TRADITIONAL WESTERN CHRISTIANITY
There was a Roman Centurion by name of Constantine, who was sent by the Roman Emperor into the lands of Gaul with his Century (a company of 100 soldiers) to reinforce the Roman soldiers there who were having difficulties successfully conquering Gaul for Rome. On his way into the lands of Gaul, Constantine came upon groups of straggling, embattled, and defeated soldiers wandering their way back to Rome. Rejoining them into his army he continued deeper in to the lands of Gaul and continued to encounter more and more Roman soldiers wandering the country sides and incorporating them into the ranks until eventually his army was quite large. With such huge numbers en masse, Constantine was able to defeat every army of the defenders of Gaul that he came upon during his campaign of slaughter, burning, raping, pillaging and enslaving. After much of Gaul became property of Rome, Constantine turned back toward Rome with a plan developing in his mind. His plan was to use his huge new army to attack the Emperor and his bodyguards and overtake the throne of Rome. Shortly before arriving at the city (so the Christian version of the story goes), Constantine had a vision. He saw the symbol of Christ forming in the clouds and heard a voice from the sky telling him that "by this sign" he would meet his objective. And so, Constantine continued to Rome and slew the Emperor and his bodyguards and took over the throne. The now 'Emperor Constantine', (because of his vision?), converted to Christianity and made it the official church of Rome.
The Christians had, for three hundred years, been persecuted, hunted down and crucified, fed to lions for entertainment, wrapped in animal skins soaked in oil and then set afire and hung from the tops of poles to light the streets of Rome. When a new Emperor, converted to Christianity, put an end to these atrocities, there was no objection when the Emperor called a council of church leaders to meet in Nicea (commonly called "The Council of Nice") in the year 325 CE. His objective was to organize a church with one doctrine and an official Credo that all Christians would agree to and abide by. Unfortunately, the church leaders (known as Bishops) could not agree on their first assignment which was to settle once and for all the division among Bishops (and the faithful) on one question which had, from the beginning, been a schism between all the believers. The question? . . . Was Christ divine at birth or did he become divine on the cross? After no agreement could be reached, Constantine stepped in and made the decision for them based on his Roman religious beliefs: Christ was divine at birth. But in order to be so, he must be the son of a god and he must have been born of a virgin.
After that question was settled, the next assignment was to separate all the gospels and epistles and urban legends which had been circulating for 300 years and select which of them should be collected into a few of the most credible gospels, epistles and urban legends. Hence, the New Testament. Comprised of four Gospels, three of which have been proven to be written between seventy and one hundred fifty years after the crucifixion. Two of these, Luke and Mark, were written by persons who never saw or knew Christ. At best, Luke was a disciple of Paul (who also never knew Christ), and Mark, who was possibly a disciple of John or Peter. But the style of the writings in Greek date them so far after the crucifixion that, while it's possible, it isn't very probable that the authenticity of these writings can be attributed to the men who supposedly authored them. This is also a problem with the Gospel of Mathew but the style of writing dates it a little closer to the year of the crucifixion. And the record of the ancestral genealogy of Christ makes 'Matthew' a bit more convincing even though, in those days, the genealogy of Jesus would be the same as that of Joseph of Nazareth which wouldn't be difficult to get fifty or a hundred years after the crucifixion.
The Gospel of John and the Apocalypse of John are somewhat enigmatic because John's Gospel, differing as it does from the other three is not considered "synoptic" with them. The style of writing also dates closer to the time of the crucifixion than any of the other three gospels. "Acts", believed to have been written by the same person who authored the Gospel of Luke, is a classic 'urban legend' in that it has Jesus mingling with the Apostles after he died. This is typical of the 'Elvis' sightings which continue to this day after the death of Elvis Presley. People have difficulty accepting the loss of a hero or the death of an idol and they conjure up all kinds of possible and believable scenarios which 'prove' the idol lives on and they excite people in to repeating their 'urban legends' for generations. Also, if 'Acts' is authentic, why did none of the apostles record the same events as described in Acts? Finally, The Apocalypse of John (The Book of Revelations) is just so abstract and enigmatic that it fits in perfectly for an appropriate ending. What could be a better way to conclude the New Testament than with a prophecy of the "End of Days"?
Now, what I've been leading up to is this: A Roman Emperor who converted but was never baptized, convened and conducted the councils of Nicea and had the final say as to what was acceptable and what was to be excluded as official 'scripture'. He decided the divinity of Christ based on Roman religious beliefs. He wrote the 'Credo' that was to be the standard to which all of Christendom would adhere and he had revisions made to the gospels and the epistles, etc, to make them acceptable to Romans. A prime example is his changing the Sabbath Day from Saturday to Sunday. The bottom line is, the accuracy of the content of the New Testament is in question and the authenticity of authorship is in question. So much so, that the Roman Church and every Christian denomination stemming from it are all based on the whims of a Roman Emperor and not by the church elders who were beholden to the emperor for stopping the persecutions and executions of the faithful.
These facts, then, beg the question: What of all the rest of the written word? What became of the gospels, epistles, records and accounts which were not found to be suitable for Constantine's purposes? The churches of the western tradition (all those stemming from Rome) tell us those writings are "heretical", "apocryphal", and even "evil", being the "works of the Devil", etc, and when found, they were burned. My question, is simply this: What is it that the leaders of all the churches in the western tradition are afraid I might learn if I read these so called 'apocryphal' accounts? And why is it, that when I do read them, I learn about an entirely different Jesus than the Jesus the traditional churches preach? A Jesus who is more believable, more human yet more divine, and ultimately far more glorious than tradition has painted him? And finally, why is it, that after an 'official' church was organized 300 years after the fact, that the persecution of many of the faithful never stopped? The Bishops now, instead of the Romans, believed themselves to have the authority to persecute and execute any of the faithful who continued to subscribe to the writings which were not corrupted by Constantine and made part of the New Testament. The authority to persecute and execute only shifted from the Romans to the Bishops and, ultimately, the believers went back in to hiding and the more accurate writings and beliefs went with them and were hidden from view. And why is it, that in the twenty-first century, people still cling to the Roman version and are afraid to even look at the other writings which have been unearthed in recent times? Hmmm? Why? Could it be that the faithful of today are so ignorant (or lazy) that they enjoy being led around like sheep instead of doing a little research and forming a belief of their own? Ya think?
The sad part of it all is that those of you who profess to be "Christians" are not truly "Christian" if you don't follow the teachings of Christ. And you can't follow His teachings if you refuse to read them. The New Testament and your church leaders, preachers, Pastors, Ministers, Reverends, Bishops, and the Pope, etc, are preaching a Christ that is not very close to who Christ really was, what he taught, where he was for seventeen years which is not explained in the New Testament, and why he came back from where he was to the people he knew would crucify him. If you think of yourself as a disciple of Christ, then do a little homework and learn all there is to know about him. You might become more enlightened than you can even imagine.
GaVaS Copyright © 2010
OUT NEXT for facts about Jesus COMMENTS ( Editor@GaVaS.com )