In my browsing of many 'pagan' blogs, pages, groups, websites, and videos, I have to deal with a lot of historical misinformation being branded about. Some of the more entertaining ones I've decided to list here:
- 'Genocide of the Mother Goddess worshipers'
Ancient people apparently were peaceful worshipers of a Mother Goddess, until they were destroyed by violent followers of male gods. Only trouble is that there is no evidence of this, and Mother Goddess worship continues to be an important part of many religions which have male gods. Most common source for this myth seems to be fictional fantasy novels dealing with King Arthur's Celtic Britain in some variation. Also, to simply brand the male gods as being violent warriors or 'sky tyrants' as they're often described is also a gross oversimplification. Certainly El, Anu, Brahma, Hermes, and a few others wouldn't fit this description at all. Proponents of this theory also like to deal with pseudofeminism and sexism a lot.
- '"The Church says the Earth is flat, but I have seen enough fake and falsely attributed quotes on the Internet to know that this is one of them"-- Magellan'
This 100% legitimate quote ("The Church says that the Earth is flat, but I know that it is round. For I have seen the shadow of the earth on the moon and I have more faith in the Shadow than in the Church") was famously said by Magellan, who doubted the Church's dogmatic teaching that the Earth was flat. This happened during the Dark Ages, when the evil Christians suppressed all scientific learning that the pagans had discovered. Magellan, like all educated people, saw Christianity for the lie that it really is. Except that he didn't.
It comes as something of a shock to many people to note that no major Christian sect has *ever* taught that the Earth was flat, even in the so-called 'Dark Ages'. So Magellan certainly never said this quote at all. In fact, the whole thing was literally made up on the spot. Note that when I pointed out this error in a page where I saw it posted, I was promptly told to "shut up" because I was apparently "missing the point".
- 'The Normans who invaded England were Indian Hindus, and Westminster Abbey was a Shiva temple'
This theory was put forward by prominent historians of Vedic civilization who have asserted that the Sri Shiva Nataraja Temple (otherwise known as Westminster Abbey) in London, which was famously in the hands of England's Norman kings, was a shining bastion of ancient Vedic civilization and the Hindu religion in Medieval England. The Normans, like the Romans before them, were indeed Indian Hindus. Apparently.
Related to this theory is the theory that the Ka'aba in Makkah was a Shiva temple owing to Arabia being a part of the Indus Valley. Erm... Arabia being a different culture to that of the Vedic Indians. While I don't deny the similarities, to state that Makkah is located in the Indus Valley is a gross misrepresentation of geography. These theories are based on ethnocentrism and cultural chauvinism. And while we're on the subject...
- 'Phoenicia was a Mycenaean Greek colony, as was Egypt'
Apparently, Phoenicia and Egypt were both 'colonies' of the Mycenaean Greeks from the Aegean in the Bronze Age. How do we know this? Well, because 'Aigyptos is a masculine Hellenic name' of course. I don't think that this one requires too much explaining to anyone with even a basic knowledge of history.
- Jesus- the fictional sun god, invented by the Romans to control the Jews
This theory is based largely around the 'documentary' movie Zeitgeist which tends to circulate the Internet around the time of year just gone by (the Christmas period). Nor is this one limited to 'pagans' either, for I could tell you of the atheists who have told me to watch this amazing 'documentary' with an open mind, because it 'disproves God's existence' and you'd have to be 'an idiot' to doubt its claims.
Gaze upon the chart above, and see for yourself the damning proof that God is not real, that Jesus never walked the earth, and that Christianity itself is a lie invented to control the gullible masses by the Roman government, based on the myth of several older gods. Nor is this limited to Horus either. Indeed, let us take a brief look at all of the following religious figures: Buddha, Krishna, Osiris/Serapis, Gilgamesh, Adonis, Zoroaster, Mithras, Baal, Dionysos, Orpheus... What do all of them have in common? All of them were born on December 25th, visited by three kings, preached in the temple, were baptized in a river, had 12 disciples, were crucified, ascended from the dead after three days, were called 'the Lamb of God' and 'the Christ' by their followers, and had the crucifix as their holy symbol.
Really now? It's our own mythology. I can affirm that most of this simply isn't true. On top of that, things like December 25th and the three kings aren't even in the Gospels! This is especially true of the supposed Hindu/Buddhist parallels. What version of Hinduism or Buddhism have these people been reading up on? There are hardly any parallels between the Gospels and the myths or stories of any of these gods or prophets, aside from extremely superficial ones such as a triumph of good over evil. I for one can't seem to recall the scene in one of the Gospels where Jesus is killed by Satan and has his body scattered all over Judah and thrown into the River Jordan. Now, that's not to say of course that Jesus may have become syncretized with some of these gods at certain points in time. But I think we pagans understand very well that syncretism does not equate to one god 'ripping off' another.
So was Jesus a real person? According to most historians, yes. And I agree with them. Where is the evidence? Well, Jesus is talked about by many Christian historians, but also pagan and Jewish ones as well. Many of them were opponents of Christianity, but none of them questions Jesus' existence. Celsus, Melek Porphyrios, Emperor Julian the Blessed... all of these considered Jesus to be a real person. Not one of them claims that he was a 'rip-off of Horus' created by the Romans to control the Jews through fear and guilt- despite being pagans themselves.
And this is not even counting the mention of Jesus by Tacitus: "Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christ, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judah, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind". And again by Josephus: "And now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judah, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus... Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned". In addition to this we have the fact that Paul also records speaking to Peter, who was one of Jesus' most trusted disciples.
The fact remains that the conspiracy theories simply have no reason to be believed. Why should we believe that Jesus was made up by the government to control people based on myths of other gods, aside from our biases against Christianity?
- 'Hypatia, a martyr of reason'
We often hear that Hypatia, a Greek Neoplatonist philosopher of the Academy of Alexandria in Egypt, was killed by 'the Christians' because they feared knowledge and learning, and so labelled her a witch.
Contrary to this, however, we have no evidence of any contemporary Christians associating knowledge or education with witchcraft. Rather, Hypatia was caught up in a bitter political struggle between two powerful figures: Governor Orestes and Bishop Cyril.
Here we have the events described by a Christian writer, Socrates Scholasticus:
"There was a woman at Alexandria named Hypatia, daughter of the philosopher Theon, who made such attainments in literature and science, as to far surpass all the philosophers of her own time. Having succeeded to the school of Plato and Plotinus, she explained the principles of philosophy to her auditors, many of whom came from a distance to receive her instructions.
On account of the self-possession and ease of manner, which she had acquired in consequence of the cultivation of her mind, she not unfrequently appeared in public in presence of the magistrates. Neither did she feel abashed in coming to an assembly of men. For all men on account of her extraordinary dignity and virtue admired her the more. Yet even she fell a victim to the political jealousy which at that time prevailed. For as she had frequent interviews with Orestes, it was calumniously reported among the Christian populace, that it was she who prevented Orestes from being reconciled to the bishop. Some of them therefore, hurried away by a fierce and bigoted zeal, whose ringleader was a reader named Peter, waylaid her returning home, and dragging her from her carriage, they took her to the church called Caesareum, where they completely stripped her, and then murdered her with tiles. After tearing her body in pieces, they took her mangled limbs to a place called Cinaron, and there burnt them. This affair brought not the least opprobrium, not only upon Cyril, but also upon the whole Alexandrian church. And surely nothing can be farther from the spirit of Christianity than the allowance of massacres, fights, and transactions of that sort. This happened in the month of March during Lent, in the fourth year of Cyril's episcopate, under the tenth consulate of Honorius, and the sixth of Theodosius."
- 'Genocide of the Mother Goddess worshipers'
Ancient people apparently were peaceful worshipers of a Mother Goddess, until they were destroyed by violent followers of male gods. Only trouble is that there is no evidence of this, and Mother Goddess worship continues to be an important part of many religions which have male gods. Most common source for this myth seems to be fictional fantasy novels dealing with King Arthur's Celtic Britain in some variation. Also, to simply brand the male gods as being violent warriors or 'sky tyrants' as they're often described is also a gross oversimplification. Certainly El, Anu, Brahma, Hermes, and a few others wouldn't fit this description at all. Proponents of this theory also like to deal with pseudofeminism and sexism a lot.
- '"The Church says the Earth is flat, but I have seen enough fake and falsely attributed quotes on the Internet to know that this is one of them"-- Magellan'
This 100% legitimate quote ("The Church says that the Earth is flat, but I know that it is round. For I have seen the shadow of the earth on the moon and I have more faith in the Shadow than in the Church") was famously said by Magellan, who doubted the Church's dogmatic teaching that the Earth was flat. This happened during the Dark Ages, when the evil Christians suppressed all scientific learning that the pagans had discovered. Magellan, like all educated people, saw Christianity for the lie that it really is. Except that he didn't.
It comes as something of a shock to many people to note that no major Christian sect has *ever* taught that the Earth was flat, even in the so-called 'Dark Ages'. So Magellan certainly never said this quote at all. In fact, the whole thing was literally made up on the spot. Note that when I pointed out this error in a page where I saw it posted, I was promptly told to "shut up" because I was apparently "missing the point".
 |
| Magellan's truthful quote, which was really said by him- a bastion of reason in an age of superstition |
This theory was put forward by prominent historians of Vedic civilization who have asserted that the Sri Shiva Nataraja Temple (otherwise known as Westminster Abbey) in London, which was famously in the hands of England's Norman kings, was a shining bastion of ancient Vedic civilization and the Hindu religion in Medieval England. The Normans, like the Romans before them, were indeed Indian Hindus. Apparently.
 |
| King William I of England, a great Shaivite Maharaja in Christendom |
Related to this theory is the theory that the Ka'aba in Makkah was a Shiva temple owing to Arabia being a part of the Indus Valley. Erm... Arabia being a different culture to that of the Vedic Indians. While I don't deny the similarities, to state that Makkah is located in the Indus Valley is a gross misrepresentation of geography. These theories are based on ethnocentrism and cultural chauvinism. And while we're on the subject...
- 'Phoenicia was a Mycenaean Greek colony, as was Egypt'
Apparently, Phoenicia and Egypt were both 'colonies' of the Mycenaean Greeks from the Aegean in the Bronze Age. How do we know this? Well, because 'Aigyptos is a masculine Hellenic name' of course. I don't think that this one requires too much explaining to anyone with even a basic knowledge of history.
- Jesus- the fictional sun god, invented by the Romans to control the Jews
This theory is based largely around the 'documentary' movie Zeitgeist which tends to circulate the Internet around the time of year just gone by (the Christmas period). Nor is this one limited to 'pagans' either, for I could tell you of the atheists who have told me to watch this amazing 'documentary' with an open mind, because it 'disproves God's existence' and you'd have to be 'an idiot' to doubt its claims.
 |
| The evidence itself, as collected by prominent historians- all of whom know the truth which Christianity has tried to keep suppressed for so long |
Really now? It's our own mythology. I can affirm that most of this simply isn't true. On top of that, things like December 25th and the three kings aren't even in the Gospels! This is especially true of the supposed Hindu/Buddhist parallels. What version of Hinduism or Buddhism have these people been reading up on? There are hardly any parallels between the Gospels and the myths or stories of any of these gods or prophets, aside from extremely superficial ones such as a triumph of good over evil. I for one can't seem to recall the scene in one of the Gospels where Jesus is killed by Satan and has his body scattered all over Judah and thrown into the River Jordan. Now, that's not to say of course that Jesus may have become syncretized with some of these gods at certain points in time. But I think we pagans understand very well that syncretism does not equate to one god 'ripping off' another.
So was Jesus a real person? According to most historians, yes. And I agree with them. Where is the evidence? Well, Jesus is talked about by many Christian historians, but also pagan and Jewish ones as well. Many of them were opponents of Christianity, but none of them questions Jesus' existence. Celsus, Melek Porphyrios, Emperor Julian the Blessed... all of these considered Jesus to be a real person. Not one of them claims that he was a 'rip-off of Horus' created by the Romans to control the Jews through fear and guilt- despite being pagans themselves.
And this is not even counting the mention of Jesus by Tacitus: "Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christ, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judah, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind". And again by Josephus: "And now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judah, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus... Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned". In addition to this we have the fact that Paul also records speaking to Peter, who was one of Jesus' most trusted disciples.
The fact remains that the conspiracy theories simply have no reason to be believed. Why should we believe that Jesus was made up by the government to control people based on myths of other gods, aside from our biases against Christianity?
- 'Hypatia, a martyr of reason'
We often hear that Hypatia, a Greek Neoplatonist philosopher of the Academy of Alexandria in Egypt, was killed by 'the Christians' because they feared knowledge and learning, and so labelled her a witch.
Contrary to this, however, we have no evidence of any contemporary Christians associating knowledge or education with witchcraft. Rather, Hypatia was caught up in a bitter political struggle between two powerful figures: Governor Orestes and Bishop Cyril.
Here we have the events described by a Christian writer, Socrates Scholasticus:
"There was a woman at Alexandria named Hypatia, daughter of the philosopher Theon, who made such attainments in literature and science, as to far surpass all the philosophers of her own time. Having succeeded to the school of Plato and Plotinus, she explained the principles of philosophy to her auditors, many of whom came from a distance to receive her instructions.
On account of the self-possession and ease of manner, which she had acquired in consequence of the cultivation of her mind, she not unfrequently appeared in public in presence of the magistrates. Neither did she feel abashed in coming to an assembly of men. For all men on account of her extraordinary dignity and virtue admired her the more. Yet even she fell a victim to the political jealousy which at that time prevailed. For as she had frequent interviews with Orestes, it was calumniously reported among the Christian populace, that it was she who prevented Orestes from being reconciled to the bishop. Some of them therefore, hurried away by a fierce and bigoted zeal, whose ringleader was a reader named Peter, waylaid her returning home, and dragging her from her carriage, they took her to the church called Caesareum, where they completely stripped her, and then murdered her with tiles. After tearing her body in pieces, they took her mangled limbs to a place called Cinaron, and there burnt them. This affair brought not the least opprobrium, not only upon Cyril, but also upon the whole Alexandrian church. And surely nothing can be farther from the spirit of Christianity than the allowance of massacres, fights, and transactions of that sort. This happened in the month of March during Lent, in the fourth year of Cyril's episcopate, under the tenth consulate of Honorius, and the sixth of Theodosius."
No comments:
Post a Comment