Before beginning, there are a few important facts to note. Individuals claiming Christianity has no Greco-Roman roots (e.g. Hellenistic, Celtic-paganism, Catholicism) are people who genuinely have skewed knowledge of Christianity.
The oldest known New Testament manuscript is believed to be Papyrus P-52. It was discovered in Egypt, but written in Greek with the strongest concentration of Hadrianic (Roman emperor from 117 CE to 138 CE) influence to date.
Christianity came about from Rome and developed in Roman-occupied Jerusalem. There is no separating Christianity from Rome. One cannot simply rip out some parts of the bible and because they disagree with them, change history. Regardless of the naysayers, if one is a part of Christianity, even in faith, they are a product of ancient Rome.
Matthew 22:17 – 21 Jesus is speaking about Rome being the power and makes mention of Caesar because one of the disciples asked Christ if they should pay taxes? Jesus asked whose face is on the coin, and of course, it is Caesar. Essentially Christ suggests that disciples pay Caesar all things that are his and God all things that are his. In the Bible, the ruling force is Rome. That “should be” a huge hint of the unbreakable connection between Christianity and Rome.
Let us begin by looking into the major differences between the accounts of Jesus by John, Luke, Matthew, and Mark. Each disciple claims that something different happened during the crucifixion of Jesus. Now, if all four of the prophets supposedly witnessed the same thing during the crucifixion, then the stories should match. Yet they do not.
For example, in the book of John, when John goes to speak with Pontius Pilate he records a long conversation with him. However, in the book of Mark, John is documented as only having said 2 words to Pilate!
The book of John has Jesus noted as dying “before” the Hebrew Passover (John 19:42 ). Whereas in Mark, Jesus is said to have died “after” the Passover (Mark 15:21-32).
Please also note that in John, Jesus knows precisely who he is, the fact that he has power, knows he is the son of god, etc. However, in the other Gospels, Jesus does not know who he is!
In fact, in Mark, as Jesus approached the crucifixion, he is frightened and even goes on to say “My God, My God, why have You forsaken me?”
Another example is when Christ spoke to the robber, and the robber told Christ to save him a seat in heaven (Luke 23:43). But this account is never mentioned in the other gospels.
In Matthew 27:44, the robbers crucified with Jesus "reviled" or harshly (insultingly) criticized and mocked him. While in Luke 23:40-43, it claims that Jesus had a pleasant chat with one of the robbers, promising him a spot in paradise.
Digressing. . . .
There is also a strong connection between Christianity and Roman Catholicism that cannot be denied.
If one looks in Matthew 27: 52, it talks about when Jesus dies and the Bible says that the whole earth shook. But it also says that many “Saints” rose from the dead.
Now, the definition of a “Saint” is a virtuous person of the “Christian Faith,” who is accepted into heaven when they die. The problem with this being in the New Testament is that in order to become a quote “saint” you must first be Canonized by the Catholic Church.
However, there was no “Catholic Church” or even “Christianity” at that time (supposedly). Thus, how can the bible mention “saints” when there were no “saints,” nor did the concept exist yet?
Keep in mind, the Bible came about 70 – 300 years after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus and so it was written 70 – 300 years after his death. So, how can it be written that “saints” rose from the dead when during the time of the crucifixion there were no such things as “saints?”
The term "Saint' has its origins in Roman Catholicism, thus, if one considers themselves a saint in any way, they are a Catholic by definition since they identify as one who has been canonized by the Roman Catholic Church.
References
(1)Papyrus P52
(2) Papyrus 1
(3) Papyrus 2
Comments
Post a Comment