Brou’ha ha on “The Da Vinci Code”

SR:

Thanks for your informative feedback. Religions are creation of human imagination. That is the reason that there are so many internal conflicts in them. The element of divinity iinjected in the religions has sealed the orthodox mind. Any criticism of religion is considered blasphemous and hence punishable by death.

Christianity, after a long history of tyranny, has lost its tyraannical powers. Consequently, its followers have undertaken research for self analysis and self criticism.

They have started questioning why only four gospels have been included in the New Testament; why not others? Other gospels have been discovered and published which show varying viewpoints and facts from those of the cannonical gospels. At present, I am reading the gospel of Mary Magdalene. She probaby was the wife of Jesus Christ. If it`s true, the concept of Christ`s celibacy goes out of the window. The concept of Son of God is also on the anvil of research and criticism. In spite of all this, people will always believe in divine religions because faith in `divine` fulfills the human need for spirituality, which is okay. The persecution and discrimination on religious grounds should however not be allowed. Wishing you well,

Mohammad Gill

Gill sahib,

Thanks for your efforts. Though I am late reading this debate, I`m glad you`ve brought it up. Interesting subject, this one: theological history. Though I agree with those who consider Brown`s book a cheap thriller (liked the ``remix`` analogy that someone gave, except that many of the remixes are actually improvements on the original songs, but that`s another issue)...

I`m glad you cleared the commonly held (mistaken) view among many Muslims that Paul was a couple of centuries after Jesus. It is noteworthy that the teachings of Jesus were also, originally, written down within a couple of decades of his crucifixition, as were, I might add, the teachings of Muhammad within a couple of decades of his death. The confusion probably arises from the fact that none of those very early written records survive today. The earliest manuscripts of the gospels and the letters that survive today are from the second and the third century. These surviving manuscripts are copies of the originals that later got lost. This is now known because after the the church establishment lost its political clout, the European scholars were able to dig deep and bring such details to light. Unfortunately, the Muslim world has not reached that level of political stability where the earlier manuscripts can be publicly discussed. In order to get there we shall first have to ``de-mystify`` scripture.

It would be very instructive, for instance, to read the minutes of the committee meetings (assuming such records were kept somewhere) chaired by Mirwan, in Usman`s reign, wherein the ``authentic`` portions of the Quran were compiled together in ``complete`` form. That was the nearest equivalent to the First Council of Niece in Islam. But no one talks about these things in the Muslim world. It is my understanding that some old Quranic manuscripts -- actually three rival versions -- are preserved, inaccessibly, in the archives of the Al-Ahraam in Egypt. I hope they come to light and are fully studied and examined. That would be the nearest equivalent to the Dead Sea scrolls of Islam.

The Arian controversey was the culmination of a couple of centuries of proliferation of rival views that sprang forth from the ``mystery of Golgotha``... According to Wil Durant, Jesus was probably alive (but unconscious) when removed from the cross by roman centurians. Obviously they must be under Pontus Pilate`s prders. It follows therefore that he later escaped, perhaps with Roman help. From Pontus Pilate`s point of view it would make sense. Appease both sides. The Temple priests were appeased by crucifying the renegade Jew from Bethelham... and his followers were passified by letting his escape. Those few intimate ones who were in the know, connived to spread the myth that he has ``risen``... Mirza sahib of Qadian took it a step further and ended up with him in Kashmir. Personally, I love the idea, though no one can really know what actually happened. However, the cross-polination of ideas that was going on in those days between the ancient cultures` myths and the newer myths, uggests that there was a lot of ``ideological traffic`` between India, Persia and Rome. Judea was just a Roman province at the cross roads of this ``traffic``...

In 255 BC, for instance, after the Third Buddhist council, Ashoke the great sent wave after wave of Buddhist monks to the known empires of the day. Damascus supposedly had a lsizable Buddhist mission as did Alexanderia. I have often wondered, if Paul`s three year disappearance in Damascus somehow coincided with him coming in contact with the Buddhists?

Coming back to c. 300s AD, the evolution of theology worked in jerky steps, back and forth. After the Edict of Milan (313 AD) and the ``Gift of Constantine`` (where churches were exempted from taxation) the church establishment gathered a lot of power and became an important instrument of the state. Constantine`s only interest was in achieveing unanimity of doctrine so as not to risk political instability in his newly re-unified empire. Arius lost the vote and Athanasius won (Bishop Alexander was already dead by the time the council was convened)... but not for long. In 335 when Constantine died and his son`s started a succession war, the ultimate victor was Constantius. It just so happens that Constantius was an Arian and during his almost three decades reign the Arian doctrine was not heresy but was the official creed. God the Father was the creator, and thus superior to God the Son... etc.

It is noteworthy that in the year 342-343 AD more christians killed other christians than the Romans had killed in the preceding three hundred years. All this killing took place because of the stupid dispute over whether God the Father and God the Son were consubstantial and co-eternal or not. One sees a similar fratricide in Islamic history, beginning with Banu-Omiyya vs Banu-Abbas and going on down the centuries.

Even today we burn people alive by setting their houses aflame because some sect says this or that... e.g., the Ahmedi interpretation of the phrase ``khatim-oun-Nabiyeen``.. where the word ``khatam`` is the point of dispute. It`s all very ridiculous and very sad. It is easy to see the absurdities of other people`s religions but most of us are blinded by faith that we cannot see our own absurdities. In this sense you`ve done a favor by bring up this issue of the christian theological absurdities because hopefully some young people may begin to think about their own religion.

Religions evolve and adapt over time. But each generation, devoid of historical perspective, sees their religion as immutable and ultimately truthful. It is useful to show to young people that there is a lot of cross-fertilization of ideologies amongst various rival religions. The early christians used to have the same seven prayer services as does Islam (seven includes ``tahajat`` and ``ishraaq`` along with the regular five) -- so in fact Islam was an improvement at the time, a liberation of sorts... only five prayer services a day in stead of seven as with the christians.

Another example is the dispute between iconoclasts and iconodules (i.e., those who disapproved of pictures and statues vs those who used the images in prayer service). This dispute was also of long standing. Iconoclasts had the upper hand from the Trullan Council of 692 until Empress Irene restored the use of images with the Second Council of Nicaea in 787 ... The struggle still went on. In 813 Leo V banned icons again and so it went on until Empress Theodora II, in 842 sided with the iconodules and restored the ruling of the council of 787, the second Council of Nicaea, organized by Empress Irene. Theodora replaced the patriarch who was iconoclast with a patriarch who was iconodule. Thousands dies in this controversey over hundreds of years.

Today the average Muslim sees his own religion as iconoclastic and considers hinduism and christianity as Iconic cults...

At this point I feel like I`ve lost my train of thought... thanx

...SR

Re: # 39
Always a pleasure reading you, AlephNull.

AlephNull:
If you can read it:

Somewhere in the middle the columnist has quoted Coomarswamy and the clarification & definition of `myth` is there--just as you explained. The sentence in english says it elegently. Please note.
It is a Figure of speech of figure of thought.
Have you read this definition before?


This is from one of Pakistan`s leading dailies, operated by Madressa educated people of Jam`aat-e Islami.

Far Far superior to our anglo-poxed writers.

Freethinker:

Just a few comments:

[They let him off because it was just a silly prank.]
Pre-9/11 world, of course!

[…the mystery of Agatha Christy’s novels,]
Freethinker, you have now got this ardent Agatha Christie fan mad like heck, and the reason is obvious!

[People believe in such myths because of religious rivalry. They have to defend their faith at all costs.]
Really!! Where did this come from?! Completely out of the blue without anything in your text to support it! Pure, unvarnished OPINION! And the switch from description to opinion is not even smooth.

Freethinker, how many articles you need to write before it sinks in that faith requires no supporting structures because it IS the supporting structure and as such, needs no defence.

Sincerely,
BeeJay

....as i mentioned somewhere else here, this was umberto eco lite... for the real thing try his foucault`s pendulum....

AlephNull:39

Yes I did misunderstand you and thanks for a very good return-post indeed. I am also delighted to know that you could understand my post as well. I do not write very well given the spontaneous eddies & swhirls of what I call mistake for thoughts. Too unbridled , too messed-up.

I am not a very well-read person AlephNull but your interacting here gives me the feeling that I was after-all able to sop off , albeit somewhat, such arcane & perhaps ``exotic`` neuronisms. (Just coined it: Couldn`t think of any `right` word)

Echoboom #28

One of us (at least) may have misunderstood some of what the other was trying to say. You be the judge.

You write:

{{Even if there is `historical` existence (of anyone) as opposed to `mythological` existence it is still OUR understanding within the prevailing contexts of Time & Space. It has become our lot. It is US now.}}

I understand this very well; it was implicit in what I wrote. I was using the word ‘myth’ not in the sense of ‘falsehood/fiction/fabrication’ but in the sense of ‘a traditional story or collection of motifs that encapsulates the outlook of a people.’ This is the older and certainly the more substantial meaning of the word. The significance of a myth is not whether it is ‘true’ or ‘false’ but that people ‘believe’ in it. The power of a particular myth is judged by the extent of its hold over the collective imagination of a people. The most powerful myths – occurring in multiple cultures - may speak of universals of the human condition.

One could ‘believe’ a myth literally – i.e., say that it narrates in detail events that ‘actually’ occurred; children fall naturally into this pattern of belief. Alternatively, one might understand that a myth, even if spun around a small kernel of real events, may have been embellished with details, symbols, metaphors, not to be ‘factually accurate’ but to build up an archetype. I don’t think the power of a myth, in this skeptical age, is diminished by the second kind of ‘belief’ or understanding; if anything, it may be broadened and enriched.

{{Perhaps unbeknown to us a similar Faustian opera is going on around us. Perhaps we have hallowed the priests(not mullahs!) of science to the point of divinity. Maybe a day will come when all this would be ``mythology``.}}

Science is “mythology” even today. Its more powerful, if abstract, myths include causality, local interaction, evolution by natural selection. The most powerful scientific myths are perhaps belief in existence of an objective reality, and in a simple underlying description of nature. What makes scientific myths – beliefs - so powerful is precisely that they seem to describe what actually occurs in such impressive detail. If all this turns out eventually to have been a shadow play, so be it.

{{A whole ``science`` of ids & libidos was concocted and `life` was breathed into them so that they became sacred, hallowed, spiritual in the corridors of ``science``. … Whole generations of innocents were crucified at the altar of this religion & on the behest of its `prophet`. The sacraments were Research & Experiment.}}

I don’t consider Freud’s categories ‘scientific’ – they seem unfalsifiable. They are dangerously seductive metaphors though – a new (or updated) mythos whose creation in the recent past is fairly well-documented.

{{Names, … names … Deconstructionism gives one the illusion of acquiring ``knowledge``. We have become prisoners of the written word & perhaps that is supposed to be our Destiny.}}

‘Deconstructionism` [in the sense of a currently fashion in academe, which denies a tangible objective reality and regards interpretation of texts as a primary activity] is *not* what I saw myself engaged in. I was describing a plausible ‘reconstruction’ of what ‘actually happened,’ what people actually believed in the early centuries of the Common Era. I’d known for decades that the ‘Dying God’ motif in religion preceded the advent of Christianity by several centuries at least. I was also aware of the scantiness of evidence for a historical Jesus. Until recently it made little difference to me beyond strengthening my cynicism towards traditional Christian dogma. The recently published alternative hypothesis of Christianity originating as Judaized paganism ties up lots of loose ends, provides a satisfying reconstruction of the past that doesn’t require me to suspend my disbelief, and also shows up the religion in a far better light than hitherto (for me at least). This, too, is myth, and may well be false. Perhaps time will tell.

Interactors:

I apologise for a mistake that I committed in my last post. The sermon was not preached by John Shelby Spong; it was preached by Rev. Scott Shreve of St. Luke Methodist Church, Omaha, Nebraska. The sermon was based on John Shelby Spong`s book ``Born of a Woman.``

Sorry for this mix up.

Mohammad Gill

The idea that Jesus was married 2 Mary comes from the Dead Sea Scrolls, I think. The DSS offer a competing & mundane version of Jesus` life - marriage, no resurrection, etc. Ultimately mythologies take on a life of their own & the real-life Jesus is only incidental 2 Xtianity. The religion is the collective work of all the believers.

I am intrigued by the story of Mary Magdalene. This story is not trivial as the following quote from John Spong`s sermon shows.

John Shelby Spong is a retired Episcopalian Bishop. In the Sermon that he preached on March 28, 2004, he dealt with Mary Magdalene`s relationship with Jesus Christ. After examining Biblical texts, he said, ``All the hints we have explored are biblically based but not conclusive. Yet, the hints can suggest that Mary Magdalene, as the primary woman in the gospel story itself, could very well have been Jesus` wife, and that this record was suppressed, but not annihilated, by the Christian church before the gospels came to be written. The biblical hints are not conclusive but now have a greater understanding regarding the origin (of) the Mary/Jesus speculation. These hints have found their way into contemporary plays, books and scholarly speculation.``

The possibility that Jesus could have been married to Mary Magdalene, an earthly woman, has devastating consequences for the conventional believers. Can Son of God be married to an earthly woman? Was Mary Magdalene a Goddess? These are strange kind of thoughts which emanate from Jesus` relationship with Mary Magdalene. Yet at the same time they are not very strange. Because religious belief is mythological and out of this world.

Mohammad Gill

My understanding is that present day Christianity is very much influenced by views of Paul … which diverge significantly from the actual teachings of Christ.

Paul, the twelfth disciple

Paul, also referred to as the twelfth disciple of Jesus, came about some time (a few decades?) after crucifixion of Christ. He apparently never met Jesus … and seemed interested in religious leadership. Up until then the person of Jesus, his crucifixion, his teachings were non-events … in that a man went about telling parables, was crucified, and his body later disappeared … no big deal. Significance, or lack thereof, involving Jesus changed as Paul capitalized on it.

Spread of Christianity

Jesus’ birth, as well as his death remained shrouded in mystery ... he claimed to be son of god … and the messiah, and so on. Paul claimed that those who accept Jesus as the Savior will experience Jesus in this very life. Furthermore, Jesus resides in heavens with Father Lord … and will eventually return to earth to meet with and save the believers (more on this later).

To further add to mass appeal of Christianity, Paul incorporated notion of vicarious sacrifice: God sacrificed His Son to atone for sins of mankind. Vicarious atonement was commonly practiced by pagans who sacrificed animals and humans as a way to atone for their own sins. The pagan belief was that the sacrificed animal/human pays for the sins of others.

As already mentioned … around 300-or-so AD the Council of Nicaea voted to accept Christ as son of God. If I recall reading correctly, the Council also voted on authenticity of several accounts of events regarding crucifixion of Christ. Accounts of Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John were declared most authentic … and termed the Gospels.

Islamic views … and mainstream Muslim views

Islam seems to have negated mainstream Christian faith … by claiming that God does not have a father or son … man is responsible for this own actions … Jesus was a prophet and prophets are mortal humans like everyone else … etc. etc.

However, sayings of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) added to the complexity of the issue. He reportedly stated that God Almighty will cause Jesus, son of Mary, to return to earth in latter days. This seems to jive at least partly with traditional Christian views. To add to the complexity, some verses of Quran are also interpreted to show that Jesus was physically raised to heavens … where he resides in bodily form.

My own views …

My understanding is that Jesus was nailed to the cross, was later taken down while still alive, and was nursed to health. He then left Jerusalem and migrated eastward in search of tribes of Israel. He eventually died and is buried in Kashmir. This is based on my understanding of the gospels, Quran, and smattering of research by historians (the Code not being one of them …).

Significance of the issue ...

Christ plays a critical role in three major religions. If it turns out that he was merely a mortal human … who survived crucifixion … it strikes at fundamental understanding of these religions.

- Jews tried to kill Jesus, in order to prove that he was a blasphemer, and therefore lacked divine support. Jesus surviving crufixion deals a blow to the views of mainstream Judaism.

- Christians accepted Christ, but as the Son of God, who will return later to save the mankind.

- Muslims believe that Christ was a human, a prophet, who resides above the clouds … and will one day return to earth to lead Muslims to their ultimate victory.

Books like the Code stir the pot … and get under everyone’s skin for obvious reasons. Efforts at separating truth, from fiction, from creative writing, from speculation … can go on and on … and hence the uproar everywhere regarding the Code …

March 27, 2005
OP-ED COLUMNIST
The Vatican Code
By MAUREEN DOWD

Some may mock the Vatican for waiting until everyone on earth has read ``The Da Vinci Code`` to denounce ``The Da Vinci Code.``

I am not one of them. It`s Easter, and I don`t want to blot my catechism.

It`s a little late, now that the two-year-old thriller by Dan Brown is a publishing miracle - with 25 million copies sold in 44 languages, a cascade of other books inspired by the novel and a movie with Tom Hanks set to start filming this spring - for Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone to intone on a Vatican radio broadcast: ``Don`t read and don`t buy `The Da Vinci Code.` ``

But when you think of the history of the Catholic Church, the Vatican is acting with lightning speed. It took the church more than 350 years to reverse its condemnation of Galileo. The Vatican only began an inquisition of the 16th-century Inquisition in 1998. It wasn`t until the reign of Pope John Paul II that the Vatican apologized for the crimes of the Crusaders and offered contrition for the silence of Catholics in the Holocaust. The church has still not apologized for shameful dissembling by its hierarchy on the sex abuse scandal. And America`s Catholic bishops only last week announced they were finally going to get serious about opposing the death penalty.

The 70-year-old cardinal assigned by the Vatican to exorcise the success of the novel is the archbishop of Genoa, a former soccer commentator and a contender to succeed the ailing pope. ``There is a very real risk that many people who read it will believe that the fables it contains are true,`` he told Il Giornale.

It evokes the Dan Quayle-Murphy Brown flap for a Vatican official to slam Dan Brown`s fictional characters, but a former Vatican reporter explained it this way: ``The church is founded on a story that some people believe and some people don`t, so the Vatican tends to get very threatened by other versions of that story, especially racier ones.``

Mr. Brown`s zippy version has Jesus and Mary Magdalene marrying and having children. This ``perverts the story of the Holy Grail, which most certainly does not refer to the descendants of Mary Magdalene,`` Cardinal Bertone said. ``It astonishes and worries me that so many people believe these lies.``

The novelist is not the first one to conjure romantic sparks between the woman usually painted as what one writer calls ``the Jessica Rabbit of the Gospels`` and the eligible young Jewish carpenter and part-time miracle worker.

For years, female historians and novelists have been making the case that Mr. Brown makes, that Mary Magdalene was framed and defamed, that the men who run Christianity obliterated her role as an influential apostle and reduced her to a metaphor for sexual guilt.

The church refuses to allow women to be ordained as priests because there were no female apostles. So if Mary Magdalene was a madonna rather than a whore, the church loses its fig leaf of justification for male domination and exclusion.

It`s obvious that Vatican officials did not read to the end of Mr. Brown`s novel or they never would have denounced it.

(Caveat lector: If you have somehow missed reading the blockbuster or are one of the thrifty souls waiting for the paperback to finally come out, do not read further.)

After whipping you into a feminist frenzy over the hidden agenda of the church`s unjustly perpetuating itself as an all-male, all ``celibate`` institution - precepts that have clearly led to some unnatural perversions and attracted a disproportionate number of priests fleeing sexual confusion - Mr. Brown abruptly deflates you at the end, going along with the notion that women should stay silent and submissive, letting the men who run the church continue to run the church with men.

The woman who is the descendant of Mary Magdalene and Jesus tells Robert Langdon, Mr. Brown`s Harvard symbologist hero, that the secret saga of how the church smeared her ancestor as a slut and swindled all women out of serious roles in the church does not need to be aired. It can continue to remain a secret.

``Her story is being told in art, music and books,`` the woman says, adding that things are gradually changing for women: ``We are beginning to sense the need to restore the sacred feminine.``

No whistle is blown. No alarm is sounded. Talk about an anticlimax for a fantastic ride. As it turns out, Mr. Brown is not the tormentor of the Vatican, but an ally.


E-mail: liberties@nytimes.com



Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | RSS | Help | Back to Top

Delhiwala:
The dates are uncertain but I reproduce a partial list of Christian chronology; see if you can extract information that you needed. Yes, Paul and Jesus Christ were contemporary. Paul converted to Christianity soon after Jesus` death (37 AD). The year of Paul`s death is somewhere between 58 and 67. Jesus was crucified in 36 AD.

Mohammad Gill

---

Chronology of Christianity (1AD-Present)
Last Update: 28 May 1997 (corrections made)

The purpose of this chronology is to assist Christians of any denomination in their search for knowledge and truth regarding the development of the Christian religion. The primary sources used in assembling this list include a chronology by Paul Harvey, The World Almanac and Book of Facts, the Academic American Encyclopedia (on Compuserve), Webster`s New Collegiate Dictionary, and The English Versions of the Bible by John Berchmans Dockery O.F.M. Question marks on dates indicate approximate dates, question marks on other information indicates information which is theoretical and/or not universally accepted as fact.



1AD-36? Life of Jesus Christ

1AD First year in Christian calendar (a.d. = anno Domini) (see 525), Augustus
(Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus) is emperor of Rome
6 Herod Archelaus deposed by Augustus; Samaria, Judea and Idumea annexed as
province Iudaea under direct Roman administration, cap. Caesarea
6-? Quirinius: Legate (Governor) of Syria, 1st Roman tax census of Iudaea
6-9 Coponius: Roman Prefect of Iudaea (Samaria, Judea, and Idumea)
7-26 Brief period of peace, free of revolt and bloodshed in Iudaea & Galilee
9-12? M. Ambivius: Roman Prefect of Iudaea (Samaria, Judea, and Idumea)
12?-15 Annius Rufus: Roman Prefect of Iudaea (Samaria, Judea, and Idumea)
14-37 Tiberius I emperor of Rome, b. 42BC
25? Assumption (Testament) of Moses, original Hebrew extant Latin (Apocrypha)
26-36 Pontius Pilate: Roman Prefect of Iudaea (Samaria, Judea, and Idumea)
27-29? John the Baptist begins ministry (Luke 3,1-2) (15th year of Tiberius)
27-34? Jesus baptized by John the Baptist (Mk1:4-11)
33-34? John the Baptist arrested and killed by Herod Antipas (Luke 3,19-20)
33-36? Jesus` ministry
36? Jesus crucified, Friday, Nisan 14th, March 30th, [Ref: John, Unauthorized
Version/Fox] Last Supper would have been Thursday evening. (7Apr30 &
3Apr33 possible Fri/14/Nisan crucifixion dates)

36?-65? Period of oral tradition in Christianity between the time of Jesus and the time
the first gospel (Mark) is written, original Christians disperse throughout
Judea and Samaria (Acts 8,1ff), Peter leads the new Christian Church,
moves the Church headquarters to Rome

36?-67 Period Peter leads the new Christian Church, moves the church headquarters
from Jerusalem to Rome
36?-37 Paul of Tarsus has Stephen martyred and the Jerusalem church destroyed
37 Paul of Tarsus is converted (Acts 9)
37-41 Gaius Caligula emperor of Rome, declared himself god
37-41? Marullus: Roman Prefect of Iudaea (Samaria, Judea, and Idumea)
40 Paul goes to Jerusalem to consult with Peter (Gal 1, 18-20)
41-54 Claudius emperor of Rome, killed by poisoning by his wife Agrippina
44 James, brother of John, executed by Herod Agrippa I (Acts 12, 1-3)
47-48 Paul and Barnabas on Cyprus (Acts 13, 4-12)
48-49 Council of Jerusalem, 1st Christian Council, doctrine regarding circumcision
and dietary law is agreed to by apostles and presbyters, written in a letter
addressed to ``the brothers of Gentile origin in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia``
(Acts 15)
48-57? Paul writes Galations
49-50 Paul in Corinth (Acts 18)
50? Peshitta translation begun, Hebrew OT->Syriac Aramaic, (Greek NT in 400)
50? Ascension of Isaiah, original written in Hebrew (Ethiopic Bible)
51-52 Paul writes 1 Thes
51-52 Paul writes 2 Thes
53-62 Paul writes Phil
54-68 Nero emperor of Rome
56 Paul writes 1 Corin
57 Paul writes Romans
57 Paul writes 2 Corin
57 Paul`s last visit to Jerusalem [Acts21]
58 Paul arrested, imprisoned in Caesarea [Acts25:4]
59 Nero kills his mother, Agrippina
60 Paul imprisoned in Rome (Acts 28,16)
61-63? Paul? writes Ephesians
61-63 Paul writes Philemon
61-63 Paul writes Colossians
61-63? Paul? writes 1,2 Timothy, Titus, known as ``pastoral epistles``
62? James written by leader of Jerusalem community? (Gal 2,9?), ``catholic``
epistle
62 Paul martyred for treason in Rome
62 {Being therefore this kind of person [i.e., a heartless Sadducee], Ananus,
thinking that he had a favorable opportunity because Festus had died and
Albinus was still on his way, called a meeting [literally, ``sanhedrin``] of
judges and brought into it the brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah,
James by name, and some others. He made the accusation that they had
transgressed the law, and he handed them over to be stoned.}
[JA20.9.1,Marginal Jew,p.57]
62 Nero kills his wife Octavia and marries Poppaea Sabina
64 Great fire of Rome, started by Nero and blamed on Christians, {Therefore to
squelch the rumor , Nero
created scapegoats and subjected to the most refined tortures those whom
the common people called ``Christians,`` [a group] hated for their abominable
crimes. Their name comes from Christ, who, during the reign of Tiberius, had
been executed by the procurator Pontius Pilate. Suppressed for the moment,
the deadly superstition broke out again, not only in Judea, the land which
originated this evil, but also in the city of Rome, where all sorts of
horrendous and shameful practices from every part of the world converge
and are fervently cultivated.} [Tacitus Annals 15.44;Marginal
Jew;Meier;p.89-90]
64-95? 1 Peter written in Rome, by Peter the apostle?, ``catholic`` epistle

65-125 Period in which 4 Gospels, Acts, Revelations, and remaining epistles written
- Peter martyred before 1st Holy Gospel is written, 7 Popes before last
epistle is completed

65? Q written, (German:Quelle, meaning ``source``) a hypothetical Greek text used
in writing of Matthew and Luke
65-150 Didache: Instructions of the Apostles written
65-150 Dialogue of the Savior, Gospel of Peter
65-150 Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 1224 fragments: pub. 1914
65-150 Gospel of Thomas written, based on Q?, pub. 1959, Greek originals: Papyrus
Ox. 1,654-5
65-175 Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 840 fragments: pub. 1908
65-175 Papyrus Egerton 2 (Unknown Gospel) fragments: pub. 1935/87, in Greek
from Palestine, one of the oldest extant Christian texts (~175)
65-250 Papyrus Fayum (P. Vindob. G. 2325) fragments: pub. 1887

Mr. Gill,
Your articles are often very good and informative. Thanks for the information, will comment on it later.

Mr. Gill,
So as per this book, did Paul live at the same time as Jesus did?
I have always heard from my Christian friends and read in religous classes that the first known Bible to Christians only came around 200-300 years after Christ. Most likely Constantine`s wife is considered as isntrumental in documenting it.

Mine information may not be accurate but the fact is, almost all the Chrsitians agree that the present day bible AKA King James verison that is; was written and compiled much later than Christ himself and that is where confusion arises in matters such as Mary Magdelene and Paul`s version.