Imperialist project that christism is ,that they will go to any lengts to fabricate history.It is these people who are talking about Aryans coming into India in 1500 BC.It is these people who are espousing dalits,muslims,dravidian idntity .

Let me make it clear that dalit emancipation is a challenge to Indian socirty.Indias linguistic pluralism is a fact.But we need to understand the white christist hatred of India.This is not to condone our inhumanity,corruption,inefficiency.

And some poster thinks there is some problem with consistency in early christian history and missing links in Jesus Life.

Jesus life has zero historicity.we hindus have no problem with the Jesus of Faith.If fellow Indians are morally elevated by this messenger of God,so be it and we respect that.

It is quite possible that the biblical christist establishment will kill this reaearch of Dr Carieer as they have done in general with all critical reaearch on Jesus.Atleast some Hindus must archive this material.



Nothing can atone your sins.When you deliberately malign others just to hold on to your cushy jobs,you deserve the Hell that christism believes in.

Quote: Joseph Hoffmann has stated that the issue of historicity of Jesus has been long ignored due to theological interests.

Donald Akenson, Professor of Irish Studies in the department of history at Queen's University has argued that, with very few exceptions, the historians of Yeshua have not followed sound historical practices. He has stated that there is an unhealthy reliance on consensus, for propositions which should otherwise be based on primary sources, or rigorous interpretation. He also holds that some of the criteria being used are faulty. He says that the overwhelming majority of biblical scholars are employed in institutions whose roots are in religious beliefs. Because of this, he maintains that, more than any other group in present day academia, biblical historians are under immense pressure to theologize their historical work and that it is only through considerable individual heroism that many biblical historians have managed to maintain the scholarly integrity of their work.

John Meier, Professor of theology at University of Notre Dame, has said "...people claim they are doing a quest for the historical Jesus when de facto they're doing theology, albeit a theology that is indeed historically informed..." Dale Allison, Professor of New Testament Exegesis and Early Christianity at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary too says, "...We wield our criteria to get what we want...We all see what we expect to see and what we want to see...."

Look at the methods at work-unsound historical practice,theological bias,reliance on consensus than on rigor or primary sources.Sounds familiar.isnt it ?

Even the biased wikepedia cannot but include this in its spin article.

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - Husky - 01-19-2013


Wanted to comment last time I saw the above, but had trouble posting.

No problem with the stuff they quote from, but have issues with the "conclusions" that the first person commenting (marked as "svenkat" by Ramana) had chosen to draw.

It just won't die, will it... People will keep excusing christianism - giving it space to grow and consume still more - even when they imagine they're criticising it.

And so the problem persists, as seen in:

1. The "white christian" excuse

How convenient. That shifts the blame onto "white" and off christianism.

But as with zombies, it does not matter what ethnicity or part of the globe the infected are from. Once zombified (christianised), the behaviour is the same: it is all Deus Vult christo-terrorism.

That's why you can see Indian sheep be busy with even *forcible* conversions in countries to India's northeast, such as Burma I think it was, same as their European equivalents had done in the past and continue to do in S America etc.

Do Indian sheep deserve to get away with the same crimes, just because they were themselves zombified by others? But if so, then that's true for those of European-origin also: their ancestors were *never* originally christian.

It's true that so-called "ethnic" converts are lower in the christo hierarchy than their "white" superiors. But the *entire* christian hierarchy is inimical to all free peoples of the planet: the ethnic converts are no less dangerous, and are quite as bent on convert-and-kill and the same old replacement theology (e.g. India's northeast, in S Korea, etc). Both the racist hierarchy and the zealous conversion overdrive are innate to christianism and follow on from conversion to the jeebus faith.

2. The error of excusing (protecting) the "jesus of faith"

Thereby shielding its adherents - who are the carriers and implementors of the christianism meme


a. There is NO jesus of history (not the one of christianism. Many others persons named jesus existed, naturally, but they are all irrelevant to this topic).

b. There is ONLY the jesus of faith.

c. christianism=jesus=the jesus of faith

Hoping to attack only the LHS while shielding the RHS of the equation will always fail, since it goes against the mathematical equals operator seen above.

People either recognise they need to negate both sides of the equation, or they may altogether retire from pretending they're taking a stand against christianism.

Christianism being "political" is a natural consequence of the total solution to the world that the jesus of faith=christianism is marketed as: the jesus-of-faith (=christianism) will always manifest as a political takeover, as imperialism. Christianism is so by nature. Same as islam. To pretend that islam is purely political and does not really "believe" it is the true religion - the way communist hysterians rewrite islamic destruction of Hindu temples as "mercenary" instead of religious in motivation - is the same error as presenting christianism as a purely political force that does not really believe it is true.

The fact is, christians are dead-serious in believing it is true = they have *faith* that it is true = they have faith in their jeebus/gawd = christianism.

It's why it's a missionary religion. I.e. Replacement Theology: they have a gawd-given mandate to Replace. (Ref: commandment #1 and the "go forth to all nations and peddle jeebus onto them" rule. Aka spreading "the good news"=the *definition* of evangelism.)

3. And this foolish statement:

Quote:we hindus have no problem with the Jesus of Faith.

An utter lie. Hindoos have the same problems with the jeebus of faith that the Hellenistic Greco-Romans faced: the "Jeebus of faith" religion spells death to all heathenism (see biblical commandment #1 and all of christian history).

Sigh. Almost a decade on from when I first started to observe, and Indian activists are still at Square One. All the revelations - and realisations about the repercussions - of jesus being unhistoric has had no tangible effect on the general activist Indian brain. All that's been achieved is to make the as-yet-unsaved Indians further encourage the hydra to grow yet another head: the Indians *choose* to prop up a 'Jeebus of Faith' against 'political christianism', and want the former to be acceptable and the latter to be rejected. How droll: at a time of life-and-death, to still be bartering with the enemy.

But there are no "different facets" to christianism. No good sides and bad sides. It is all *one* thing. And wholly deadly. You can't dissect it into a harmless part and a fatal part, hoping to salvage one and destroy the other, like defanging a poisonous snake. Christianism is like islam. You either understand that you need to unravel every part of it until there's nothing left of the mindvirus, or - in the final analysis - it would have won.

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - ramana - 03-13-2013

W R Mead on Jesus:


Tries hard to assert Jesus was real.

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - ramana - 07-01-2013

Dhu, has this article about Mr Sethna who was also interested in Jesus historicity and dating the biblical incidents

Quote:...The paradox that stumps one in studying Jewish history-is that it presents a paradox that is the converse of what we find in Indian history. Our records have no mention of Alexander's invasion by which Western historians set such store in determining our chronology. On the other hand, al­though the Exodus is such a watershed for the Israelites, the Egyptian records are innocent of it. ....

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - Husky - 10-22-2013

On a topic that IF member Dhu has been posting about for years: Joseph Atwill's work Caesar's Messiah

Quote:Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'

15/10/2013 14:58:51

Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'

Biblical scholars will be appearing at the 'Covert Messiah' Conference at Conway Hall in London on the 19th of October to present this controversial discovery to the British public.

London (PRWEB UK) 8 October 2013American Biblical scholar Joseph Atwill will be appearing before the British public for the first time in London on the 19th of October topresent a controversial new discovery: ancient confessions recently uncovered now prove, according to Atwill, that the New Testament waswritten by first-century Roman aristocrats and that they fabricated the entire story of Jesus Christ. His presentation will be part of a one-days ymposium entitled "Covert Messiah" at Conway Hall in Holborn (full details can be found at

Although to many scholars his theory seems outlandish, and is sure to upsetsome believers, Atwill regards his evidence as conclusive and is confident its acceptance is only a matter of time. "I present my work with someambivalence, as I do not want to directly cause Christians any harm," he acknowledges, "but this is important for our culture. Alert citizens need to know the truth about our past so we can understand how and why governments create false histories and false gods. They often do it to obtain a social order that is against the best interests of the common people.

"Atwill asserts that Christianity did not really begin as a religion, but a sophisticated government project, a kind of propaganda exercise used to pacify the subjects of the Roman Empire. "Jewish sects in Palestine at thetime, who were waiting for a prophesied warrior Messiah, were a constant source of violent insurrection during the first century," he explains."When the Romans had exhausted conventional means of quashing rebellion, they switched to psychological warfare. They surmised that the way to stop the spread of zealous Jewish missionary activity was to create a competing belief system. That's when the 'peaceful' Messiah story was invented. Instead of inspiring warfare, this Messiah urged turn-the-other-cheek pacifism and encouraged Jews to 'give onto Caesar' and pay their taxes to Rome.

"Was Jesus based on a real person from history? "The short answer is no," Atwill insists, "in fact he may be the only fictional character in literature whose entire life story can be traced to other sources. Once those sources are all laid bare, there's simply nothing left."Atwill's most intriguing discovery came to him while he was studying "Wars of the Jews" by Josephus [the only surviving first-person historical account of first-century Judea] alongside the New Testament.

"I started to notice a sequence of parallels between the two texts," he recounts."Although it's been recognised by Christian scholars for centuries that the prophesies of Jesus appear to be fulfilled by what Josephus wrote about in the First Jewish-Roman war, I was seeing dozens more. What seems to have eluded many scholars is that the sequence of events and locations of Jesusministry are more or less the same as the sequence of events and locations of the military campaign of [Emperor] Titus Flavius as described by Josephus. This is clear evidence of a deliberately constructed pattern. The biography of Jesus is actually constructed, tip to stern, on prior stories, but especially on the biography of a Roman Caesar.

"How could this go unnoticed in the most scrutinised books of all time?" Many of the parallels are conceptual or poetic, so they aren't all immediately obvious. After all, the authors did not want the average believer to see what they were doing, but they did want the alert reader to see it. An educated Roman in the ruling class would probably have recognised the literary game being played." Atwill maintains he can demonstrate that "the Roman Caesars left us a kind of puzzle literature that was meant to be solved by future generations, and the solution to that puzzle is 'We invented Jesus Christ, and we're proud of it.' "Is this the beginning of the end of Christianity? "Probably not," grants Atwill, "but what my work has done is give permission to many of those ready to leave the religion to make a clean break.

We've got the evidence now to show exactly where the story of Jesus came from. Although Christianity can be a comfort to some, it can also be very damaging and repressive, an insidious form of mind control that has led to blindacceptance of serfdom, poverty, and war throughout history. To this day, especially in the United States, it is used to create support for war in the Middle East." Atwill encourages skeptics to challenge him at Conway Hall, where after the presentations there is likely to be a lively Q&A session.

Joining Mr.Atwill will be fellow scholar Kenneth Humphreys, author of the book "Jesus NeverExisted." Further information can be found at

About Joseph Atwill: Joseph Atwill is the author of the best-selling book"Caesar's Messiah" and its upcoming sequel "The Single Strand."

*Contact Information* *Ryan Gilmore* +44 7854966520

But then, Pope Leo X did loudly and famously declare for all history to document "How much we have profited by the *legend* of Christ".

A relevant comment at HK:

Quote: Hindu

16/10/2013 04:29:17 this one

It is a very Good News. Allah(Mo) also Blabbered about Jesus. So that also will be debunked. <smiley>

Islam isn't the only cult existentially-dependent on jeebus.

No more ISKCONism aka Hare Christna-ism either. Hedged their bets wrong: that's what happens when ISKCON/Prabhupada invent a new character called "Krishna" equated to that genocidal propaganda-fiction known as "jeebus-allah". In this and other ways, Prabhupada did clearly warn people that he was not talking about the Hindu God/Avatara known as Krishna.

I don't want to be all doom and gloom however: even if jesus never had a beginning, this need not be his end. And why *should* this stop people believing in jeebus anyway? He only ever existed/had a "life" in people's "faith", and that's all the proof they ever really proffered or wanted.

Besides, he's not the *only* character claimed to be historical despite having no tangible evidence submitted for his person. I mean, there's a whole population of unattested entities out there that modern people fervently build their hopes and histories on: when so many people believe in the Oryans, why should one more character who's unknown to history be considered a burden? Not to mention that jesus has a more ancient claim, in that belief in jeebus has been around for longer: over a millennia (though he too was backprojected by all accounts, though not projected quite as far back as the Oryans).

And if some 1600 years pass, Oryanism too will, by then, be a "long established" belief, as will ur-Shramanism. Or maybe this expose on Jesus betokens a sinister pattern: perhaps every unattested character will have a lifespan in people's imaginations of just under 2 millennia. Alternatively, jesus and all other fictions could simply appeal to the masses forever. ("Once invented, never forgotten.") I think the latter is more likely. (At best, every now and then, people will threaten to resurrect them - and could do at a moment's notice.)

So there's no need to think that jesus can't continue persisting in the faith of christians as he has so far - indeed, there's every hope he may continue to spook the world, despite these brief moments of waking up (which regularly happen every century or so). Christians are as attached to jesus as oryanists to oryans. [Which would explain why, like christianism and other religions famous for peddling relics, the oryanists have a relic industry too, and an embarrasingly large number of obsessed collectors for archaeological finds that are assigned to the unattested oryans *, who get free creditation for everything wondrous invented by man anywhere in at least two continents, even though the oryans were unheard of until just a few centuries ago. (But I admit back-projection *is* one of the greatest and most brilliant innovations in human history-writing. And oryanism like ur-shramanism proves we can start at any time and go back as far as we want. So there's hope for us all to try our hand at this.)

* The collectors consider the oryans their esteemed ancestors - conveniently possessed of all the qualities they want their ancestors to have had, so they can feel better/superior about themselves - hence the collector frenzy.]

Worst case scenario: there's no need to experience withdrawal symptoms. Humanity's mental patterns being predictable, even if jeebus/christianism went the way of the dodo at last - anything being possible :requiem: - there'll still be oryans/oryanism and ur-shramanas/ur-shramanism and a zillion other such to take their place in capturing and retaining mankind's fancy. And if ever these too were to dodo far off into the future, then I'm sure there'll always be something just as powerfully captivating and infectious awaiting to work on humans minds. There'll always be *something*. So no need to get all wistful. Still, am feeling optimistic that jeebus' lack of historicity will neither stop christians nor sway islamics. The truth about jeebus' non-historicity has come out so often after all, even back when the Roman empire was still standing. So when has it ever before stopped christianism/islam?

Maybe the fact that the Internet now exists will make a difference. (I'm not holding my breath. But anything's possible.)

Quote:Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'

15/10/2013 14:58:51

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - Husky - 12-08-2013

Post 1/2

San, one of the regulars at the Rajeev2004 blog wrote:

Quote:Turkey to Convert Hagia Sophia into Mosque

Turkey's Islamist-leaning govt is planning to convert the Hagia Sophia into a mosque:

The Hagia Sophia was a prominent Christian church of Constantinople which was turned into a mosque after the city fell to the Turkish Ottomans. It was later turned into a museum under Ataturk's rule.

The bit that San writing the above left out (perhaps wacky didn't tell him) was the more important part. The christist basilica (it was a basilica originally, i.e. a tomb to one of the church fathers or something, since it's called a "patriarchal" basilica. Basilica=christian dargah. Church=christian mosque). The christian tomb was built - as always - on a Hellenistic temple site. Its building was commenced by Constantine (who else); no doubt the other raving christist loon - i.e. his mother - put him up to that one too: to confiscate the Hellenistic temple from the Hellenes and build a disgusting christist dargah on it. That was of course a double slap on Hellenes' face: nothing was more impure and more unsanctified than christist tombs, and to turn a sacred Hellenistic Temple site into that abomination was an express act of trying to christianise (by de-sanctifying) a sacred Hellenistic site.

Even the current remains of the christian aberration - Hagia Sophia church (doesn't hagiography mean fictional "histories" of saints and church fathers, confirming its basilica origins - even the church's current remains still have parts of Hellenistic temples broken and impounded for serving as pillars etc for christian churches.* (Rather like christians did in the case of a major church of the invented "st thomas" in India and other churches for which they had likewise stolen Hindu temple remains when they built on Hindu temple sites. And also rather like the islamic Qutb Minar and other mosques and dargahs stealing from Hindu temples even as these mosques/dargahs were built on Hindu temple sites.)

[color="#0000FF"]EDIT:[/color] The supporting data for the above is in the next post.

The christists even stole the sacred Hellenistic name "Sophia" for it, another inculturation. The "church" was destroyed a couple of times at the very start, by christist madmen itself apparently (for once they did something right), due to the usual christian infighting.

* This is the reason why Julian insisted on disbanding christian churches to return the sacred pillars and remaining parts of Hellenistic temples to rebuild Hellenistic temples on the originally-Hellenistic sacred sites. Of course, these sites had to be purified first from the diseased taint of christian basilicas. The Greco-Romans (Hellenes) considered tombs ritually impure, and most especially christian tombs/basilicas of murderous-madmen dubbed "saints" (and non-existent entities used as excuses to take over Hellenistic sacred sites, also dubbed "saints").

I parrot my betters again (previously parroted in post 73 of the Natural Traditions thread):

Quote:The most effective way for Julian to further his cause was to do all he could to ensure that the worship of the gods was firmly linked to the material prosperity of the Empire in the minds of his subjects. That, above all, was [color="#FF0000"]what Constantine had done for the Church[/color]. Behind the success of his reforms had stood the brute force of money.135 Vast sums were spent on [color="#FF0000"]the building of basilicas, [/color]and there were grand endowments of land to the Church. That land, moreover, was to be exempt from tax. Clerics were excused the burden of costly public offices, even personally subsidized. There were food allowances for Christian widows and nuns. To pay for it all, Constantine looked to a source of funds accumulated over centuries: the huge treasure house of precious metals lying to hand in the ancestral temples. Pagans, it has been nicely said, had financed their own destruction. 136 [color="#0000FF"]Julian[/color]'s most pressing task in this connection was to do the same in reverse, to restore the temples as the perceived focus of public beneficia at the expense of the Church.137

A clear step in this direction came as early as 4 February 362. [color="#0000FF"]An edict decreed that temples of the gods that had been put to improper use should be rededicated, and that those which had been destroyed by the Christians should be rebuilt at the Church's expense.138

Owners of land which had formerly belonged to the temples were to give it back, and a special tax was levied on those who had used the fabric of sacred buildings in the construction of new ones.
[/color] The importance Julian attached to the issue is clear from a further edict of 29 June: the rebuilding of temples was to take priority over all other building projects in the provinces. 139 In parallel, in March, the clergy's tax exemptions were revoked, and their judicial power and exemption from service as decurions withdrawn.140

(Ah, I keep forgetting what Heroes are like. Timely reminder.)

And, Julian's Gods from RSmith again (with some context):


Their (christians') failure to sacrifice had long been a central complaint of pagans, and Julian reiterates it with vehemence: the inexhaustible blessings of the gods need to be acknowledged by public worship: 'it is our duty to adore not only the images of the gods but also their temples and sacred precincts and altars.'91

The demand that sacred places be revered bears on a last charge.Against the Galilaeans speaks with disgust of the veneration by Christians of the tombs and relics of the martyred saints.

You keep adding more corpses to the corpse of the past [Jesus]. You have filled the whole earth with tombs and sepulchres ... and yet Jesus himself said that tombs were full of pollution

(akatharsia). How is it, then, that you invoke God at them? (335bd)

In this practice Julian saw only 'the work of sorcery and foulness' (340a). The accusation of magic was a common one, but Julian's polemic seems to have been the first to level a charge against the cult of saints. (Notice the real=christian superstition in the modern i.e. christist sense: the worshipping of fake so-called christist "godmen" aka saints/church fathers and their fraudulent fictional "miracles", when the only things any historical saint did - though most were simply unhistorical - was to destroy Hellenistic temples and take these over for christianism and/or to brutally convert-or-kill masses of Hellenes, such as the famous saint/church father Inquisitors did when they pulverised the Greco-Roman world.) It responds to a developing practice among Christians, and behind it there is a compelling feeling which transcends all philosophic argument. To a pagan, the ascription of holiness to the graves and remains of the human dead involved a monstrous ritual pollution:

'On this point, the rise of Christianity in the pagan world was met with deep religious anger.'92 By replacing the divine helpers of the sublunar regions with privileged dead persons, the cult of saints merely compounded the 'atheism' of Christians.

The strength of Julian's abhorrence of pollution through the dead is evident both from the funeral decree of February 363 - a 'confirmation by law of an ancient custom' by which daytime funerals were forbidden93 - and from particular actions he took in 362. His brother Gallus, as Caesar, had had the bones of the Antiochene martyr Babylas transferred from the city to a new sepulchre built adjacent to the temple of Apollo at Daphne, and columns from the temple had apparently been used in the construction of the Christian monument. En route to Antioch, Julian gave orders that the columns be restored to the temple;94 having arrived, he was dismayed to find that Apollo's oracle was still silent. The cause was plain to him: in October, he had the remains of Babylas removed, and the sanctuary at Daphne purified.95 The episode is further evidence that the palpable well-being of pagan cult ritual was central to Julian's hostility to Christian belief and practice - and it is not to be reckoned an eccentric act of a theurgist obsessed with purificatory rites: in various cities,96 pagans quickly followed Julian's lead, dealing similarly - and less gently - with the tombs of local martyrs.

As we have it in the standard modern edition of its fragments, Against the Galilaeans gives out in the midst of criticism of Christian indolence in the matter of sacrifice and divination.97 That is chance, but it is an apt chance. If my account holds good, the driving force behind Against the Galilaeans will be found in a keen defence of ancestral cultic practice focused upon sacrifice by one to whom it seemed, in all its diversity, the very cement of a civilized world. This verdict gains support not only from the emphasis Julian places on the point, but also from the brute fact that so much of what he says belongs to the stuff of popular pagan polemic.


So, there's no need for San to lead some lamentation. Islamaniacs in Turkey are just doing what the christists did before them (and which christos still do: they still take over heathen sites in India etc. PLUS the christist govt also sells off Hindu temple lands to islamania without Hindus' permission, as seen not just in Kerala and TN, but also recently at Tirupati in AP, where an ancient Hindu temple's lands - recovered by Hindus from the islamic invasions at great cost - was sold to islamania by the christogovt - behind Hindus' backs, of course. And now Saudi-sponsored islamaniacs in India are building an islamic madrassa dubbed islamic "university" there. No doubt the eminent hysteric/histrionic Rajarant will call this islamic monstrosity a "temple of learning" and a suitable replacement for the ancient Hindu temple whose remains where until very recently - and perhaps still are at present - visible on the site commandeered for islam by christianism, but the rest of the world need not pretend along with Rajarant.)

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - Husky - 12-08-2013

Post 2/2

[color="#0000FF"]The supporting data for all the statements I made in the previous post:[/color]

You can tell I'm not making anything up because my lips are not moving below:


Quote:Constantine's Church

Known as the “Great Church” or “Magna Ecclesia” in Latin, the first church was built at the same location where there had been a pagan temple before. It was Constantius II who inaugurated Hagia Sophia on 15 February 360. From the chronicles of Socrates of Constantinople, we know that the church was built by the orders of Constantine the Great.

This first church was a wooden-roofed basilica with a nave flanked by two or four aisles, each carrying a gallery storey. It was preceded by an atrium. This church was largely burned down in 404 during riots since patriarch John Chrysostom was sent into exile by the Emperor Arcadius.

(Christist emperor Arcadius inculturating on a heathen name, like church father John inculturating on the Hellenistic name Chrysostom, despite said John lecturing his sheep to abandon all sacred Hellenistic names. Now wasn't Arcadia an ancient Greek province? Although my own first familiarity with it was related to GE-999...)


Quote:The nave is paved with marble panels, which were revealed after the prayer rugs were removed in 1934. Its porphyry and verde antico columns, which were gathered from pagan temples of Western Anatolia, are crowned with elaborately carved capitals that bear the monogram of Justinian I.

[color="#800080"][etc. blablabla][/color]

And the christian "contributions" (vandalism of Hellenistic temple materials) there is then followed by the islamic contributions to the christian church:

Quote:There are many Ottoman additions visible in the nave, many of which were transformed during the Fossati restoration. Among earlier Ottoman work are two 16th century tile panels to the right of the mihrab, which depict the Holy Ka'aba and the other, shows the tomb of the Prophet. A band of blue tiles with Koranic inscriptions, signed 1607, wrap the sanctuary apsis below the window level. The marble minbar also believed to be of this period.
Now let's not be biased: if christists can steal and vandalise the originally and forever-exclusively heathen sites and temple materials, then islamaniacs can similarly "decorate" and "make their own" the until-then temporarily christian phase. In reality, there's one set of Good guys and 2 sets of Bad Guys involved: the one heathen ancestral, original religion of the space (the Hellenistic religion) and the two missionary replacement religions that followed.

3. Early christian infighting destroyed the illegal church a couple of times. Part 1

Quote:Constantinople (Ä°stanbul): Hagia Sophia

The main church of Constantinople was the famous Hagia Sophia, the Church of the Divine Wisdom. It was built near an older Christian sanctuary, the Church of Heavenly Peace or S. Irene. The two shrines were also called "the old church" and "the new church", for example in the Notitia Urbis Constaninopolianae.

The Hagia Sophia was built for the first time by the emperor Constantine the Great (306-337), but was not finished until the end of the reign of his son Constantius II: in 360, to be precise. Although the church was used by the patriarch, it was probably not yet the city's main church; when the emperor Theodosius invited the bishops to discuss the Nicene Creed (in 381), this First Council of Constantinople took place in the Church of Heavenly Peace, and not in the Hagia Sophia.

It was in the church of Constantine, situated directly to the north of the imperial palace, that patriarch John Chrysostom in 399 offered asylum to Eutropius, the right-hand man of the emperor Arcadius (395-408), when the powerful consul was attacked by the empress Eudoxia I. Although Eutropius was dead before the end of the year, Eudoxia now hated John, and did not test until she had him exiled. In 403, she was successful, when the Synod of the Oak condemned the patriarch for his support of several Origenist monks. When he was exiled to Bithynia, there was a riot, there were riots, and John was recalled.

Six months later, a silver statue of the empress was erected at Augusteôn Square near the Hagia Sophia. The patriarch protested against this pagan excess and Eudocia's vanity, and on 20 June 404 he was - rather predictably - sent into exile again, this time to Armenia. During the night of his departure, the Hagia Sophia burned down. In October, Eudoxia died of a miscarriage, soon followed by John. The rebuilding of the church was left to Arcadius' son Theodosius II (408-450) and his sister, Pulcheria.

This "Theodosian Church" was inaugurated on 10 October 415. In front of the current entrance of the Hagia Sophia, some remains of this monument are still visible in the garden before the entrance, and archaeologists believe that the cathedral of Theodosius II had more or less the same map as the third phase - which became necessary when the Theodosian Church was burned down during the Nika Riots (13 January 532). The first stone of the third Hagia Sophia was laid on 23 February, just forty-one days after the Theodosian Church had been pillaged and destroyed.

The architects of the new church, which is connected with the name of the emperor Justinian (527-565), were [...]

Plus the Arians - you know, one of the more famous early christian heretics - had already vandalised the meaningless christian trinkets (no doubt looted from where they had meaning) that Constantius II had lavished on the illegal church construction.

4. Part 2 of how early christian infighting destroyed the illegal church a couple of times: some further detail

Quote:Hagia Sophia

Before the first Hagia Sophia was built there was a pagan temple on the same spot and Constantine The Great planned to build the first church there .Same place different door!!

The first Hagia Sophia was built by the Emperor Constantius,son of Constantin the great in 360 AD and it was a basilica planned church with a timbered roof.When the emperor Arcadius exiled the patriarch of Constantinople,John Chrisostom for his open criticism of the empress Eudoxia,people got angry and arsoned the first church in 404 AD.

11 years later emperor Theodosius II [color="#800080"](wait, of Theodosian code fame?)[/color] built second Hagia Sophia at the same site.The second church was again basilica planned and again had a timbered roof.The second church lasted a little bit longer than the first one but its destiny was almost same with the first one.People were having some fun with chariots in Hippodrome and two factions;The Blues and The Greens , had a fight and it turned into a big riot;NIKE RIOTS.Since the rioters shouted ''NIKE,NIKE,NIKE'' repeatedly during the riot ,it is known as NIKE RIOTS or NIKA RIOTS.They arsoned many public buildings and tried to depose the emperor JUstinian I [color="#800080"](again, he of "The Codes of Theodosius and Justinian"?)[/color].Actually he was scared to death and about to leave the city but his wife Theodora made a speech and changed the destiny.She convinced Justinian to stay and fight instead of leaving like a coward.And Justinian send his famous and glorious general Belisarius to handle the rioters.And he did it very well, killed them all in Hippodrome in 532. But it was too late for second Hagia Sophia.

10 days after the riots Justinian started to build a new church,a much bigger one and brought the best architects and workers of the country.They completed the work in five years and ten months and the third Hagia Sophia was opened for services in 537.It was the greates church of the Eastern Roman Empire at that time and used as a church till 1453.

When the Ottoman conquered the city,as a tradition, it was converted into a mosque and was a mosque till 1935 .

It was converted into a museum by the order of Ataturk ,the founder of the Turkish Republic, and is a museum now.


The above is also at "Hagia sophia Document Transcript"

They were yelling "Nike"? Does it have a plain meaning in Greek, I wonder.

I know of the beautiful winged sculpture of the Goddess Nike of Samothrace (what remains of it). Nike is IIRC (but not sure at all) the Goddess of victory. A famous - but merely "secular art" - modern statue of her is in Germany I think.

[[color="#0000FF"]INSERT:[/color] the above blank-brained question followed by the answer is typical Husky, by the way: "Does [Nike] have a plain meaning in Greek, I wonder. Nike is IIRC ... the [Greek] Goddess of victory." <===> The Romans' Goddess Victoria, as is known, which yet again translates plainly what the meaning of Nike is - in a word that even I could understand. But as always, I couldn't add 2 and 2 together: "Since Nike - known as Victoria to the Romans - is the Goddess of victory, what could Nike possibly mean?" Duh. Public exhibitions of stupidity deserve to be lampooned.]

But these were rioters yelling "Nike". And they wanted the evil christist malevolence Justinian deposed? And he massacred them all, it says. Could they have been heathen protestors? (If so, maybe they tried to do away with the church to reclaim the heathen site.) But the fact that a christist madman massacred everybody present at some place doesn't necessarily imply that they couldn't have been christians whom he killed: christians - including christian rulers - are famous for murdering christians too, usually if they're of some heretical faction, if they're a challenge to the christian individual in charge/pose a threat to his power, or especially when there are no heathens left to murder for sport. But there were heathens left in Justinian's time: even as per the Codes of Theodosius and Justinian wherein they incrementally ban Hellenismos on pain of death, which they wouldn't have had to do if it had already been murdered out by christianism at that point.

The previous link says the Nike Riots were on 13 January 532.

Looking for the entries on Theodosius II and the Justinian who succeeded him at

No mention of the riots. It only mentions the following incidents relating to this Justinian's reign:


Emperor Jutprada (Justinianus) outlaws the "alternative" Olympian Games of Antioch. He also orders the execution (by fire, crucifixion, tearing to pieces by wild beasts, or cutting by iron nails) of all who practice "sorcery, divination, magic or idolatry" and prohibits all teachings by the Gentiles ("..the ones suffering from the blasphemous insanity of the Hellenes").


Emperor Justinianus outlaws the Athenian Philosophical Academy, which has its property confiscated.


The inquisitor Ioannis Asiacus, a fanatical monk, leads a crusade against the Gentiles of [color="#FF0000"]Asia Minor[/color].


Emperor Justinianus allows the inquisitor Ioannis Asiacus to convert the Gentiles of Phrygia, Caria and Lydia in Asia Minor. Within 35 years of this crusade, 99 churches and 12 monasteries are built on the sites of demolished Pagan Temples.


Emperor Justinianus allows the inquisitor Ioannis Asiacus to convert the Gentiles of Phrygia, Caria and Lydia in Asia Minor. Within 35 years of this crusade, 99 churches and 12 monasteries are built on the sites of demolished Pagan Temples.


Hundreds of Gentiles are put to death in Constantinople by the inquisitor Ioannis Asiacus.


Justinianus orders the notorious inquisitor Amantius to go to Antioch, to find, arrest, torture and exterminate the last Gentiles of the city and burn all the private libraries down.


Mass arrests, burlesquing, tortures, imprisonments and executions of Gentile Hellenes in Athens, Antioch, Palmyra and Constantinople.

Hmmm, the following page says that Justinian was making promises to the protestors on the babble - with the expectation that they would understand and value this, i.e. that the audience of protestors was (largely? wholly?) christian - and the page also reveals that the protestors were clammering for Justinian's in-all-likelihood christist nephew Hypatius to replace him as emperor (plus it reveals that Nike means "conquer"):

Actually, reading that page in entirety is reminiscent of the Congress' mass-scale corruption - thumbing their nose at the populace - and seen in India today, a topic that is similarly eclipsing the simultaneous ongoing suppression of Hindu religion by the christist KKKongress.

5. The search engine search result snippet for

describes the Hagia Sofia as "a former patriarchal basilica, later a mosque, now a museum"

(i.e. dargah to the christian patriarchs). Can't find the actual statement on the page though, perhaps I didn't finish loading it.

6. This next is from a blog, making it unofficial, but it has photo evidence of Hellenistic symbols to none other than the blue-haired/black-haired Poseidon:

Quote:2 Pagan symbols in Hagia Sophia

Posted on 1 Jul ’12 by Giulia Tweet As many of you know, Hagia Sophia was once a Bizantine church. It was converted to a Mosque by Sultan Mehmed II and nowadays it is a museum.

Most of the Christian features were removed but many others are still there, together with some pagan symbols that we can often find in churches. This is because Christians have adopted and converted pagan symbols since the early times of its expansion.

[color="#800080"][photo caption:][/color] Cross and trident symbols in Hagia Sophia

The trident and the dolphins (on the right) are related to the God Neptune (or Poseidon in Greek) and the dolphins are always associated to this God as well as to the legend of Atlantis.

(In Hindus' Bharatam, shoolam is Shiva's laanChanam and, though not a River God himself, his sacred hair is associated with dolphins and many other famous water animals since these are found in the sacred Ganga running down from his head/the Himalayas the great shivalingam.)

[color="#800080"][photo caption:][/color] Temple signs on the entrance of Hagia Sophia

On the main gate there are embossed columns, indicating the entrance to the temple.

[color="#800080"][photo caption:][/color] A typical Pagan altar in Hagia Sophia

In the Pagan rituals, the altar was (is) used for offers to the Deities. This is something that Christianity has adopted for its worship.

[color="#800080"][photo caption:][/color] Another trident and dolphins, symbols of Atlantis, in Hagia Sophia

Another representation of tridents and dolphins, indicating some form of worship to Neptune/Poseidon and a reference to Atlantis.

[color="#800080"](Christians only left alone remnants of such original Hellenstic temple parts used in the illegal church because christians typically didn't know these were all sacred symbols and how they were intimately associated with the Olympic Gods.)[/color]


[color="#800080"](Then the site notices some freemasonry symbols tattoed onto remains. Don't know why the writer of the blog entry expressed mild surprise at their presence: freemasons are the separate christo cult that "built" christian churches/were called in to convert temple remains to christian churches. They are called freemasons for a reason.)[/color]


So, it was a temple to Neptune-Poseidon (and perhaps other Olympic Gods), eh? And shall be again. First step already accomplished: christianism is no longer occupying the site. Islamania will turn it into a bad memory. And then, sooner-than-eventually, islamania too will be dislodged from the site, the country and the planet, and Phrygia and all Anatolia shall be sacred Greco-Roman territory once more, never to plagued by any missionary disease ever again.

Anyway, wonder how this latest turn in the site's history affect the inclusion of Turkiye in the EU.

Whenever christians occupy heathen sites to then have these occupied by islamanania, christians always pretend what they had done before doesn't count (when they can't hide it away) and fingerpoint islam as the villain and themselves as the victims of it, wanting the world to commiserate with "poor persecuted christianism". And while christianism carefully conceals the heathen history of such heathen sites and the christian confiscation thereof, and pretends these sites were originally christian, in India christianism plays an inverse game: christianism (colludes in) propagating fictions of Hindus occupying/taking over others' temples, while the reverse is true (and usually demonstrably so).

Oooh, look what I found (when searching for the comment at JNE by a Turkish person who decided to revert to Hellenismos):

Quote:False Accreditation

"Every one knows that the Evangeliums were written neither by Jesus nor his apostles, but long after their time by some unknown persons, who, judging well that they would hardly be believed when telling of things they had not seen themselves, headed their narratives with the names of the apostles or of disciples contemporaneous with the latter."

– Bishop Fauste (Manichean heretic, 3rd century AD)

3rd century is a very timely observation: that's when the gospels first appeared/when they were first concocted.

Historicity of Jesus - 2 - dhu - 03-29-2014

[url=""]Egyptian Origen of the Book of Revelation[/url]

By John H. C. Pippy (2011)