mountainman

The Church History is available online. It was written in Greek by Eusebius between the years of c.312 and c.337 CE, primary completed c.324 with a number of revisions to c.339 CE. The usual "Once Upon a time opening takes the following form ....


Its the old one two. The good guys and the bad guys.
The good guys are part of Constantine's flock.
The bad guys are devious gnostic authors adding bits here and there.


Observant readers will immediately perceive that Eusebius does not set out
what he states he is going to do. Nowhere in all his church history is the
name of any of these gnostic authors specifically attributed to a specific
gnostic book for which the manuscript is today available.

Eusebius says "[b]It is my purpose also to give the names ..." [of the heretics;gnostics].
The only name that has arisen in the field is Leucius Charinus.


(1) Introductions are in order for a new saviour and god. Stacks of historical churches
which the archaeologists have yet to find are alluded to. The Twelve Boneheads have
a lineage intertwined with the Emperors of Rome, the Heads of the Academy of Plato,
and the Galilaean fishing cooperative. These are the good guys. Praises be to all
who vote for the good guys. The boss will love you .... BUT

(2) He berates the gnostics who have innovatively added details
over and above the canonical holy writ of the new testament canon.
The Boss does not like Christians getting beaten up by bullying pagans.
The Boss protects the flock of Christ with his sword.
The bad guys are not part of the Constantinian "flock".
They write satirical stories about our dear Jesus.
They write satirical stories about our dear Peter.
They write satirical stories about our dear Paul.
They write satirical stories about our dear Mary.



The rest of the books of "CHURCH HISTORY" follow suit.
You should really take the time to read this 4th CE propaganda.
It and In Preparation for the Godspell are the foundation
of the entire island continent of Christendom in the field of
ancient history.

arnoldo

An equally valid alternative to the Eusebius Fiction Postulate (EFP) is the Hindu Prank Postulate (HPP). Apparently after Alexander the Great conquered much of the known world the Hindus began a long term plan of seeking revenge against the west. They began by recruiting certain members of the lost tribe of Israel who were residing in India at the time and committed the entire OT to memory. Once achieving this the Hindus created a dialectic approach to scripture to abolish the judaic law. Once satisfied that they have achieved their goals the Hindu masters waited centuries until the astrological signs were in place and in fact were the magi who came from the east. The treasure they brought was the christ child whom they identified as shiva. Many miracles which were attributed to Christ were in fact the result of advanced tantric energy destroying the illusion of sickness. The alleged death of Christ was equally an illusion as Lognius used a spear filled with blood to "fake" piercing the side of Christ. In a deep self induced coma Christ was placed in tomb which functioned like an artificial respirator. Once revived Christ and his disciples fled back to India where they lived long and peacful lives.

Toto

arnoldo - did you make that up? It's very creative. But I don't think it's what J-D is looking for.

premjan

Christianity has some definite similarities to Hinduism though it need not be a Hindu prank. If it was a Hindu idea presented as something Jewish in retaliation for the Jewish rebellion, the resurrection would be metaphorical. Jesus died but the resurrection was the creation of the idea of Christianity (what a Christian would call the propagation of the holy spirit perhaps) via the death of the body of Christ which would correspond to the simultaneous death of the ego and the body. Parinirvana in Buddhist terms.

DCHindley

Toto,

Of course he made it up! I think his whole point is that JMs are so anxious to discredit the HJ position they will make up all sorts of wild things.

Arnoldo's posts have been rather good lately.

DCH

PS: It goes the other way too! HJers can be just as whacky! A while ago, on Synoptic-l (the incarnation of it that preceded the present manifestation) or another of the lists active in the 90s, there was one gentleman who seemed very reasonable and had an interest in Aramaic as a key to interpreting some of the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels (no, it was not Jack Kilmon). He even had his own web site touting how one could be an "independent biblical scholar" like him. He even learned Aramaic grammar. I seem to recall that he believed that Jesus had some sort of alien (as in outer space) connection, and there was some sort of Aramaic gospel that has been preserved in part, written by Jesus himself, in the possession of a modern person living in California? I cannot locate the posts in question, but the story sounds like the Talmud of Jmmanuel. The TJ even has an Indian element. Maybe James W. Deardorff? For a bit of history:
http://www.stopnwo.com/docs/discover...f_jmmanuel.pdf

PSS: Oh, it was definitely James Deardorff! He is a retired professor of atmospheric science (PhD) and resides in Oregon.
http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/index.htm
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/synoptic-l/message/5391

The overarching motif surrounding the TJ is that a certain alien group, who told Jmmanuel they were from the constellation of the seven stars—the Pleiades, were genetically compatible with us and had been visiting Earth in past scores of thousands of years. Some 10,000 or so years ago they decided to oversee us in a manner that no longer involved themselves directly, and to give us some guidance in a similar indirect manner. This they did by arranging to have a highly advanced spirit form or soul periodically reincarnate into the human race in the Middle East region, starting with the biblical Enoch. Some 3000 years ago they decided the time was approaching when the key human lifetime of this spirit form should occur, for the purpose of teaching humanity some spiritual truths. So some 2000 years ago they brought about this incarnation, with that spirit form reincarnating into the fetus of Jmmanuel around A.D. 6, not 6 B.C.! His alien procreator saw to it that Jmmanuel would receive intensive education in his youth, which involved those "lost years of Jesus" spent in India -- a topic receiving very substantial evidential support. Thus Jmmanuel was an occasional contactee of these aliens. They realized that his teachings would inevitably be distorted, but felt that mankind could only learn through making mistakes and then learning from those mistakes. So they maintained a continued interest over the centuries.

One of the TJ's minor heresies is that the person who betrayed Jmmanuel to the arresting party and a little later committed suicide was Juda Ihariot, a young Pharisee who had been acquainted with Jmmanuel and the disciples, and not Judas Iscariot. Judas was Jmmanuel's designated writer as well as the treasurer for the twelve.

However, the greatest of the TJ's heresies is that Jmmanuel survived the crucifixion, with the help of medical attention inside the tomb during three days and nights. Then, after appearing to his disciples several times, he went on to Damascus where he stayed incognito a couple years, before sending for his mother Mary, brother Judas (Judas Thomas) and disciple Judas Iscariot to join him. Soon thereafter they started on their travels, of which various traditions speak.

The TJ rolls were mostly written by Judas Iscariot who traveled with Jmmanuel to India, along with Judas-Thomas (Jmmanuel's brother Judas) and mother Mary, several years after the crucifixion.

Move over, Arnoldo!

semiopen

There were three Magi which became the basis of the trinity. One of the three Magi(s?) was named Casper, the holy ghost...

mountainman

But everyone knows Constantine first heard of the Christian God
somewhere in the west of the empire, perhaps on the far-flung
shores of the Britons, or the wild tracts of Gaul? Who really knows?
At least we may safely say that it was not in an Irish pub.

However Constantine the WarLord was greater than Alexander.
He trashed the city of Alexander and constructed the city of Constantine.
He shipped every valuable in Alexandria to Constantinople.
The monstrous obelisk at the Karnack temple complex was no exception.

Constantine created history again by trashing Alexander.
And recycling Hellenistic wisdom as "The Christian Bible".



The Column of Constantine

It could have been easily seen from the Sea of Marmara and the Bosphorus, and was completed at the dedication of "The City of Constantine", 11 May 330. It was constructed of nine drums of porphyry each 2.9 m in diameter, topped by a Corinth Capital. Its total height was more than thirty-six meters. The column was crowned with colossal bronze statue of Constantine, depicted wearing a crown of seven rays. (It may have been Pheidas' sculpture of Apollo Paropius from the Acropolis of Athens, recycled with bullneck's head. Some accounts describe Constantine holding a spear in the left hand, and a globe in the right hand. Data from The Emperor Constantine, by Hans A. Pohlsander.


Historian John Julius Norwich writes that in the Column of Constantine,

“Apollo, Sol Invictus and Jesus Christ
all seem subordinated to a new
supreme being—the Emperor Constantine.”

What do you think this guy Constantine would do
about bad press from the local Alexandrian populace
concerning his new and revised plans for the Logos?

mountainman

Can anyone figure out why Eusebius starts out by informing his readers
that he is about to name the heretics who have in their reasonable and
objective nature rejected this christian bullshit, and yet in his entire works
of many books fails to provide us with one single name?

People were important to Eusebius. He preserved many sources.
We are expecting Eusebius to name the heretics.
We are expecting Eusebius to follow his intentions stated.
But he does not name one single Christian heretic.
Not one. He renegs on his clearly stated intentions.

Eusebius is playing politics.

The Great Eusebian Silence on the identification of any ANTI-CHRISTIAN heretic by name

The Christian Historian Eusebius cannot name the Anti-Christian resistance because they are his contemporaries.
Christian heresy exploded in the epoch of Constantine and not before.
Eusebius is embarrassed to report any real non-literary political resistance to the Golden Apple of Christianity.
His assertions about the heretics are a fictional polemical exercise and has nothing to do with history.
Eusebius silent on the identification of the heretics for political purposes.
Their name were not to be mentioned.

Who said?

The Boss

Constantine decreed that nobody was to ever mention the name of Arius of Alexandria.
The memory of Arius and the name of Arius were subject to imperial memoriae damnatio.

"There was Age when He was not"....

[This is similar to rubbing people out of photographs.]

OPEN QUESTION:

Why do you think Eusebius fails to identify by name -- as he states he will --
any anti-christian heretic in his entire many books of "christian history"?

If you were reporting the local football match between the Christians and
the Heretical Gnostics, and you have gone through the entire Christian
football team, including a list of their architecture and football stadia,
dont you think you would mention at least the name of the captain of
the opposing football team, called the Heretical Gnostics?

No names are mentioned on the opposing team.
As a sporting commentator Eusebius is a failure.

mountainman

Draft Specification of the Eusebian Fiction Postulate. - (2008)



Identifying Four Categories of the Authors of Antiquity

It is our postulate that the Constantinian political regime was corrupt and that christian history which was to be presented as legitimate and authentic, and to be associated with this new top-down-emperor cult, was in fact fabricated by the invention of legions of fictitious authors which are classified into Category 1, with their respective works. In the first place I will list the four categories of the authors of antiquity being dealt with:

1) The fictional prenicene christians (who babble about things "christian")
2) The historical prenicene "pagans" (who have no knowledge of anything "christian").
3) The historical post-nicene christians
4) The historical post-nicene "pagans" and ascetics

Once I have listed the detailed authors and their respective categories, I will defend the postulate, on the basis that it represents the simplest method to explain the political chaos of the fourth century between the groups 3 and 4, and all known archaeological and/or scientific citations that are present in the field of ancient history in the twenty-first century after the birth of Apollonius of Tyana (who we may rest assured may be reasonable assessed as more of an historical person than Harry Jesus Potter and the Twelve Garden Gnomes)


CATEGORY 1: AHISTORICAL PRENICENE CHRISTIANS

This category includes all source authors mentioned in the Eusebian Ecclesiastical History and In preparation for the Gospels, on the basis that Eusebius has simply fabricated his "christian sources", and is thus quoting himself. This category of authors is presented below. Jesus is included on the basis that Eusebius pointedly presents him as the author of letter to the King of Edessa, Agbar, which he tells us is on his desk in front of him as he writes. He asserts that he found it in the archives, and that he will translate it, for our benefit, from the Syriac to the Greek:

Jesus of Nazareth (0-33), Judas (0-40), Simon Magus (0-50), Jude (0-60), Barnabas (0-61), Paul (20-65), Matthew (0-70), Mark (0-70), Luke (0-70), John (0-70), Peter (0-70), Clement of Rome (18-98), Ignatius of Antioch (40-117), Aristides the Philosopher (70-134), Basilides (120-140), Marcion (130-140), Papias (110-140), Quadratus (70-140), Agrippa Castor (90-145), Aquila of Sinope (of Pontus) (90-150), Aristo of Pella (130-150), Polycarp (110-155), Valentinus (120-160), Epiphanes (130-160), Marcion of Sinope (110-160), Justin Martyr (150-160), Isidore (140-160), Carpocrates of Alexandria (80-160), Minucius Felix (140-170), Melito of Sardis (165-175), Dionysius of Corinth (165-175), Excerpts of Theodotus (150-180), Athenagoras of Athens (175-180), Apelles (160-180), Apollinaris Claudius (120-180), Julius Cassianus (160-180), Hegesippus (110-180), Heracleon (150-180), Ptolemy (140-180), Pinytus of Crete (130-180), Rhodon (175-185), Theophilus of Caesarea (175-185), Tatian (135-185), Theophilus of Antioch (180-185), Irenaeus of Lyons (175-185), Apollonius (136-186), Anonymous Anti-Montanist (193-193), Maximus of Jerusalem (185-195), Polycrates of Ephesus (130-196), Victor I (189-199), Mathetes (130-200), Diognetus (130-200), Clement of Alexandria (182-202), Apollonius (200-210), Pantaenus (190-210), Serapion of Antioch (200-210), Tertullian (197-220), Bardesanes (180-220), Caius (200-220), Hippolytus of Rome (180-230), Ammonius Saccas (155-245), Octavius of Minucius Felix (160-250), Alexander (of Cappadocia,Jerusalem) (150-250), Cornelius (of Rome) (200-253), Cyprian of Carthage (200-258), Novatian (201-258), Dionysius (of Alexandria) the Great (200-264), Dionysius of Rome (210-268), Gregory Thaumaturgus (212-275), Paul of Samosata (200-275), Hermias (210-280), Malchion (of Antioch) (220-290), Anatolius of Laodicea in Syria (222-290) Victorinus (bishop) of Petau (240-303), Arnobius (245-305), Phileas (Bishop) of Thmuis (250-307), Pamphilus (250-309), Peter of Alexandria (250-311), Methodius (250-311), Miltiades (Pope 311-314) (270-314)

CATEGORY 2: HISTORICAL PRE-NICENE PAGANS

The second category of authors are those who never knew anything whatsoever about the existence of either Jesus, the Apostles, or the "nation of christians" in the period from the first century to the Council of Nicaea. These authors have been referred to as "pagans", but they would have considered themselves part of the Egypto-Graeco-Roman empire. Any references by any of the following authors, to "christianity, etc" are to be separately explicated as either interpolations, or more substantive forgeries by either Eusebius in the fourth century, through to other pious forgers of the 15th century:

Gaius Asinius Pollio (-76-5), Nicolaus of Damascus (-65-5), Augustus (-63-14), Livy (Titus Livius) (-59-17), Ovid (Publius Ovidius Naso) (-43-17), Herod Archelaus (-23-18), King Juba II (of Lybia) (-52-23), Strabo (-64-24), Aulus Cremutius Cordus (-25-25), Herod of Chalcis (-10-27), Gaius Asinius Pollio (Jnr) (-20-30), Marcus Velleius Paterculus (-19-31), Thrasyllus of Mendes (-36-36), Tiberius (-42-37), Aulus Cornelius Celsus (-20-37), Seneca (the Elder) (-54-39), Pontius Pilate (-10-40), Herod Antipas (-20-40), Ptolemy of Mauretania (-1-40), Caligula (12-41), Agrippa I (Herod Agrippa) (-10-44), Zeno of Sidon (-100-44), Diophantus (-20-44), Gaius Sallustius Passienus Crispus (1-47), Philo-Judaeus (-15-50), Abgar V of Edessa (-4-50), Remmius Palaemon (-10-51), Claudius (-10-54), Lucius Iunius Moderatur Columella (1-60), Persius (Aulus Persius Flaccus) (34-62), Lucan (Marcus Annaeus Lucanus) (39-65), Seneca (the Younger) (-4-65), Thrasea Paetus (20-66), Petronius (27-66), Nero (37-68), Galba (-3-69), Otho (32-69), Vitellus (15-69), Dioscorides (1-70), Cornutus (39-70), Moderatus of Gades (Cadiz, Spain) (0-70), Asconius Pedianus (-9-76), Helvidius Priscus (35-77), Demetrius the Cynic (36-77), Vespasian (9-79), Pliny the Elder (23-79), Quintus Curtius Rufus (10-80), Damis (0-80), Chariton (10-80), Titus (39-81), Memnon of Heraclea (20-90), Mucianus (20-90), Statius (Publius Papinius Statius) (45-96), Domitian (51-96), Nerva (30-98), Apollonius of Tyana (-4-98), Quintilian (Marcus Fabius Quintilia (35-100), Agrippa II (27-100), Musonius Rufus (30-100), Flavius Josephus (37-100), Neilus (son of Theon) (50-100), Silius Italicus (25-101), Martial (40-102), Pliny the Younger (63-113), Juvenal (40-115), Trajan (Marcus Nerva Traianus) (53-117), Tacitus (Cornelius) (56-117 ), Plutarch, Mestrius (46-120), Aelianus Tacticus (50-120), Nicomachus of Gerasa (Jerash, Jorda (60-120), Dio Chrysostom (of Prusa) (40-120), Curtis Rufus, Quintus (70-120), Florus (60-130), Suetonius (70-131), Epictetus (55-135), Secundus (the philosopher) (76-138), Soranus of Ephesus (98-138), Hadrian (Publius Aelius Traianus) (76-138), Ptolemaeus Chennus (60-140), Demonax (70-140), Favorinus (80-150), Aristocles of Messene (100-150), Antoninus Pius (86-161), Appian of Alexandria (95-165), Sextus of Chaeroneia (90-165), Ptolemy (Claudius Ptolemaeus) (90-168), Fronto (Cornelius) (100-170), Junius Rusticus (90-170), Artemidorus (100-170), Avidius Cassius (130-175), Arrian of Nicomedia (92-175), Lucian of Samosata (165-175), Herodes Atticus (101-177), Celsus (178-178), Alciphron (120-180), Aulus Gellius (125-180), Marcus Aurelius (Antoninus) (121-180), Lucius Apuleius (123-180), Thallus (90-180), Pausanias (110-180), Rufus of Ephesus (110-180), Alexander of Cottyaeum (117-181), Aelius Aristides (117-181), Symmachus the Ebionite (110-190), Longus (120-190), Granius Licinianus (120-190), Numenius of Apamea (140-190), Hermas (120-190), Commodus (161-192), Pertinax (126-193), Didius Julianus (133-193), Pescennius Niger (140-194), Sextus Pompeius Festus (120-195), Clodius Albinus (150-197), Alexander of Aphrodisias (120-199), Phlegon (99-199), Mara Bar Serapion (073-200), Julian the Theurgist (160-210), Septimius Severus (146-211), Geta (189-211), Abercius (193-216), Galen (Claudius Galenus) (129-216), Talmud (188-217), Caracalla (186-217), Macrinus (165-218), Diadumenian (190-218), Philostratus (200-220), Athenaeus of Naucratis (160-220), Elagabalus (203-222), Dio Cassius (165-230), Marius Maximus (160-230), Claudius Aelianus (175-235), Alexander Severus (208-235), Alexander Severus (208-235), Maximinus Thrax (173-238), Gordian I (159-238), Pupienus (178-238), Balbinus (165-238), Gordian II (192-238), Philip II (Philippus II) (238-239), Sextus Empiricus (170-240), Xenophon of Ephesus (170-240), Herodian of Syria (170-240), Gordian III (225-244), Ammonius Saccas (155-245), Pacatian (Pacatianus) (200-248), Jotapian (Jotapianus) (200-249), Philip the Arab (204-249), Philip the Arab (204-249), Julius Africanus (170-250), Babrius (-250-250), Decius Trajan (201-251), Decius (201-251), Herennius Etruscus (227-251), Hostilian (233-251), Trebonianus Gallus (206-253), Aemilianus (207-253), Volusianus (200-253), Uranius (200-254), Origen (185-254), Diogenes Laertius (190-260), Valerian (200-260), Gallienus (218-268), Plotinus (205-270), Asinius Quadratus (200-270), Claudius II (213-270), Quintillus (225-270), Longinus, Cassius Dionysius (213-273), Aurelian (214-275), Tacitus (Marcus Claudius) (200-276), Mani the Prophet (210-276), Florianus (200-276), Heliodorus of Emesa (220-280), Probus (232-282), Carus (230-283), Carinus (240-285), Junianus Justinus (220-290), Carausius (240-293), Allectus (245-296), Diophantus of Alexandria (200-298), Porphyry (234-305), Constantius Chlorus (250-306), Asclepiodotus (250-310), Galerius (250-311), Diocletian (236-316), Hierocles (270-324), Iamblichus of Chalcis (245-325), Amoun (250-325)

CATEGORY 3: HISTORICAL POST-NICAEAN to 5th Century CHRISTIANS

The third category is reserved for christian authors who were alive after the Council of Nicaea. Some of these authors perpetuated further frauds, and strove to eliminate the common knowledge that the nation of christians appeared in chronology with Constantine. In the midst of these authors remains the "christian authodoxy", the victors in the battles of religious and social controversy in the period from 325 until 500 CE. These victorius authors wrote the history that we today regard as accurate. It is the contention of this thesis that some of the following authors censored the public opinion against Constantine's invention of christianity, because the tax-exempt regime of the bishops was literally very big business in those times. Elsewhere, outside of these authors below, land tax by 350 CE had tripled in living memory. Ammianus comments about this category 3 group c.350 CE "The highways were covered with galloping bishops":

Lactantius (240-320), Alexander of Alexandria (260-326), Sabinus (270-330), Eusebius Pamphili of Caesarea (265-340), Commodianus (270-350), Alexander of Lycopolis (280-350), Maximin of Trier (346-352), Donatus Magnus (311-355), Anthony the Great (251-356), Aphrahat/Aphraates (280-367), Hilary of Poitiers (300-368), Athanasius (296-373), Ephraim the Syrian (306-373), Basil the Great (329-379), Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386), Gregory of Nazianzus (329-389), Apollinaris (the Younger) (330-390), Acacius (320-390), Eunomius of Cyzicus (323-393), Gregory of Nyssa (335-395), Philastrius or Philaster of Brescia (345-396), Ambrose (340-397), Didymus the Blind (313-398), Damasus of Rome (320-400), Epiphanius of Salamis (310-403), Sulpicius Severus (363-406), John Chrysostom (347-407), Rufinus (340-410), Theophilus of Alexandria (345-412), Jerome (331-420), Augustine of Hippo (354-430), Philip of Side (380-431), John Cassian (360-435), Philostorgius (368-439), Cyril of Alexandria (378-444), Sozomen (400-450), Socrates Scholasticus (379-450), Vincent of Lérins (390-450), Theodosius II (401-450), Nestorius of Constantinople (386-451), Theodoret (393-457), Leo the Great, Pope (395-461), Hydatius (400-469), Gennadius of Marseilles (440-496)

CATEGORY 4: HISTORICAL POST-NICAEAN to 5th Century PAGANS

The final category is reserved for the pagans of the fourth and fifth century who were alive after the Council of Nicaea. It is this segment of the authorship of antiquity who have not been allowed to tell their story for almost 1700 years. The Emperor Julian wrote three books "Against the Galilaeans" (he never once referred to christians as anything else other than "Galilaeans". This term implied a Hebrew robber, rebel and gangster. It was the common Roman hegemonic term reserved for the Jewish resistance fighters up until Masada in the first century. See Gibbon.) Julian actually legislated that the Christians of c.360 to 363 CE be legally known by the name of THE GALILAEANS. His books were burnt and he was "refuted" by the publication of other works, by the category 3 victors above:

Crispus (299-326), Palamon (270-330), Sopater of Apamea (270-335), Arius of Alexandria (270-336), Constantine I (272-337), Constantine II (316-340), Asterius the Sophist (281-341), Pachomius (292-346), Constans (320-350), Lucius Ampelius (100-350), Magnentius (303-353), Constantius II (317-361), Julian (331-363), Jovian (332-364), Aëtius of Antioch (307-367), Anonymous Scriptores (4?) (312-370), Sallustius (300-370), Marcellus of Ancyra (300-374), Valentinian I (321-375), Pambo (304-375), Valens (328-378), Prohaeresius (300-380), Gratian (359-383), Himerius (315-386), Themistus (317-387), Festus (Rufius?) (320-390), Macarius the Egyptian (300-390), Origen the Priest (associate of "Th (324-390), Eutropius (320-390), Sextus Aurelius Victor (320-390), Macarius the Alexandrian (293-393), Libanius (314-394), Nichomachus Flavianus (344-394), Decimus Magnus Ausonius (310-395), Theodosius I (346-395), Ammianus Marcellinus (325-399), Evagrius Ponticus (345-399), Isodore the Ascetic (318-400), Gelasius of Caesarea (365-400), Oribasius (320-400), Quintus Aurelius Symmachus (340-402), Ammonius (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-402), Discorus (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-403), Claudian (350-404), Arcadius (377-408), Melania the Elder (341-410), Paphnutius of Scetis (312-412), Synesius (373-414), Eunapius (347-414), Hypatia of Alexandria (370-415), Euthymius (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-420), Eusebius (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-420), Amma Talis (320-420), Isaac of Scetis (350-420), Palladius of Galatia (363-425), Ambrosius Theodosius Macrobius (360-430), Plutarch (the Younger) (350-433), Gelasius of Cyzicus (420-475), Stobaeus (420-480), Proclus, Lycaeus (412-487), Moses of Chorene (400-490).

mountainman

Logical Implications of Eusebian Fictional "History"

There are at least five logical implications which any
researcher should expect to find in history in a case
like this. That is, the populace has been fed bullshit.

If the New Testament is a fabrication of the christians
and is a plain and simple fiction of men composed by wickedness
then what are the logical implications of this?

If the Bible is bullshit what happened?


First Implication of Historical Fiction
An Alternative History exists

The first implication of the postulate is that there must exist another theory of history with a far greater integrity for the period, and perhaps quite different than the theory of history presented by Eusebius. For the exercise, this is to be called "reality".

Second Implication of Historical Fiction
A Conjoin must exist between the fiction and the History

The second implication is that there must exist a point in time at which the historical fiction is conjoined with "reality". That is, the fictitious theory of history must have been physically inserted into "reality" at some stage, or point in time.

Third Implication of Historical Fiction
Fiction publication precedent date must be related to author of fiction

The third implication is that this point in time at which the historical fiction is conjoined with "reality" must necessarily be - at the earliest - either during, or after, the life of the author of the fiction. Academics agree that Eusebius the author completes his work at the earliest prior to the Council of Nicea, in 325 CE (with a number of revisions to his death c.339 CE, particularly following the death of the Boss 337 CE).

Fourth Implication of Historical Fiction
We may expect a massive social turbulence of controversy

The fourth implication of the postulate is that this point in "reality" at which the fiction was implemented, would necessarily be associated with possibly massive social turbulence. People would be bound to notice the change in their history books, and possibly overnight. The orthodoxy who pushed the fiction would be expected to downplay this controversy. The Arian controversy and heresy is here cited and analysed with a new perspective.

Fifth Implication of Historical Fiction - POLITICAL (Military) POWER
Lavish single minded Political power is behind this
Perhaps even military power like Ardashir c.222 CE
who created a new monotheistic state religion
based on a canonised Holy Set of Documents.

The fifth implication of the postulate is that because of the possibly massive social turbulence associated with the actual implementation of the fiction, a great degree of power would be needed to be brought to bear, by the party responsible for the implementation of the fiction. The supreme imperial commander of the Roman Empire, Constantine I, is cited and his involvement in the establishment of the Nicean Council, for the express purpose of containing the Arian controversy (heresy) is cited and detailed.