Historicity of Jesus - 2

[Husky]

^ There's stuff relevant to that. May come back to it later. But then, it's nothing you don't already know (I think all of it was pasted by someone or other on IF before. Search IF for "Nestorian".)





Anyway. Some bits and pieces.



1/2





1. http://jesusneverexisted.com/orthodoxy.html

on santa Augustine (who famously persecuted Hellenes):

(354-430)

Superstar of the Latin Fathers, Augustine of Hippo wrote the "CIty of God" to absolve Christians from any blame for the fall of Rome.

Humphreys doesn't mince words and gets straight to the point in his one-line summary of Augustine's work.





2. Couldn't locate this earlier, in an above post, when I wanted to link to it.

http://ishwarsharan.wordpress.com/

(via https://bharatabharati.wordpress.com/the...ar-sharan/)



Contains Sharan's book the St Thomas Myth in a format for online reading. He has a PDF somewhere for offline reading.





3. First the reprise:

It's probably familiar to all that the cross as deeply religious symbol was used until IIRC the 4th century by the heathens of the mediterranean, in particular the Hellenes. The earliest crosses (and crucifixes: of Dionysus) that have been found are Hellenistic, not christian. And they concern the death and rebirth/resurrection of Dionysus (christianism 'invented' the resurrection of jeebus rather late).

The christians slowly usurped crosses *thereafter*.



http://www.nobeliefs.com/facts.htm#anchor237925 via http://freetruth.50webs.org/B1b.htm#CrossAndFish

Although a stake called a stauros (the Greek term used in the earliest Bible writings but where English versions incorrectly translate it to "cross") got used to execute criminals, there exists not a shred of evidence that a Biblical stauros describes a cross or even a T-shape.



There occurs no cross in early Christian art before the middle of the 5th century, where it (probably) appears on a coin in a painting. The first clear crucifix appears in the late 7th century. Early Christians usually depicted their religion with a fish symbol (ichthus), dove, or bread of the Eucharist, but never Christ on a cross (or on a stick).

And all that just tells one something about any socalled "ancient" crosses found by syrian christianism in India: they are lately manufactured evidence, of course. Any crosses they point to as establishing their ancientry in India merely underlines that they're lying, and in fact can be taken as admission that their uninvited invasion into India was late.



While as per the catholic church the cross was *officially* inducted into christianism in the 6th or 7th centuries - apparently the cross didn't usurp the fish's position in christianism until some centuries later again:



http://www.christianism.com/appendixes/append6.html

"The Cross. About the tenth century the fish was superseded by the cross, which became the universal symbol of the Christian faith." [69].

So now to the point. Following - incl. its use of bold and italic for emphasis - is also from http://www.christianism.com/appendixes/append6.html

from: Sex Symbolism in Religion, J.B. Hannay [1855 - 1931], With an Appreciation by Sir George Birdwood, Privately printed for The Religious Evolution Research Society, 2 volumes, Oakeshott, 1922.

Volume II

[...]

'Paul is, of course, only known to us from the "Acts" and the Epistles attributed to him; and in a very learned analysis of the researches on this subject the Encyclopaedia Biblica says:—

Column 3627—"The principal Epistles cannot be the work of Paul," and A.D. Loman, of Amsterdam, "upholds the entirely symbolical character of the whole Gospel history." Column 3624—"We cannot regard the 'Acts' as a true and credible first-hand narrative of what had actually occurred. The Book bears in part a legendary historical and, in part, an edifying and apologetic character." Column 3625—With respect to the Pauline Epistles in the New Testament, "there are none of them by Paul." "Neither fourteen, nor thirteen, nor nine or ten, nor seven or eight, nor yet even the four so long universally regarded as unassailable. They are all, without distinction, pseudepigrapha." [van Manen] So PAUL, AS A WRITER, DISAPPEARS. Column 3630—"THE CONCLUSIONS OF CRITICISM ON OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE LIFE AND ACTIVITY OF PAUL ARE OF A PURELY NEGATIVE CHARACTER." [NOT ONE POINT OF HIS HISTORY OR ACTIONS HAS BEEN PROVED, OR EVEN SHOWN TO BE PROBABLE; EVERYTHING STATED HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE FALSE.] [these brackets, by J.B. Hannay] Column 3630—"Thus all the representations formerly current regarding the life and work of Paul must be set aside. These representations are very many and various and discrepant in character; far from showing any resemblance to one another, they exhibit the most inconsistent proportions and features. But, however different they were, they all of them have disappeared; they rested upon a foundation, not of solid rock, but of shifting sand. So, too, . . . the 'ideas,' the 'theology,' the 'system' of Paul" have "irrevocably passed away, the right foundation being wanting." ["]We possess no Epistle of Paul." Column 4145 says that the "Roman Church was not founded by Peter or Paul."' [260-262].



[See: #4, 105-151, passim ("Paul")].

Volume II

"I INCLINE TO THE OPINION THAT JESUS WAS ENTIRELY A PEN CREATION." [351]. [See: #25, 560]. [See: #3, 41-104, passim ("Jesus")].