Thursday, July 9, 2009

Holy Blood, Holy Grail Batman, Same old Athist Hype in New Package.

ST. Mark's Basillica

In The Real Messiah Stephen Huller Bring sup some old attacks on Jesus' Messianic standing but with some new packaging.

According to the prophecies, �[t]he intended [Jewish] Messiah had to be a king�not simply in a spiritual sense, but also in a political sense, [whose] arrival would alter Judaism forever. It would mean an abandonment of the Laws of Moses and a completely new Covenant with God that would be so all-encompassing that the very Temple of Jerusalem would be abolished and ultimately destroyed.� With that beginning to his story, Huller lays the groundwork and details the life and times of The Real Messiah, Marcus Julius Agrippa, last king of the Jews, a contemporary of Jesus, and the author of the four gospels of the new testament, also known as St. Mark. The proof begins with a small throne carved in one piece from alabaster in Alexandria in Egypt and now housed in Venice. (Ibid)

the New Covenant was predicted by Jeremiahs. There did not need to be a New Coveant to make a new king. Jesus was an actual King, it's possible that he was in line for the throne and that has been shown many times. The Genealogy in Matthew shows him descending from the kings of Judah. There is nothing new about attacking Jesus' Messianic standing through the Royal line.

the New Wrinkle is the absurd claim Huller makes that the throne

Huller in a promotional Interview
with His publisher


Thanks, Norm. The Real Messiah is a book which details a major discovery I made in Venice a few years ago. I saw a chair called the throne of St. Mark in the Basilica di San Marco . Everyone knew it had a strange inscription chiseled across its front in reverse Hebrew mirror letters. Scholars think, ‘oh that’s odd’ and go on to study other things.

I looked at it for the first time and realized these aren’t just regular Hebrew letters but a special kind only made by the Samaritan sect in Israel; the Samaritans are the oldest religious sect in the world. I happened to be very friendly with them. I snapped photos of the inscription and the throne as a whole and sent them to world-wide experts on Samaritans. I pieced together the code and find something which proves that Jesus wasn’t the messiah of Christianity. Jesus was just the guy who came to announce someone else as the one predicted by Moses and the prophets. of Mark was stolen and it bears upon it marks that indicate Jesus was a fake.

This is the new wrinkle but is it new? We have seen this before. This is just another version of Holy Blood, Holy Grail which was itself a knock off of a previous book, and it also has shades of The Devinci Code. The idea of finding the secret clue that disproves Christianity is as old as Christianity. It goes back to Celsus in the second century who claimed that the Jews gave him secret historical inifo that showed Jesus true history. None of this stuff has ever amounted to a hill of beans. This want either. in a couple of years will be crowding the used book stands.

Like most of these characters with amazing disproofs to sell,Huller has another twist. Jesus wasn't really cliaming to be the Messiah, he was really saying that someone else was. Non other than:Marcus Julius Agrippa

Anthony Sacramone on the Strange Herring Blog.

As for this book by Stephan Huller, apparently the REALLY real messiah was Marcus Julius Agrippa, to whom Jesus was supposedly pointing because — among other reasons — when Jesus refers to “the son of man” and “the messiah” in the Gospel of Mark, he does so in the third person.

Tell that to the pizzo family supporters? Does not know there's already a conspiracy theory that says a Roman family called the Pizzo's started Christianity as a joke.
Sacramone has a huge running battle with Huller on this blog (see link above) it is worth reading, worth a chuckle.

Let's notice some things about this:

(1) there is really one piece of evidence and it can't be connected to the theory he's trying to prove.

Joseph Faltas writing a review "The St.Mark Code" in Daily News of Egypt:

While the book’s introduction doesn’t promise to present conclusive evidence to support Huller’s wild claim, the rest of the pages eliminate the hope of a real connection between the pieces of “evidence” the researcher presents.

Did I say pieces? I really meant “one piece,” which is the throne of St. Mark displayed in the Basilica San Marco in Venice. There are, however, many loose and disjointed connections Huller makes between the different inscriptions and pictures on the throne, without referencing them to similar symbols anywhere else.

So appreanlty all he really has is an interesting old throne that can't be connected to anything else. He apparenlty has no scholarly evidence about it's dating.

(2) It depends upon secret knowledge of a forgotten language and a code that only the author has understood. This is just what Holy Blood, Holy Grail was based upon. Things that revolve around secret language that only the author gets are usually crap. This does not bode well for Huller.

(3) It depends upon this secret code in an innocuous place where no one but the author could find it. Again, secret knowledge = conspiracy = sillness.

(4) In 829 the remains of St Mark were supposedly transferred to the basilica of St. Mark in Venice. In 976 the Basilica was totally destroyed by fire. Any furniture there today would post date that era and thus can't be authentic.

(5) Huller's reasoning is quite absurd. He says that one of the emperors was influenced by his Christian mistress to foster Christianity and bring it in line with Paganism by forcing December 25th as Jesus birth day (emperor Cammodus).

His Christian mistress Aurelia Ceionia Demetrias is universally acknowledged to have 'rescue' at least one future Roman Pope. Her father, Marcus Aurelius Sabinianus Euhodus was a freedman under the joint rule of Commodus father Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus. A man with the very same last name Q Tineius Demetrius was established in 189 CE as the prefect of Egypt.

Demetrius certainly had 'keeping an eye' on the Church of St. Mark in Alexandria as one of his main duties. Interestingly enough Church history tells us that a figure by the name of 'Demetrius' oversaw the activities of the community in that very same year. He scandalized the community by being married (Egyptian Christianity was notoriously ascetic), ignorant and illiterate (a strange way for a bishop to be described as when the community was so learned (think Clement, Origen etc.). This Demetrius is interestingly remembered as assuming office in the very same year as Q Tineius Demetrius - i.e. 189 CE.

Again is all of this supposed to be mere 'coincidences'? I am not so sure.

that was centuries after the Gospels were written. Christianity was already well established. It has nothing to do with the validity of Christianity. But it is an amusing tid bit to bring reproach upon the RCC. Its true function not proof but bad mouthing.

(6) why should this pile of garbage be any more serious then the already voluminous lies of the Jesus mythers?

(7) Another dead give away there is no scholarly support for this at all. There are no scholarly recognizing the find as the true throne of St. Mark or endorsing the bs about a secret Hebrew code.

(8) Here is a description of the items in the treaurie of St Mark's. Notice what is not mentioned--a throne.

Section dedicated to the Treasure of St. Mark's

The church's Treasure is kept in the ancient rooms between the church and the ducal palace, accessed by means of a door in the south transept embellished with a 13th century mosaic which, in memory of the fire of 1231, depicts two angels bearing the reliquary of the Cross, miraculously left intact.
The small vestibule leads, on the left, to the sanctuary and, on the right, to the actual Treasure. In eight niches in the sanctuary walls there are numerous precious reliquaries containing the relics of saints that were gathered from Constantinople to the Holy Land and from places outside the eastern Mediterranean basin. The Treasure consists of an overall 283 pieces in gold, silver, glass and other precious materials.

The oldest nucleus is a part of the booty brought to Venice from Constantinople between 1204 and 1261 after the Venetian conquest. For the most part they are liturgical chalices, bowls and patens in semi-precious stone mounted on Byzantine enamelled gold-work. It also includes two icons of the Archangel Michael with enamelled frames. To these may be added late-antique vases in glass and semi-precious stone and bowls of Islamic origin, all of great interest. Lastly there is a nucleus of western objects, some of them Venetian filigree.
Other pieces - gifts from popes, European princes or the doges themselves - were added subsequently.
When the Republic fell in 1797 part of the Treasure was pillaged. What was saved was returned to the church in 1798, but between 1815 and 1819 precious stones and pearls were sold to pay for restorations.

The Treasure is divided into four sections:
- Objects from Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, including two beautiful lamps in rock crystal sculpted in the form of fish and two amphorae with handles in the form of animals, each one obtained from a single block of precious oriental agate;
- Objects by Byzantine goldsmiths dating to the centuries around the year 1000: chalices and patens in semi-precious stone with mountings in gold and silver ornamented with cloisonné enamels, also present in the two portable icons with the image of the Archangel Michael.

(9)Huller's real Messiah is a man of mystery. Like Superman he has a secret identity but unlike Superman he has multiple identities and keeps popping up here and there, like the Scarlet pimpernel.

According to review Joseph Faltas

Huller claims that Marcus Julius Agrippa was “the last King of the Jews, true heir to the royal title mockingly bestowed on Jesus of Nazareth.” This as well as being “the author of St. Mark’s gospel, and the true Messiah.” Plus some more.

Marcus is also Barabas, the man Pilate released into the Jews in place of Jesus. Oops, forgot another of the man’s manifestations. He is also Marqe, son of Titus, an important Samaritan theologian.

(10) Hullers arguments are so week they amount to saying "Jesus referred to 'the son of man' in third person so he wasn't talking about himself." Of closure that doesn't prove anything. The figure son of man was a Messianic reference in the Book of Daniel and Jesus refers to it as third person to indicate that he's it. He couldn't come out and say "I am the son of man" that would be a cancellation of other prophetic statements: ("he will not raise his voice in the streets"). It's a signature fulfillment. He's placing himself in positional to be seen as the fulfillment like a signature.

(11) Huller asserts that the leader of the Coptic chruch knows the true identity of the Messiah.

Faltas again:

Huller’s real Messiah is one that can be easily scrapped off both the history books and his followers’ hearts. A Messiah who — save for in one secret gospel — has left the basics of his message nowhere to be seen. A Messiah/client of Rome whose sister/wife was the acknowledged mistress of his countrymen’s archenemy, the Roman emperor himself. Yet it’s repeatedly claimed that he is the one responsible for the Christian faith.

It also turns out that Pope Shenouda III, the current leader of the Coptic Orthodox church, is not only “aware of the connection between Mark and Marcus” but also “comes very close to revealing the true identity of St. Mark.” How does he do that? Huller quotes Pope Shenouda’s “The Evangelist Mark” where he speaks of a theology school St. Mark built which was managed by a man called Justus. It turns out that Marcus, according to Huller, had a secretary also named Justus. Does any sane person need to look for any further evidence?

If that's the case why doesn't he say it? What a cheap way to try and gain credibility where he has none. This guy supports me but he wont admit it?

(12) The major logical contradiction at the heart of the theory seems pretty absolute. This also is pointed out by Faltas. Huller wants us to believe that the real messiah was a Roman who served the Roman state but the Roman emperor took over the church and used it to erase the real Messiah and instead backed as Messiah this Jewish guy who had no connection with Rome but was a Jewish Rabbi. why?How could the real messiah be so easily forgotten? Where are his teachings? what happened to his followers?

How many of these absurd gimmicks have we seen?

HolyBlood, Holy Grail
The Di Venchi Code
Jesus survived the crucifixion and went to France
Jesus survived the crucifixion and went to Cashir
Jesus survived the crucifixion and went to Japan.
The Passover plot

A sucker born every minute.


stuart said...

So I am trying to figure this out. Jesus was a real king - where was his kingdom? I don't remember reading about this in history.

And the Jews were right about everything it seems EXCEPT that the messiah who was to come would be a king.

This they got wrong because - well - Jesus wasn't a king and so a circular argument has to be developed to allow for Jesus to be the messiah of the Jews.

I haven't read this book you are talking about but I hate Christian arguments about the messiah.

They always seem so ridiculous. And isn't Christ the whole point of Christianity? So Christianity is wholly ridiculous.

J.L. Hinman said...

So I am trying to figure this out. Jesus was a real king - where was his kingdom? I don't remember reading about this in history.

He was in the line of kings according to both genealogies. His kingdom was Israel. It was occupied at the time so of course they didn't' make a lot of it. IN fact he was an heir but not necessarily a king, but it was possible that he was the heir apparent. we don't know who the others members of his distant klan were who would also have been in line.

And the Jews were right about everything it seems EXCEPT that the messiah who was to come would be a king.

who says they were right about everything. A lot of them were right about who the Messiah was.

This they got wrong because - well - Jesus wasn't a king and so a circular argument has to be developed to allow for Jesus to be the messiah of the Jews.

how do you know he wasn't? do you not realize that the true king of the Mayans is still alive in Guatemala today? He's not rule because his country is occupied, but people still know who he is.

why would you think Jesus wasn't i line? the genealogy of Matt puts him in the line.

I haven't read this book you are talking about but I hate Christian arguments about the messiah.

probably because you haven't bothered to study them. what I know about it, which ant much, comes from Rabbis and Christians who studies to be Rabbis.

Read the book Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah By Alfred Edersheim. He was tried all his life to be a Rabbi, but he became a Christian. He taught at both Oxford and Cambridge.

They always seem so ridiculous. And isn't Christ the whole point of Christianity? So Christianity is wholly ridiculous.

why are they ridiculous? because you don't' know anything about them. you don't study them so you don't know.

J.L. Hinman said...

I am sure they wrote on a chiar. this is the real messaih Jesusisn't it. that makes a lot of sense.

o the Christian messiah ideaas are so stupid so very ery stupid. but it's so intelligent ot hink they wrote on a chiar "this guy is the real messiah." O yea.