mountainman

Since evidence exists for this claim (christians did destroy documents, from at least the council of Nicaea) it cannot be denied.

Since evidence does not exist for this claim it might be argued that it can be denied on the basis of the first claim.

Lets put it another way. Do we have evidence to suggest that extremely authoritative religious/political regimes who said they were going to destroy a certain class of literature, and who not only enacted laws for its destruction but also laws by which the literature was able to be searched out by the army and other delegates of the ruler, when they obtained the books, did not destroy them, but put them in the imperial Archives for future reference?

Books were hidden by the gnostics against destruction by the orthodox.
The only way to preserve these books was to make them hidden.
To make them "apocrypha" - the Greek word for hidden.
The term new testament apocrypha has been inherited
from fourth century Greek/Roman religious politics.

JoeWallack

JW:
I fear that the historical Christian willingness to destroy literature they didn't like is getting a bad rep here. Common sense tells us they would if they could and with Apologies to Roger Pearse, when Christians in power went to the trouble of officially banning problematic writings for their brand of Christianity, it's likely that the practical related destruction was exponentially worse and not better since the more enthusiastic of the Christians knew they had the sympathy of power.

In my research I am constantly coming across Christian persecution of unfriendly literature which I fear James Hannam has somehow missed in his studies. I'm not overly concerned with Pearse and Hannam since I already know why they have the positions they do. I'm more concerned with Skeptics who tend to agree with them simply because they are not aware of the evidence for Christian destruction of literature which can be difficult to detect in Christian authors. So I'm just going to start inventorying all evidence I run across of Christian mistreatment of literature:

http://www.wrs.edu/Materials_for_Web...Jesus_Life.pdf

C'mon guys (Skeptics). If Christians thought a work blasphemous, why wouldn't they destroy it.


Joseph

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

Roger Pearse

Only Christian?

Has there ever been a group of people who obtained power and did not then censor works of which they disapproved? Indeed it goes on today. But I don't see any urge to object to it, as it now is. So this is all rather curious.

Indeed the whole argument seems rather strange, as a matter of logic. It is insinuated, is it not, that no text should be banned, ever, for any reason, and that to do so is morally wrong. It is a pity that this precept is not stated explicitly, to be defended or denied or modified; insinuated arguments are never sound. It is then asserted (truly) that during the centuries when Christianity was the official religion, such things took place. But this we know well; the life of Tyndale would tell us so much. It is then insinuated that this is a charge against Christianity, and only Christianity. This is false, as we all know. (NB: I know some posters don't know what the word "insinuate" means. It means suggest something without saying so explicitly).

What is much more interesting, tho, is specific historical investigation, going to the original sources. I wish we had some of this.

The event mentioned here in these odd terms -- "purge"? Like Stalin? -- is an interesting one. (Although is the argument insinuated here that the Christians were obliged to use the diatessaron rather than the separated gospels? Surely it is up to the Christians what they use in their churches? And what they do with their property? The argument, once we ask what it is, promptly falls apart).

Might we see what the ancient sources say about the event so curiously discussed?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Toto

The rebellious American colonies seized power from the divinely annointed King of England and adopted a Constitution and a Bill of Rights that guaranteed Free Speech.

But this is outside the scope of this forum, except in that it explains why modern Christians in American can be a bit touchy on the subject.

Roger Pearse

This seems like a strange remark. If you are asserting that there is and has been never any censorship of any printed materials in the USA, that there is and has never been any obscenity law, that any statement may be expressed in print, whatever it is, without fear of persecution or harassment, then I can only ask whether you really mean it.

I have not done a serious Google search. I merely ask some questions, about how people unpopular with the current US establishment are likely to fare. E.g. would a staff member at a US university be able to leaflet the students with "racist" material, and be immune from any consequences? Really? Do you mean that child pornography is legal and circulates freely? That the US congress would never run a series of "UnAmerican activities" hearings? That Yale University would not ban a book discussing the cartoons of Mohammed from a book on the subject? (Although fear rather than censorship is probably the motive here). That books are not edited to ensure "diversity"; and to prevent the expression of "unacceptable" views about (e.g.) negroes, moslems, women, <insert current favoured group here>?

The ruling group in every society have their views. They obstruct, by various means, the expression of different views. This includes preventing the circulation of them in printed form. Whether this obstruction is morally acceptable is not the point here; I merely draw attention to its universality.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Toto

Roger - this is off topic, but you can say anything in the US without fear of criminal persecution (unless your speech is part of an actual crime, such as "give me your money or I will kill you.")

Universities have tried to enforce speech codes as a matter of civil discourse, and these are routinely struck down as violations of the First Amendment. Conservatives have printed racist screeds at Universities and handed them out. Books are available that discuss the genetic inferiority of one race or another.

Yale University Press (a private entity) decided not to print the cartoons of Mohammed, but the Center for Inquiry published them in its magazine Free Inquiry, with no criminal consequences.

Universities might consider the fitness for teaching of someone who spews out pseudoscientific views on race, but there is no criminal prosecution.

The House Committee on UnAmerican Activities was shut down a long time ago. It is now considered part of a period of national hysteria.

Child pornography is the one big exception here, and it is justified on the basis that producing child pornography involves expoiting children, and that sexual exploitation of children is a crime.

Conservative Christians in the US have relied on the First Amendment to protect their right to proselytize their fellow citizens, even when their fellow citizens consider them public nuisances.

avi

Thank you Joe, much appreciated link, and excellent rejoinder.
avi

Doug Shaver

Your question seems to assume that all Christians, everywhere, throughout that period of history, always believed that all blasphemous works should be destroyed. I don't believe that assumption is justified.

But of course, if you have some evidence to support it, then it's not an assumption.

mountainman

This response seems to assume that
the fourth century never happened.


The fourth century christian regime immediately after the council of Nicaea (at which petitions were burnt in the presence of the summoned attendee petitioners) commences with imperial edicts to destroy books, imperial edicts to have books searched out, imperial edicts to persecute and immediately execute anyone caught concealing a certain proscribed list of prohibited books (which were to be delivered to the fire). See Eusebius HE for the "list". The fourth century closes with the christian mafia thugs controlling the taxation collection business in Alexandria, torching the library of Alexandria - to be considered the very center of the book and knowledge "WORLD" in antiquity. But of course, I am forgetting, the fourth century never really happened, did it.

Doug Shaver

The way you tell it, I don't think it did.