The history of the Church reveals a gap of 1200 years, as well as the first 30 years of Jesus of Nazareth. He appears from nowhere, preaches among the illiterate, naïve and slaves in despair for 2-3 years and after that he “disappears”.
Where did Christianity really come from? Who was Jesus Christ and how did the New Testament, the cornerstone of the Christian faith, come about? On which dogmas, rites and symbols was it built upon? Although the Church gives its own answers, archaeological and historical evidences reveal that the truth lies elsewhere.
Scholars emphasize that Christianity differs from other religions because it is based on certain events that supposedly happened 20 centuries ago. Examining closer these events that are presented in the form of stories in the New Testament and cross-examining other historical sources, we realize that for the most part, they are not historical truths. And despite the fact that the Church does not admit the myth-making openly, it partially confesses: “The written sources of our knowledge of the origin and early development of Christianity come mainly from the sacred texts of the New Testament, the authenticity of which we must take, to a large extent, for granted” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol.iii, p.712).
However, the same Church reveals the spuriousness of the scriptures contradicting itself. (Encyclopedia Biblica, vol ii, p.1880, vol iii, pp.1767,1781 & Catholic Encyclopedia, vol iii “The evidence of its spuriousness” & Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed. Vol iii pp.274-9, Canons)
Why not taking for granted then the Gnostic Christian, or recently found Gospels, or the Codices, namely the Codex Sinaiticus and so many other Hebrew and Christian scriptures that reveal a different “version” of Christianity?
It is more than obvious, that the Church falls into incredible contradictions. When referring, for example, to the origin of the Gospels it admits that they “do not refer to the first century of the Christian era” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol.vi, p.137, pp.655-6). The above statement contradicts its own arguments that the Gospels were written over the centuries, beginning after the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The Church’s own texts also state that “the latest of the surviving manuscripts of the New Testament date back to before the middle of the 4th century BC” (Catholic Encyclopedia, op. Cit., pp.656-7). It means that they were written down 350 years after Jesus supposed crucifixion. Again, the Church contradicts itself, especially after the Synod of Nicaea and its reports, when Emperor Constantine I, commissioned Eusebius to deliver fifty Bibles for the Church of Constantinople, as Athanasius (Apol. ad Constantium 4) a pivotal figure in early Christian theology recorded, that Alexandrian scribes around 340 preparing Bibles for the use of the Bishop of Constantinople. This is also confirmed by marginal comments that Pamphilus and his friends and pupils, including Eusebius, corrected and revised much of the biblical text in their library. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius
According to ancient texts, the bishops were “The most rude persons who taught strange paradoxes, who openly declared that only the ignorant were fit to listen to their speeches, who never appeared in the circles of the wisest, but always took care to infiltrate the circles of the ignorant and uncultured, who wandered in the markets and at festivals playing tricks, who filled their books with fables, whose minds could only go so far, who wrote nonsense on their parchments” (Contra Celsum, Origen of Alexandria, c.251, Bk I, p.lxvii, Bk III, p.xliv, passim). The Church calls them “Fathers” even today and tries to cover up the truth about their character and beliefs. (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol.xiv, pp.370-1)
Further on we read that these groups of bishops believed in many deities and many different religious sects, each with its own doctrine. “And the groups often disputed with each other about the particulars of their doctrines and competed to gain an audience for their speeches” (Optatus of Milevis, 1:15, 19). The prevailing view that Constantine embraced Christianity and then imposed it as the official religion is totally false, since Christianity didn’t even exist in his time. “The above theory finds no historical basis and must be revised” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Pecci ed., vol.iii, p.299, passim).
The same occurs with his supposed baptism in Christianity is “entirely a myth”. (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xiv, pp.370-1). On the contrary, he “never adopted a solid theological knowledge and his beliefs were largely based on his religious advisors” (Catholic Encyclopedia, New Edition, vol.xii, p.576, passim).
Constantine had been initiated into the religious brotherhood of Helios Pantocrator, one of the two dominant cults that considered Helios as the supreme god. He ordered the first meetings to be held on the summer solstice [21 June 325] (Catholic Encyclopedia, New Edition, vol I, p.792). According to Sabinius, bishop of Heraclea, “Apart from Constantine and his confidant Eusebius of Pamphilus, there were only unlettered, insignificant creatures there, who understood nothing” (Secrets of the Christian Fathers, Bishop J.W. Sergerus, 1685).
Having all these evidences, we must conclude with certainty, that these texts were in fact, not written before the 4th century CE, but after, leading to the next question on how was the New Testament created and what is true or false?
Δεσμώτης
Article URL : https://www.ecatholic2000.com/cathopedia/title.shtml