#mother of a deified tyrant? check

[lunamond]

RIP Olympias of Macedon

Myrtale would have loved Alicent hightower and Lady Jessica.

[saintaugustinerp]

Congratulations Nina! You have been accepted for the role of The Pacifist with the faceclaim Henrik Holm.  Please be sure to check out the accepted applicants checklist! Also be sure send us a link to your blog within the next twenty-four hours. Welcome to St. Augustine!

OUT OF CHARACTER

Name/alias: Nina

Age (18+) : 20s

Gender/Preferred pronouns: she/her

Timezone: GMT+2

IN CHARACTER

Desired Skeleton: The Pacifist Character Name: Camille Anton Frey

Age (18+): 21

Gender/Pronouns: he/him

Hometown: itinerant; parents are missionaries

Major: Anthropology, with electives from History, Literature & putting in extracurricular work at the University paper

Desired Faceclaim: Henrik Holm

Character blurb: A gait like a 90’s slinky, there it is. None of the fluidity a more feminine form should possess; none of that veiled threat, either, that so many college boys have, danger stretched over sinew and muscle. He seems, at once, the indefinable translated into carnality. Curled fingers, devoid of sensuality, devoid of light. Or perhaps so laden with both that it has obscured them. Glove-hands, foxglove hands, keeping books and coins and bag straps in their crannies. Fake leather and a faint tinge of rosemary. A title: The Golden Bough. A currency: foreign credit cards. And ever the same, these clothes that come from nowhere and could call no name: laceless shoes, buttonless coat, all zippers - the only fault that betrays his time. A motion impediment? Can there be any impediment at all, in a body that looks so carved in gypsum?

Developed Head Canons:

1/3 headcanons: His parents had started out as field researchers, bright minds and left-leaning beliefs that thought all answers could easily be cartographed. However, the more they traveled from place to place, the more the remoteness of the cultures they visited increased, and they would drift further from the center, their beliefs dried up like mortar. They became enmeshed in esoteric things, ritualistic tidbits Camille would always dismiss as poppycock. He was reared by his mother’s relatives (oddly contrasting in their placidity, in their borderline-upper class nuance) for intermittent periods in his life. When his health was good enough, or when exams (private schooling institution, then lyceum) were not a priority, he was allowed to travel with them. Though, if he were to roll the word in his mouth now, traveling was a poor term for it. His parents fled, plunged into, absorbed. It’d never ceased to make his head whirl with the incongruity of it all.

2/3 headcanons: He is outspoken without betraying anything about himself; vocal, virulent, with no stakes in the game to show for it. He has long puzzled both his companions and his detractors due to this nonchalance, this forfeit of all conflict. It could be an enigma, if he did not seem so open about anything - as if ready to profess all the world’s hidden clues. A pacifist and a prodigal son: oh, he is still eager to debate, to draw out sharp, silver claws, peering out from his pitch-black sleeves. He will only step back, indulgent smile plastered on his face, if the debate begins to resemble a bloodshed. Violence holds no interest for him; it is petty, an easy thing to sweep under the greater carpet.

3/3 headcanons: Few people, if any, know that he admires what he cannot have. Perhaps even to himself he does not admit it: he would long for the leniency with which other people believe things, the easiness in which they act. He’s never been the one for grand gestures, commitments, decisions which could later reverberate when he is not there to stop them. In his darkest moments, he thins the Gods, genetics, Fortune herself set it out for him to be like this. That, somehow, it’d all been cast dices the moment he began to stumble. Due to a small, barely accountable deficiency, Camille has a chronic disorder; it’s almost not there, until it is. Most times, it translates to a difficulty in all physical activities, and though he had managed to brush it off in the same way he always does - not confessing it, but not obscuring it either - it still makes him wonder. Is his entire personality, is entire system of beliefs, an elaborate distraction from not being a standard Apollo? Someone like, let’s say, the Golden Heir?

Camille is not averse to war because he lacks the knowledge surrounding it. Ever since he began to immerse himself in comparative cultural studies (and he had started early - if you are to waste your brains with trifles, you might as well get to it already) violence ran through the world like veins in the marble. It was the red thread to unite all great events, all explanations, together. But could that simple impulse account for all of it? Even as a kid, he was skeptical that those reputed minds which tried to explain the world all throughout 20th century could find no other justification for this life, this wheel of habit. Palms turned over, they said: evolutionary motives, plain and simple, desire to control and subdue and revel. He’s always found it rather reductive. And Camille was never fond of simple causes, simple equations meant to tie mankind at its knots. There are more grand, the forces that move us. He had always thought, and lived by it, too, that some wishes that are so counter-instinctive they make playthings of survival itself. And empathy, oh, empathy can ensnare as much as any tyrant. Ambiguity, too; the lost art of taking no sides. A side is a stable thing, and inside stability meaning curls to die. Why choose anthropology? It could prove the only compass to a nameless core. And why literature; why, what was literature, but a reprieve from trying to explain the world? Saint Augustine did not represent delivery from these doubts, this reaching out, drawing near and fading off like candle taper. But it was a focal point he was determined to seize. With his tuition paid by a close relative (how benevolence comes to bite us in the back, almost a principle of eternal recurrence) and more to spite his parents than anything else, this chance was still his. After all, it was not as if they could keep him forever in their quagmire, an ideological one no less, shifting about from world corner to world corner - a poor man’s blend between missionaries and journalists, sensationalists and explorers; insultingly rich one moment, destitute the next. Has transience of his parents been passed on to him like a mark of deliverance? Or twisted his genetics about, as some dormant traits also become decisive when combined, so that twofold they render individuality useless? And what use could there be found, in a boy presented with the world’s myriad faces? So there he is, an enemy to permanence; seemingly sworn against stable ground itself. Why pacifism? Because violence could never explain this pallid fire. This inner drive that, even without being followed, propels forward with the odium of celestial bodies, and the indifference of those deified.

[realrationalist]

The Mythology of Jesus

Christians have a propensity for looking at extra-Biblical references to Jesus of Nazareth and formulating a logical argument that looks somewhat like this:

1. The Bible asserts that Jesus was a real, living man and the Son of God.

2. Extra-Biblical, historical documents corroborate that Jesus was a real, living man.

3. Because historical evidence shows that Jesus was a real, living man, the Bible is true; and Jesus is the Son of God.

This is a logical fallacy. At best, because none of the historical documents used to corroborate the life of Jesus are from primary sources of people were alive during the time when Jesus of Nazareth is professed to have lived and who could then have personally known him, at best, all these documents can objectively prove is that they believed Jesus to have been a real person based on what they had been told. Even if they had been primary sources, based on what these documents state, they would still only objectively prove that Jesus of Nazareth was a real, living man. They would still not be objectively evidence of the Bible’s veracity with regard to his alleged divine nature.

With this in mind, consider first that the extra-Biblical historical documents used to corroborate the life of Jesus predate their New Testament counterparts. Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews, in which he references Jesus, was written around 93-94 CE; Tacitus’ Annals wherein he refers to Jesus was written around 116 CE; Mara Bar Serapion’s reference to Jesus was written around 73 CE; and the portion of the Jewish Talmud, (the Mishnah) which seeks to detract from the idea of Jesus as being the Son of God, was written around 200 CE. All four of these manuscripts are extra-Biblical and non-Christian, and three of the references come from manuscripts dated earlier than the oldest New Testament manuscript in existence, the Rylands Library Papyrus P52, which contains excerpts from the Gospel of John, and is dated between 125 and 175 CE (Taylor, 2015).

Josephus writes in Antiquities of the Jews, Book XX, Chapter 9.1, “Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king [Agrippa], desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrim without his consent. Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest.”

In Annals, Book XV, Chapter 44, Tacitus writes, “[s]uch indeed were the precautions of human wisdom. The next thing was to seek means of propitiating the gods, and recourse was had to the Sibylline books, by the direction of which prayers were offered to Vulcanus, Ceres, and Proserpina. Juno, too, was entreated by the matrons, first, in the Capitol, then on the nearest part of the coast, whence water was procured to sprinkle the fane and image of the goddess. And there were sacred banquets and nightly vigils celebrated by married women. But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. 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. Christus, 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 Judaea, 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. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.” Notice that in this passage, Tacitus refers to the execution of Jesus, (the extreme penalty) but also refers to the “mischievous superstition” surrounding him.

Though some might assert that Mara Bar Serapion was Christian, in his letter to his son, he refers to multiple Gods, and while he refers to a “wise King” of the Jews, (presumably Jesus) he does not refer to him as the Son of God, as Lord, as Savior, or by some similar title; and while he claims that Jesus will live on, he indicates that this will be through his laws and teachings (equating him to Socrates and Pythagoras) rather than through his resurrection. In other words, Bar Serapion considers Jesus to be (a wise King notwithstanding) a man.

In his letter to his son, he writes, “What are we to say, when the wise are dragged by force by the hands of tyrants, and their wisdom is deprived of its freedom by slander, and they are plundered for their superior intelligence, without the opportunity of making a defence? They are not wholly to be pitied. For what benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death, seeing that they received as retribution for it famine and pestilence? Or the people of Samos by the burning of Pythagoras, seeing that in one hour the. whole of their country was covered with sand? Or the Jews by the murder of their Wise King, seeing that from that very time their kingdom was driven away from them? For with justice did God grant a recompense to the wisdom of all three of them. For the Athenians died by famine; and the people of Samos were covered by the sea without remedy; and the Jews, brought to desolation and expelled from their kingdom, are driven away into Every land. Nay, Socrates did "not" die, because of Plato; nor yet Pythagoras, because of the statue of Hera; nor yet the Wise King, because of the new laws which he enacted.”

While these references to Jesus from extra-Biblical manuscripts do substantiate that a person named Jesus actually lived, they all pre-date their New Testament analogs, and they are in agreement that he was a man—not divine. Furthermore, while they agree that he was put to death without any mention of his subsequent resurrection, (or even the disappearance of his physical body) they make no reference to the miraculous crucifixion darkness (global or localized) that the New Testament asserts accompanied his death. In addition, while Josephus also references John the Baptist, similarly substantiating him as a real person, none of these extra-Biblical texts substantiates the concurrent existence any New Testament manuscript, indicating that while none had survived, they had at least been written by then (and subsequently lost).

Given that the extra-Biblical, historical documents predate their New Testament counterparts, make no reference to the existence of said New Testament manuscripts, and while they potentially corroborate the existence of Jesus of Nazareth, but as a man, rather than a divine being, it suggests that Jesus was, indeed, a real, living person, but not divine. Perhaps, the concept of Jesus as being divine was something that happened posthumously.

Not a single manuscript, Biblical or extra-Biblical, exists as a primary document written by someone who actually lived during the time that Jesus Nazareth is purported to have lived by someone who knew him personally and to give an eyewitness account to corroborate what is claimed about him, nor is there a primary document to corroborate the most dramatic and public of the miracles involving him (the Star of Bethlehem marking his birth or the crucifixion darkness marking his death). Furthermore, if John 22:25 is true, then “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.” Yet, there are not volumes of books recording this.

So, is it possible, that the followers of Jesus of Nazareth deified him after his passing? There certainly is precedent for this. Real people who were posthumously deified: Imhotep, (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2018) the Buddha, (Lopez, 2019) Pythagoras of Samos, (Zhumud, 2012) Antinous, (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2019) Guan Yu, (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2018) and even George Washington (Encyclopedia of Shinto, 2005) and Mother Teresa (Stacey, 2016) are all examples of real people who were later deified. If manuscript evidence of Jesus is sufficient to objectively support the Bible’s assertion that he is the Son of God sans primary sources, then the historical documentation of these individuals is likewise sufficient to support their respective deifications. Yet, neither Christians (nor the general public) accept these people as divine, even when there is better evidence. Nonetheless, it is for these reasons that it seems likely that the mythology of Jesus of Nazareth lies not with whether or not he existed, but with how his legend grew after his passing.

References:

Encyclopedia of Shinto. (2005). Shrines and Hawaiians of Japanese descent. Kokugakuin University. Retrieved from http://eos.kokugakuin.ac.jp/modules/xwords/entry.php?entryID=342 on June 5, 2019

Josephus. (n.d.). Antiquities of the Jews. Retrieved from http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2848/2848-h/2848-h.htm on June 4, 2019

Lopez, D. (2019). Buddha. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Buddha-founder-of-Buddhism on June 5, 2019

Serapion. (n.d.). Letter to his son. Retrieved from

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/mara.html

Stacey, D. (2016). In India, Mother Teresa draws devotees of all faiths. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2016/09/03/in-india-mother-teresa-draws-devotees-of-all-faiths/ on June 5, 2019

Tacitus. (n.d.). Annals. Retrieved from http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.12.xvi.html on June 4, 2019

Taylor, J., 2015, January 20, How should we respond to reports that a fragment of Mark dates to the first century? The Gospel Coalition. Retrieved from https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/how-should-we-respond-to-reports-that-a-fragment-of-mark-dates-to-the-first-century/ on October 18, 2018

The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. (2019). Antinoüs. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Antinous on June 5, 2019

The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. (2018). Guandi. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/Guandi on June 5, 2019

The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, (2018). Imhotep. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Imhotep on June 5, 2019

Zhumud, L. (2012). Pythagoras and the early Pythagoreans. Oxford, UK. Oxford University Press