Two articles appear
below:
- Vardis Fisher and the
Testament of Man
- 1st Century
Christianity — Fisher
and Eddie Answered
VARDIS
FISHER and THE TESTAMENT OF MAN
Laurie
Eddie
(Investigator
165, 2015 November)
Few people today
will have heard of Vardis Alvero Fisher, (March 31, 1895 – July 9,
1968). An American, he was the author of a number of historical novels
set in the Old American West.
Particularly
moving was his novel, The Mothers, a harrowing, but extremely emotive
account of the Donner Party tragedy of 1846-47. This tragic event
occurred when members of a wagon-train heading for California, hoping
to find a shorter way, left the main route and became hopelessly
trapped in the snow-bound Sierra Nevada Mountains during winter. When
they ran out of food supplies they ate their horses, then, even the
leather harnesses were boiled to be eaten. Eventually, so desperate did
some become, they resorted to cannibalism. Of the eighty-seven who were
trapped only 48 survived.
Fisher is
probably best known for his epic twelve-volume series of novels, The
Testament of Man, (1943–1960), a fictional account of the development
of human societies, from Palaeolithic times through to the 20th
century. In preparation for the series he read more than 2,000 books on
anthropology, history, psychology, theology and comparative religion,
incorporating many aspects of these subjects into the subject matter of
these books.
Three of
the novels in this series, Jesus Came Again, A Goat for Azazel and
Peace Like a River, dealt with the early, formative years, of
Christianity, from its origins through to the era of the Christian
anchorites. In these, Fisher wove into his fictional depiction of the
lives of his various characters, factual details of the complex social
issues and the tensions that existed between the Romans, the Jews and
the gentile Christians during these times.
What was
unusual about these three books was that, at the end of each one, he
included a lengthy collection of quotations, from a wide selection of
scholars, relevant to the conditions in the eras which formed the
background of that particular novel. Set out under specific headings,
these quotations covered many of the social, political and religious
issues pertinent to the early years of the emerging Christian
faith.
Unfortunately,
only the surname and initials of the various authors quoted were
provided, none of the titles of the books, from which the quotations
had been obtained, were given.
Since the
lack of bibliographic details created a degree of uncertainty as to the
legitimacy of these quotations, this author set out to attempt to check
as many of the quotations as possible, in an attempt to determine the
veracity, or otherwise, of these quotations.
Using
Google, a number of books by the following authors were located ─ E.
Carpenter; C. Guignebert; P.S. Moxom; J.M. Robertson and W.R. Smith.
Referring to reproductions of the original books, many of the
quotations cited by Fisher were located and found to be true copies of
the originals. While this in itself is not proof that the remaining
unchecked quotations were similarly valid, it does suggest they too
were probably also accurate reproductions.
Born, and
raised in a strict Mormon family, in adulthood Fisher became
increasingly disillusioned with both Mormonism and Christianity.
Possibly reflecting this changed outlook, most of the quotations cited
in these three books questioned many of the commonly held beliefs about
the origins and evolution of early Christianity.
The
common image of the early Christian Church is that it developed in an
orderly, sequential manner, that the original teachings were passed on,
intact and unchanged, from Jesus to the disciples, to Paul, and then
finally, to the members of the developing Christian community. However,
the overwhelming tenor of the quotations cited by Fisher is that this
is a complete fallacy.
These
quotations suggest that the early years of the new faith were quite
chaotic, and that as each of the numerous sects sought to promote their
specific teachings, it produced a great deal of disharmony, infighting
and open conflict.
The new
faith, comprising Gentiles from many parts of the Roman Empire, appears
to have shaken off the original teachings of Jesus, the leadership of
the original disciples, and all other Jewish influences, replacing them
largely with their own unique interpretation of "Christianity."
Although
influenced by the teachings of Paul they were inclined to incorporate
many of their own former pagan beliefs into the new belief-system. The
result was that the faith which emerged was an amalgam, a diverse
collection of Aryan, Semitic, Greek and Egyptian religious concepts,
combined with many aspects of the various Eastern mystery cults.
Evidence
of the influence of mystery religions upon the early church comes from
the claim that the so-called 'Last Supper' was largely fictional, the
creation of later Gentile writers.
Certainly,
from a Jewish perspective, the gospel version of this event is
completely inconceivable. The very idea of drinking blood, even in a
symbolic sense, would have been completely abhorrent to any Jew. No
devout Jew would ever have used the terms "eat of my body and drink of
my blood." According to the quotations, the so-called Christian “last
Supper” was a mystery concept, originating with pagan cults such as
Mithraism, it was introduced into early Christianity by early converts.
The early
Christian Church was heavily influenced by Greek philosophical
concepts; some Church Fathers, such as Origen, even sought to
demonstrate a relationship between the earlier philosophical ideals and
the new religion. The basis of this point-of-view perhaps comes
from the fact that many of the doctrines and teachings of Paul reflect
Stoic and Gnostic influences; thus, the Christian concept of the
brotherhood of men was a basic teaching of the Stoics, the concept of a
transcendental atoning deliverer, the Christos, came from Gnosticism
and the mystery religions, while the dualistic concept of a battle
between good and evil, against the, “… spiritual hosts of wickedness in
the heavenly places” (Ephesians 6:12) was a Persian-Gnostic concept.
As Lake
indicated, "The ethics of the Stoics were almost wholly adopted by the
leaders of Christian thought,”. Latourette too noted that, "stoicism
affected Christianity through a number of channels. Some modern
scholars ascribe to it a substantial part in shaping Christianity."
Jewish
students were exposed to a range of Greek philosophical ideas as part
of their general education. Paul must have been aware of these
philosophic teachings since Tarsus, where he grew up, was a major
centre of Stoicism and Gnosticism. Furthermore, as a Jewish scholar, he
would have been exposed to the common Jewish debating practice whereby
students were expected to know every possible argument that their
opposition might use. It was commonly said that, when debating, Jewish
scholars should be able to argue one-hundred points in favour of their
argument and one-hundred points against.
The
gospel writers were obviously aware of other Greek philosophical
concepts; the notion of the Logos, which features so prominently in the
Gospel of John, was a Platonic and Stoic conception. A "divine"
animating force, it was believed by the Greeks to be the governing
principle of the entire Cosmos. Adopted into Jewish philosophical
thought by Philo (circa 20 BCE - AD 50), the Gospel of John goes on
to identify the Logos as an actual divine principle, rather than
an abstract concept, and names Jesus as the incarnation of this notion.
Many of
the quotations suggest the majority of the early Christians were from
the lower classes; they were generally perceived as being ignorant and
largely uneducated. They already believed in such incredulous ideas as
“virgin births,” where human females were impregnated by divine-beings
to produce semi-divine children, celestial omens proclaiming the birth
of divine beings, sages with miraculous healing powers, even able to
raise the dead, the result was that these, and many other extremely
fanciful pagan ideas, were unquestioningly, incorporated, into
Christianity.
In their
extreme naivety early Christians put forward the most incredulous
concepts, however spurious, to support their various beliefs. As
Trachtenberg noted, in arguing the validity of the resurrection of
Jesus, the Church Fathers offered as proof of this, the "fact" that the
Phoenix too, was also regularly resurrected.
The early
Christians lived in a fantasy world, expecting Jesus to return at any
moment, and to sweep aside the current world political order. As Gibbon
observed, they were, "... animated by a contempt for their present
existence." adopting an attitude of indifference towards politics and
the realities of life.
It also
appears that, from the earliest times Christians perceived themselves
as "an elect." For them Christianity was the only "true religion" and
they were extremely intolerant of all “non-believers,” (including those
Christians whose beliefs differed from their own), who they believed
were all doomed to eternal damnation.
Such
opinions would not have been a problem if they had kept them to
themselves, unfortunately, they openly proclaimed these beliefs, not
only to the pagans they came into contact with in their daily life, but
also to Christians of other sects, haranguing them to “convert or be
doomed.” It was said that one could not shop in the markets or bazaars
without being confronted by at least one shop-keeper demanding to know
your religious beliefs, and seeking to convert you if you were a pagan.
This behaviour created a great deal of animosity, not only amongst
their pagan neighbours, but also amongst members of the many other
sects.
The early
Christians were especially harsh towards the Jews who they demonized as
those most responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus. Ignoring the fact
that Christianity was a direct offshoot of Judaism, the Gentile
Christians, believing they were truly god's elect, considered it
necessary to do everything possible to denigrate the Jews, and their
belief they were god's chosen people.
The
various authors point out that both the Jews and Christians used
allegory in much the same way as the Greeks had rationalized the
Homeric tales of Zeus. According to Harnack, without allegorizing a
great deal of the Jewish text, "the Old Testament would have been
unacceptable to Christians." Furthermore, by using this approach,
Christians were able to "discover" passages in the Old Testament which
they perceived as being not only relevant to the life of Jesus, but
also outlined his destiny upon earth.
Despite
the opposition of the Jewish Rabbis the early Christian scholars were
determined to "Christianize" the Old Testament, to fit it to their own
beliefs. Uncritically the Church leaders "reinforced" what they
presented as the basic truths of Christian teachings; as Moody
observed: “... the Church was able to ... read into it whatsoever she
judged to be 'spiritual' truth."
The
existence of the twelve apostles is queried; the number "twelve"
appears to be symbolic, rather than an actual number, much like that
found in Mithraic tradition. Furthermore, there is some degree of
uncertainty as to the actual names of the disciples; these varied
according to local church traditions and Loisy suggests that, far from
being chosen by Jesus, they were more likely the individuals chosen by
the first community of believers to manage the affairs of the group.
The quotations
indicate that, on the subject of baptism, there is a great deal of
uncertainty. It is pointed out that, despite being baptized himself,
Jesus never promoted the practice in his teachings. Indeed, many early
Christians objected to this ritual, arguing that none of the disciples
had ever been baptized. Typical of the naive rationale of early Church
Fathers, Tertullian argued the disciples had actually undergone a form
of de-facto baptism, "... they were sprinkled when the spray dashed
over the boat, and Peter was immersed when he tried to walk on the
waves."
Baptism
was a common rite of transformation into mystery cults and other pagan
Salvationist religions; total immersion in water was a common ritual
form of entry into the worship of Isis and Mithra. The ritual signified
the death of the old, and the creation of a new individual, who, like
the deity, as they emerge from the water, were reborn to a new life.
Replicating this pagan idea, the Christian initiate would “wash away”
the old self, to ensure that, in their “reborn” form, they could gain
eternal salvation in the company of Jesus.
The
quotations clearly indicate that Jesus never set out to establish a new
religion. On the contrary, he was a devout Jew, and his primary
intention appears to have been to act as a Jewish herald, proclaiming
the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God, and warning his fellow Jews
to prepare for this event.
With regards to
the miraculous aspects of the life of Jesus, it is clearly pointed out,
most of his so-called “miraculous abilities,” were already commonly
attributed to other pagan deities. Indeed, it is impossible to find one
supernatural quality attributed to Jesus that had not been previously
ascribed to other pagan deities. Some scholars, e.g. Loisy, while
accepting the historical existence of Jesus, totally reject the claimed
miraculous aspects of his life.
Some of
the other concepts, referred to in the various quotations, which were
taken from other religious sources, were: -
•
The Christian concept of "sin" cannot be fully understood without
an appreciation of the Jewish teachings on this subject, while the
connection of the physical body with sin was a Gnostic concept;
•
The concept of the Incarnation was Indian;
•
The concept of angels, demons and a divine Mediator was Persian;
•
The concept of rebirth was both Chinese and Eleusinian;
•
The concept of the Trinity was common in many ancient religions,
including the Egyptian;
•
The concepts of a virgin birth was a common belief in many
religions including Chinese, Egyptian, Greek Indian, Roman and Persian.
REFERENCES:
Carpenter,
Edward. Pagan and Christian Creeds, Their Origin and Meaning.
Whitefish, Montana: Kessinger Publications,1992.
Fisher, Vardis.
A Goat For Azazel. New York: Pyramid Books, 1956.
Fisher, Vardis.
Jesus Came Again. New York: Pyramid Books, 1956.
Fisher, Vardis,
Peace Like A River. New York: Pyramid Books, 1957.
Guignebert,
Charles, Jesus. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd.,
1935.
Moxom, Philip
Stafford. From Jerusalem To Nicaea: The Church In The First Three
Centuries, Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1896.
Robertson, John
M. Christianity and Mythology. London: Watts & Co. 1910.
Robertson, John
M. Pagan Christs, Studies in Comparative Hierology. London: Watts &
Co. 1911.
Smith, William
Robertson, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites, Fundamental
Institutions. London: Adam & Charles Black, 1889.
1st CENTURY CHRISTIANITY
FISHER
AND EDDIE ANSWERED
Anonymous
(Investigator
165, 2016 January)
INTRODUCTION
Based on the
work of novel writer Vardis Fisher (1895-1968) and the people Fisher
quotes from, Mr Eddie (Investigator #165) says:
These quotations
suggest that the early years of the new [Christian] faith were quite
chaotic, and that as each of the numerous sects sought to promote their
specific teachings, it produced a great deal of disharmony, in fighting
and open conflict…
The
new faith, comprising Gentiles from many parts of the Roman Empire,
appears to have shaken off the original teachings of Jesus, the
leadership of the original disciples, and all other Jewish influences,
replacing them largely with their own unique interpretation.
Whatever
Fisher's quotations may say the fact is that the main guide to 1st
century Christian history is the New Testament itself, supplemented by
2nd century Christian writers.
1ST
CENTURY CHRISTIANITY
Was Christianity
"quite chaotic" with almost everything "shaken off" or was there a
continuum with progressive increase in details?
Jesus' life,
ministry and teaching were general knowledge when Christianity started.
(Luke 1:1-4) Jesus did not teach everything Christians later believed
but laid the doctrinal foundation upon which the Apostles built.
Doctrinal development was progressive rather than chaotic. The New
Testament accepts the Old Testament as "inspired of god" and shows
clear progress in applying the Old Testament to the Christian
situation.
In my article
"The New Testament Canon" (Investigator 127), I summarized the
quotations taken by second-century "church fathers" from the New
Testament. The 2nd-century authors include:
•
Ignatius (35-197), Bishop of Antioch;
•
Clement (wrote around c.100), fourth Bishop of Rome;
•
Papias (60-130), Bishop of Hierapolis;
•
Polycarp (69-166), Bishop of Smyna;
•
Tatian (b. 120), Christian convert and apologist.
Not mentioned in
#127 but worthy of inclusion is Justyn Martyr (100-165) a convert from
paganism.
The New
Testament and the 2nd century writers who quote it as their authority
placed a limit on the official beliefs of Christianity.
CHAOS
OR CONTINUITY?
The "chaotic"
aspects that Eddie seems to see are the following:
1.
Some people aimed to exploit Christian congregations for personal
gain;
2.
Some converts adopted Christian beliefs but then became
subversive by advocating other beliefs;
3.
Some Christians were not up-to-date due to living in isolation
from the mainstream;
4.
Some Christians deserted the faith completely.
However, all
such divisiveness is compatible with the existence of an official
mainstream.
Jesus himself in
the parable of the wheat and weeds foretold that his genuine disciples
and imitations would mix and even be indistinguishable. (Matthew
13:24-30)
Some of the
issues and disputes can be read in:
•
Acts 8:9-23; 15:1-2; 20:29-31;
•
I Corinthians 1:10
•
II Corinthians 6:14-18; 11:3-4, 13-15, 27
•
Galatians 2:1-4; 11-14
•
II Thessalonians 2:1-12; 3:6
•
II Timothy 2:17-18
•
Jude 1-25
•
Revelation 2:6, 15
That not all was
"chaotic" is seen by the existence of doctrine and beliefs regarded as
"accurate". The evangelist Apollos, for example, needed to catch up but
was otherwise "accurate":
Meanwhile a Jew
named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a
learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. He had been
instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervour and
taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John.
He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila
heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way
of God more adequately. (Acts 18:24-26)
Continuity and
stability is also seen in that some of the earliest disciples were
still alive decades later including Philip the evangelist (Acts 6:5;
21:8-9, 16-17), Luke, John, Peter, Paul and others. Some congregations
also had periods of peace (Acts 9:31) when teachings could be
consolidated.
SHAKEN
OFF?
Eddie says: "The
new faith, comprising Gentiles from many parts of the Roman Empire,
appears to have shaken off the original teachings of Jesus, the
leadership of the original disciples, and all other Jewish influences,
replacing them largely with their own unique interpretation."
Rather than
everyone having "shaken off" almost everything the 1st-century story is
one of steady progress in applying the Old Testament and teachings of
Jesus to the Church.
What Eddie calls
"chaotic" was due to dissenters and "false brethren" along with
opposition from established belief systems. In that sense the
development and growth of every new group — including the skeptics whom
Eddie promotes — experienced "chaotic conditions". Consider any
large-scale endeavour — perhaps the development of cars, computers,
democracy, or the educational system. In all these we see steady
development but also controversy, alternative methods, splinter groups,
and many dead-ends.
Jude, one of the
last New Testament writings to be written, reveals that Christianity
was facing corruption from within:
I find it
necessary to write and appeal to you to contend for the faith that was
once for all entrusted to the saints. For certain intruders have stolen
in among you … who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and
deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ. (Verses 3-4)
Second-Century
Christian writers refer extensively to the New Testament as their
authority — showing it had not been "shaken off".
In short, while
the Apostles and their immediate successors lived, the faith was
relatively united. It had official explanations of how Jesus and
Christianity were predicted in the Old Testament; its Gentile converts
discarded Greek and Roman idolatry; and it had a system of ethics and
morals that shamed the larger society. (I Peter 4:4)
LAST
SUPPER
Eddie claims the
"Last Supper" was introduced from pagan cults such as Mithraism. To
check this we go to the "textual critics" who compared all ancient
Bible manuscripts and fragments to determine what the original said.
The Englishman's Greek Concordance
of the New Testament lists thousands
of "various readings" and shows that the "Last Supper" is not in doubt.
The Last Supper is also mentioned by Justin Martyr (100-165).
If some
Christians later added elements from Mithraism to their "last Supper"
ritual, that does not affect the truth of the New Testament. The
process of adding to the Bible or substituting or ignoring it, goes on
even today in pseudo-Christian cults. Justin Martyr argued:
Now it is
evident, that in this prophecy [allusion is made] to the bread which
our Christ gave us to eat, in remembrance of His being made flesh for
the sake of His believers, for whom also He suffered; and to the cup
which He gave us to drink, in remembrance of His own blood, with giving
of thanks. And this prophecy proves that we shall behold this very King
with glory; and the very terms of the prophecy declare loudly, that the
people foreknown to believe in Him were fore-known to pursue diligently
the fear of the Lord. Moreover, these Scriptures are equally explicit
in saying, that those who are reputed to know the writings of the
Scriptures, and who hear the prophecies, have no understanding. And
when I hear … that Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that
the deceiving serpent counterfeited also this. (Dialogue with Trypho)
OBJECTIONS
ANSWERED
Eddie claims
that: "the Christian concept of the brotherhood of men was a basic
teaching of the Stoics, the concept of a transcendental atoning
deliverer, the Christos, came from Gnosticism … while the dualistic
concept of a battle between good and evil … was a Persian-Gnostic
concept."
A few general
ideas in common, in the absence of specific quotes from specific
sources, do not prove plagiarism or indicate origins. Paul routinely
cites the Old Testament as his reference — i.e. the Old Testament is
Paul's "specific source", never Gnostics or Stoics.
The
"brotherhood" of Christianity follows from the Old Testament teaching
of God as "father" and the New Testament teaching that Christians are
"brothers of Christ". The "atoning deliverer" was foretold in the Old
Testament e.g. Isaiah 53.
And the "concept
of a battle between good and evil" probably reached Persia via Israel's
"Ten Lost Tribes" exiled around 700 BCE to Mesopotamia and border areas
of Persia.
Archaeology has
shown that some exiled Israelites became officials, scribes and
priests. Zoroastrianism with its "dualistic concept" was founded about
150 years later. (See debate with Dr Potter in #121-#123; also "The
Devil, The Ten Lost Tribes and Zoroaster in #155)
Is "logos" in
John's Gospel a "Greek philosophical concept", a "divine animating"
force?
In John's Gospel
"logos" refers to Jesus as the "Word of God" — i.e. God's words
personified in Jesus. We see this because Jesus said:
- My teaching is not
mine but his who sent me. (John 7:16)
- I do nothing on my
own, but I speak these things as the father instructed me. (John 8:28)
- …the Father who sent
me has himself given me a commandment about what to say and what to
speak… What I speak, therefore, I speak just as the Father has told me.
(John 12:49-50)
- The words that I say
to you I do not speak on my own; but the Father who dwells in me does
the work. (John 14:10)
- … for the words that
you [God the Father] gave me I have given to them… (17:8)
The
Greek word
"logos" in the New Testament therefore does not imply that Christians
held to mystical beliefs of Greek philosophers. The preceding quotes
show what Christians held and there is no mention of Greece or Greeks.
"Logos" occurs with its common meaning about 50 times in John's Gospel
and 350 times in the New Testament, and not in restricted senses
employed by Greek philosophers.
Eddie attributes
virgin birth, resurrection, "celestial omens proclaiming the birth of
divine beings", and miraculous healing to "fanciful pagan ideas". Again
no New Testament passage quotes "pagan ideas" but the Old Testament is
routinely quoted.
Eddie considers
the number "12" in the 12 Apostles to be symbolic and points to some
apostles having multiple names. However, such an argument would make Mr
Eddie himself non-existent and symbolic because he is variously
referred to as "Mr Eddie", "Eddie" and "Laurie". The 12 Apostles are
all named including alternative names, and when one apostle dropped out
he was replaced to retain the total at 12. (Acts 1)
Eddie says "The
concept of angels, demons and a divine mediator was Persian." That was
discussed in #121-122 with Dr Potter where I cited the Britannica
Macropaedia: "The debt of Israel to its eastern neighbours in religious
matters is easy to demonstrate on a few precise points of minor
importance but less so in other more important points such as dualism,
angelology, and eschatology."
Angels,
according to the Bible, appeared to Abraham, which was about 2000 years
before Zoroastrianism became the official religion of Persia/Parthia.
And since those angels were said to deliver messages they were also
"divine mediators". The virgin birth of someone who would destroy the
devil is implied in Genesis 3:15 and communicated to the first humans.
Historically the origin of such an idea and how it spread is unknown.
Mr Eddie goes on
to mention Christian bigotry, intolerance and stupidity. However, his
comments refer to the 2nd or 3rd century or later when the New
Testament predictions of false prophets, antichrists, and imposters had
become facts of life.
Nevertheless, I
wonder whether the "extreme naivety" of the Church Fathers in offering
the regular resurrection of the Phoenix as an argument for Jesus'
resurrection is misrepresented. Perhaps their argument was that pagans
were inconsistent in believing in a recurring resurrection while
denying Jesus' one-off resurrection.
MY
AGENDA
What I do is
research the accuracy of the Bible to satisfy people who say, "Prove
the Bible and I'll believe it." My method is to consult scientific
literature to examine whatever in the Bible is testable. This method
has confirmed hundreds of biblical claims as truthful.
To oppose these
results by citing superficial similarities between the Old Testament
and China (or Persia, Egypt, India, Greece, etc) is a dubious response
because lists of resemblances establish nothing about the significance
or origins of the resemblances.
REFERENCES:
Livingstone,
E.A. 1977 The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, Oxford
University Press
Younger, Jr., K.
Lawson Israelites in Exile, Biblical Archaeology Review, Nov/Dec, 2003.
www.earlychristianwritings.com/justin.html
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Phoenix_(mythology)