Early Christians covered up the truth - the bible is a hoax

My favourite book on the History of Christianity (and other religions) was written by William Hopper and was called The Heathen's Guide to World Religions. William Hopper had two talents (probably more - but two are relevant): he was a humourist and he had an extensive education in Comparative Religions.  I would like his book to be read by everyone but it is a book and as such too big to put on line - besides, he wants to sell his book!  Instead, this article summarizes what I think is a key section - and before you dismiss it as fantasy, there are others who have said much the same thing so it has not been invented.  I challenge anyone to dispute the facts given here.

So I'll summarize in bullet form to keep it as short as possible.

  • Constantine was a well liked successful Emperor of Rome from 306 to 337 AD.
  • Constantine was a worshipper of Apollo - not a Christian - but his mother, Helena, was a Christian.  Therefore he did not want to kill Christians since she would be either be dead or hate him for it
  • Constantine used the Christian Symbol (the cross) in battle and won. (I guess it scared the other guys). He therefore paid homage to the particular god who had helped him - just like any follower of Apollo would.
  • Constantine set up the image of Jesus as being similar to the image of Apollo at the time - a beautiful male figure wrapped in white robes and looking very loving and wise. Unfortunately for Christians, there was one credible genuine historian at the time of Jesus (Josephus) who described Jesus as follows:

At this time, too, there appeared a certain man of magical power, if it is permissible to call him man, whom certain Greeks call a son of God, but his disciples the true prophet said to raise the dead and heal all diseases. His nature and form were human; a man of simple appearance, mature dark skin, small stature, three cubits high (about five feet) hunchbacked, with a long face, long nose and meeting eyebrows, so that they who see him might be affrighted, scanty hair with a parting in the middle of his head, after the manner of the Nairites, and an undeveloped beard.

And to quote Hopper:

This description was edited by Christians in the fourth century to read as follows:

" ... Ruddy skin, medium stature, six feet high, well grown with a venerable face, handsome nose, goodly black eyebrows with good eyes so that the spectators could love him, with curly hair the color of unripe hazelnuts, with a smooth and unruffled, unmarked and unwrinkled forehead, a lovely red, blue eyes, beautiful mouth, with a copious beard the same color as the hair, not long, parted in the middle, arms and hands  full of grace ... "

If you read anything else by Josephus, you'll understand the guy would never write anything this flattering about anyone. (Both of these passages are quoted directly from A Criminal History of Mankind by Colin Wilson, pages 215 and 216.)

Do not accept my word. Look it up. You'll find a really good translation of this description in a book titled The Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist, by Robert Eisler. Also, read the original Josephus. Any copy will do, but as Eisler explains in his book, the early Christians doctored some (though not all) of the copies of Josephus's works. The original text is still readily available. You'll know you have the undoctored version if Jesus' description reads more like someone you'd see at Halloween than at Christmas.

This illustrates that early Christians were not at all averse to changing texts to suit.

  • In Constantine's time, there was no such thing as the Church.  No pope, no central authority and no bible.  But there were a bunch of Christian Sects that disagreed with each other. The Roman and Greek sects said Jesus was divine but not the others who said he was a teacher and prophet (like Mohammed said later).  So Constantine called the Council of Nicea.  It was called the Ecumenical council which simply meant Council of the inhabited world.  The goal was to have a single religion that did not contradict Constantine's right to be Emperor. The proceedings were recorded in detail and these documents are available today.
  • The first item to be decided was whether Jesus was divine like Constantine believed.  Everyone agreed that he was (since they knew that the Emperor wanted that) but two bishops (Arius and Marcius) disagreed quite eloquently and logically.  After some debate, they were declared heretics and beheaded on the council floor. That effectively stopped disagreement. (These days the pope just excommunicates anyone who disagrees. That is, he condemns them to hell.)
  • The texts brought to the council were then selected so that only those that agreed with the pre-conceived notions were "approved" - thus was born the bible.  Many texts were destroyed and banned. To disagree risked being beheaded.
  • However, in the 1800's, some buried texts (the Gnostic texts) were discovered that included many of these banned versions.  The discovered texts included:
    The Gospel of Mary
    The Gospel of Thomas
    The Gospel of Philip
    The Act of Peter
    And many more.  That's where the stories of Mary Magdelene as Jesus's "wife" come from.

So the bible is a compilation of texts selected to agree with the line wanted by the "Power of the time" and conveniently supported what he wanted to hear.  There is no support for consistency of the story or any reason why it should be believed.  It is simply ridiculous to talk about it as anything more than a good book of myths in the same way that stories on Greek god myths are entertaining.

Addendum: For a longer more detailed account of Constantine and how he created the bible, go here.

 
Comments (3)
  • Dr. Günter Bechly  - please fellow atheists do not embarass us with inc

    I am a German scientist, skeptic and atheist, but I refuse to suspend my skepticism if I encounter bullshit by fellow atheists. Unfortunately, the American atheist media abounds with pseudohistoric nonsense (e.g. the long refuted Horus-Jesus parallels in Bill Maher's "Religiulous" or in Richard Carrier's books).

    Paul Draper's essay unfortunately contains several such pseudohistoric myths and even factually incorrect claims that I feel to be an embarrassment to atheism: Just two examples:

    1.) The cited book by Robert Eisler is considered by all academic historians as scientifically worthless pseudohistory. His source for the true wording of Josephus is a dubious Slavonic translation! The alleged true text of Josephus is simply bogus.

    2.) Arius was not beheaded at the council of Nicea. He simply died in 336 long after the council on Nicea.

    Even two minutes web search at Google and Wikipedia are sufficient to get the facts straight. Please try harder and avoid to give religious zealots the welcome opportunity to make cheap but valid points against atheists.

  • roderigo  - ....

    Hi there, I had always thought the bible was stupid crapped out book out of some wise guys from back in the day I refused my ass off to believe it. But I'm talking past tense.

    As ive told my mentor, if goverments ran on the teachings of the bible we would be running on h2o powered vehicles and on nikola telsas energy systems. See even if you don't believe in god the morals and teachings of good will and character that the bible projects to the reader is a great experience, especially the Corinthian chapters, I have hard troubles trying to absorb the stories of genesis but regardless it is a great knowledgeable book it has infact changed my life.

    If people went their day by the bibles teachings, there would be no war, no ignorance or hunger, no earth about to collapse on the ozone no secrets from no one, no rapes, no adultery, no lying. It's a great power in that book which I have not found in others. I don't care if you frankly don't believe in god, but the teachings of.love and compassion and the care for one another is there. Who cares about who wrote it? Why are you condemning so many brothers and their faith in Jesus? Their faith in good will and good doings. All people low on morale and faith will be next to you which means the traitors will only follow you. Because you are condemning the word of love.

    I say dear brothers and sisters who read this, please even if you do not believe in god read the teachings that true cristians follow, pretend we say that their from some random man who pulled all of that knowledge and wisdom.out their ass but read.it.and go by it your life will get better. For there's no such thing as evil in gods eyes only lost sheep and ignorant wolves.
    The world is really fucked over. Because of greed and lying and all this confusion going on. You don't have to believe god did it.all just.follow the good morals Jesus taught us.
    And if you think the teachings are wrong I will personally reply to your arguments " rgcloud17@gmail.com"

  • CeCe  - To add to Dr. Günter Bechly's remarks

    On top of that, the biblical canon was not decided or even discussed at the Council of Nicaea. And Constantine subscribed to Arianism, not trinitarianism.

Only registered users can write comments!