Jesus Wars: How Four Patriarchs, Three Queens, and Two Emperors Decided What Christians Would Believe for the Next 1,500 Years

Around ten years ago, I could care less about anyones religion. But, then in a great bookstore no longer in existence(it was a bookstore inside of a railway station; the railway tracks still worked), I saw a book, The Bible Unearthed, in the archaeology section. The Bible Unearthed only considers the Old Testament, and only the Torah mostly. Soon, in another curious twist, I found out that something could be said about the New Testament. I learned about sungods from someone at a free for all topic messageboard at a now defunct Madden video game messageboards website. Anyways, I soon got into things like Robert Eisenman's "James Brother of Jesus"(nowadays, Robert Eisenman has those books rewritten in a new more comprehensive format). I also read "The Golden Bough." Anyways, All that reading never could figure out who did what; who wrote the Gospels is still a question. Yes, there's a passage in Iraneous "Against Heretics" that gives names ot three of the four gospels, for Mark, he simply says "the independents wrote it." Who are they? Nobody knows!Anyways, I saw this book in amazon suggestions a few years ago. I certainly thought it was probably a pretty good book covering a period that I haven't explored yet; but, I was tired of religion and mythology. I felt that I had more of less seen what modern day scientific view could say about religion, at most history periods(see E.T. Bell's "Magic of Numbers" for Pythagorean number mysticism). About a month ago, I saw this book again, checked out some reviews, and noted something curious. It was mentioned that Christianity had two main centers claiming traditions of 'origin of christianity' - Alexandria and Antioch. As I learned while finally getting around to reading it, Alexandria was intimately tied up with Rome. Also, when Christians held councils, Roman emperors and whomever Priests were organizing the event would have to declare under whose authority gives this council the right to make any kind of decision; again, they'd have to announce Alexandria or Antioch as holding ancient Christian origins. Well, that's about it as far as clues to who did what in making up Christianity. The book focuses more on three hundred on, when the Roman empire was crumbling away due to various forces. The book has a great quote from a Nestorius(a more or less main character of the story) that of barbarians, plagues, and Christian in house fighting of whom, Alexandria or Antioch, were to be the viewpoint of Christianity.I'm into Jacob Bronowski's philosophy of mathematics and how this understanding gives a holistic view of all human intellectual endeavor(poetry mostly). I don't want to get into it too much, but in his "Ascent of Man" book/video series(and I consider his Science and Human Values, and his 'Origin of Knowledge and Imagination' to be his best works, not Ascent of Man), he notes how the Phlogiston theory of flames is a vague concept. The vague concept has contradictions; the question becomes, is flame a form of matter; if you believe that, then you have to give it all sorts of contradictory properties. That flames are lighter than nothing. Flame wasn't understood till the discovery of oxygen. Science defines concepts like that instead of holding on to old works like Phlogiston. Mythology holds on to their vague concepts like god, and the topic of this book, Jesus Christ - was Jesus Christ a man or a god? Every which way you go leads to problems. The problem here is why is there a problem at all?I don't want to get into all the early Christian apologists from Ignatius, Marcion and on. Philip Jenkins does mention these figures. Alexandria is focuses on Jesus as pure god, Antioch was focused on Jesus as a historical human figure. Mr Jenkins mentions this, and that was the case of the time period he mostly focuses in on - 300 A.D. on to almost 700 really. But, Antioch was not so focused on Jesus as a pure human at first; Philip more or less notes this when he at least notes that Marcion was an important early Christian there. He was a Gnostic, and certainly didn't view Jesus Christ as a real human historical figure. How Antioch changed so radically over the centuries after Marcion(who formed a proto-New Testament first before anyone else; he had a gospel of Luke, a primitive one, and a few Pauline epistles) he doesn't know, and I've never heard of anything about this. But, I want to mention one of my favorite quotes; what I consider one of the best smoking guns that Jesus Christ was made up. It's a kind of mystical logic from a Barnabas in his Epistle,-"then he clearly manifested himself to be the son of god. For had he not come in the flesh, how should men have been able looked upon him, that they might be saved?" This is in the Epistle of Barnabas chapter 4:13-14."Barnabas is mentioned in the New Testament book of Acts. This quote of his shows that there is a logic to historicizing the sungods. If you read the epistle around and after this quote, you'll see mention of the sun.So, we have sungods traditions, mostly centered in Alexandria where Philo did his midrashing of the old testament to combine with Platonic philosophy. And, you have Antioch which evolved remarkably for Jesus as a real human being. And, you had churches who had the responsibility of feeding whoever decided to come their church for protections and food! As Philip Jenkins shows throughout his book here, this proved too lethal a combination. The Romans were willing to go to one council after another, even with Germanic and other 'barbarians'(basically hunter gatherers groups/remnants from that pre-agricultural period) baring down on them!As James Burke notes in his Connections chapter/episode four, the Romans had aqueducts feeding/powering tremendous wheat hammers. I mean we're talking about sport stadium sized industrial waterwheels! They also had Heron of Alexandria who hit on steam power. As Carl Sagan and Arthur C. Clarke had noted, if they had just hit on the idea of powering their hammers, and saws from steam power, and keeping these hugh aqueduct waterwheel powered hammers and saws going, they would have no problems dealing with the Germanic and Asian barbarians. But no, due to a Germanic defeat of Roman legion around 260, Romans literally, and this is in the book, literally thought this meant the pagan gods and science/technology really was not the way! Christianity had to be the way.Phlip Jenkins mostly shows some of how it was in late Roman empire and early dark ages. One major component of what it was like were the mob scenes at the church councils. Meetings, like the Nicene meeting held by Emperor Constantine - the first Roman emperor to make Christianity the official religion of the roman empire. After him, another Roman emperor tried to go back to Pagan ways, but because of a Roman legion defeat by Germanic barbarians, the general Roman citizen and apparently roman emperor feeling was that Christianity should be the way; the Roman empire never turned back after that. I've already mentioned the date of the Roman legion defeat - 260. These Christian meetings to determine what Christianity was and was not reflects the multitude of Christianity before Christianity became the official religion of the roman empire. The meetings were certainly gangster like, but not nearly as bloody as Philip initially implies. One guy, a Favius got beat to death. But, for the most part, everyone matched each other sword for sword. That was scarier than you might initially think. I mean hundreds of Bishops from hundreds of churchs the roman empire wide would come, but to protect themselves, they'd bring all their armed guard with them as well. Some had to appeal to the Roman emperor for Roman soldier protections. Most of the Bishops had to sign on with whomever was most powerfull to not get killed.Another major societal feature highlighted by Mr Jenkins was a kind of thinking started by what are called the Capadocian fathers - Basil of Caesaria, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory of Nyssa. They came up with ousia, physia, hypostasis, and prosopon; these are the Greek versions of words of features of the Christ. I found this interesting, because a book I found while a youth/high school time, was "The Ancient Engineers." In the chapter about Byzantines, he mentions Gregory of Nyssa actually complaining,"People swarm everywhere, talking of incomprehensible matters, in hovels, streets and squares, marketplaces and crossroads. When I ask how many oboloi to pay, they answer with hairsplitting arguments about the born and the unborn. If I inquire the price of bread, I am told that the father is greater than the son. I call a servant to tell me whether my bath is ready; he rejoins that the son was created out of nothing."Well, I thought the quotes Mr Jenkins comes up were some more. Well, he does have another quote to the affect of such weird talk. He also indicates that if you want more, look up the references in the notes.Overall, the end of the Roman empire, and the first half of the Dark ages, at least(it's pretty well known that there's a first and second half of the Darks defined by the translations of ancient Greek knowledge in Arab spain around 1000 A.D.) was Christian in house fighting(to the point of calling whole councils to determine someone was heretic) to forcibly converting pagans to Christianity. This happened up to around 700A.D. when the Vikings came. The Vikings(not noted in Philip Jenkins book) were a pagan reaction to the Christians forcibly converting everyone. They were eventually converted to christianity. The Vikings also were not able to conquer the Byzantine walls, much less the Islam Arab southern spain.One interesting character that I wonder if Philip Jenkins got the whole story right about was a Saint John Chrysostom. He just states that he was banished as a heretic by the Christian Alexandrian Cyril and Aelia Eucoxia, wife of Theodosius the 2nd. Curiously, Cyril was responsible for the death of Hypatia(Philip Jenkins shows her death may have come indirectly because of her association with some Roman official Cyril killed). The burning of the books of Alexandria came shortly after the death of Hypatia, for which Saint John Chrysostom has been quoted,"Every trace of the old philosophy and literature of the ancient world has vanished from the face of the earth."[...]Well, Saint Cyril did the dirty work, and then went and banished Saint John Chrysostom later; that christiantiy for you I guess!Back to Aelia Eucoxia and Theodosius, they lest some daughters - Gala Placidia(daughter of Theodosius 1 actually - sorry about that), Licinia Eudoxia, and Pulcheria(sister of Theodosius the 2nd). Galla was taken in by a barbarian who first sacked Rome around 410 A.D. She didn't exactly do any escaping. Those Germanic barbarians just got knocked off. But, her other relatives apparently actually invited in Germanic barbarians to pummel the pagan Rome because they had converted to Christianity. Pulcheria brought in Atilla the Hun for a period. But then, they conveniently got rid of him as well. So, here we have it, Rome was sacked not just by Germanic barbarians, but by Christianity. It was too hard to convert all the pagans(who probably knew the truth of Christianity); so they innovated after while how to use the Germanic barbarians to destroy the old pagan world.

JESUS WARS by Philip JenkinsReview by Tim CampbellJESUS WARS by Philip Jenkins is subtitled "How Five Patriarchs, Three Queens, and Two Emperors Decided What Christians Would Believe for the Next 1,500 Years"To say that the early history of Christianity was filled with intrigue, politics, ambition, greed, jealousy, and bitter violence as multiple groups (and individuals) strived for supremacy would be an understatement! Four major cities (Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria) were the focal points for the "development" of the so-called Orthodoxy that today is still dominant and yet still disputed by the many disparate groups that call themselves "Christian". The Council of Chalcedon in 451 provided what many hoped would be the final word on the nature of Jesus, but for many others was considered a demonic or Satanic promotion of wretched heresy!Confused? I think that may have been the whole point of early Christianity. Depending on which city you called home and which decade of the six centuries from 100CE to 700CE, and which patriarch you called your bishop, you believed in one of several doctrines about the nature of Jesus, and you were perfectly willing to torture, excommunicate, anathematize, or kill anyone who believed differently.As Author Jenkins points out, the nature of Jesus was at the crux of the entire theological dispute that resulted in so much violence and most likely contributed heavily to the downfall of the Roman Empire (or at least changed the Empire's configuration and drew attention from the issues that really mattered for its odds of survival!).JESUS WARS author Philip Jenkins has a joint appointment at Penn State University and Baylor University. He has authored a number of books dealing with early Christianity and in JESUS WARS, Jenkins deals thoroughly and entertainingly with this complex and long-lived subject!Who or what was Jesus? That is the question! And in spite of numerous church councils called to settle the matter, the "settlements" seldom lasted very long, thus necessitating more councils!Was Jesus all-God, or all-Man, or half-God half-Man, or All-God AND all-Man, or some other possible combination? Was God actually at one time a two-month old infant? Was Jesus always God or did he become God at a specific time in his life (at his baptism, for example)? These questions are still being asked today and are still the source of major conflict between Christian sects. From the First Century after the death of Jesus through the Seventh Century, this question found the four major cities of the Roman Empire at odds with each other and within themselves.Eventually, the disputes boiled down to One Nature (monophisites) versus Two Natures, and similarly, the four cities more or less coalesced into two factions: Constantinople and Alexandria on one side, and Rome and Antioch on the other (though this configuration did change at least a few times over the centuries with Rome sometimes the odd man out and sometimes dominant--that is where the politics of the Empire come into play!). Naturally, the idea that Jesus was just an ordinary man was tossed right from the get-go, but since the Bible is anything but clear on the subject, each side brought to bear plenty of Scriptural references to support their own position.Ultimately, however, it was not Scriptural integrity or rationally determining the correct theology. Rather, "volume", "politics", and "force" were the only real factors in determining which "nature" was dominant at any one time."Volume": shout down your opponents. The louder you shout, the more legitimate your position."Politics": gain the ear of the Emperor, either directly or through one of the women at the Imperial Court., thus giving your position the weight of state approval and of course Imperial Law!"Force": Come to the church council with a large group of thug/monks and physically intimidate your opponents. Fists, stones, clubs, and swords are all excellent tools for intellectual debate! If your opponent seems particularly heretical, excommunicate him and then have him stoned to death!And thus, we have Christianity in all its scriptural and holy legitimacy!Jenkins writes well, his book is thorough and highly entertaining. I would certainly recommend it to anyone curious about early Christianity, especially those who believe that there is an unbroken and unblemished line of theological thought leading from one's own congregation directly back to either the Apostles or to Jesus himself. Just be prepared to take a few notes as it really IS difficult to tell the players without a program!TRCJuly 26, 2012

This book is good and having listened to various lectures (cf Prof Jim Papandreas) on youtube on early church fathers this is a good recap but this book is special for me as it deals with Islam at the Gates for the period 7c to 8c thus embracing the life of Muhammad and his immediate followers after this death. Little more rigour would have been good. Any response of the contemporaneous Popes Boniface V and Honorius I to his proclamations? The Byzantine emperor Heraclius is mentioned who was responsive. Before Muhammad there were 5 ecumenical councils and 2 after his death. It would have been a simple matter to explain the Trinity on the sand using 4 pebbles and 6 sticks. The God pebble will be in the centre of the equilateral triangle. It is mystery as to why Muhammad didn't take that up the trinity concept properly as there were 5 ecumenical councils before him - how could God didn't try him? He certainly was exposed to the Nestorians' concept and that too he appears to have rejected. Did he take a simplistic line on One God (Allah) only? Overall a good readable book.

This is an excellent book which gives an incisive coverage of a particular historical period. However, it's not an easy read, it is challenging and an existing background knowledge of the historical period covered would be a desirable pre-requisite. Pity that conjunctions are used to commence sentences and paragraphs!

Excellent. A fascinating read.

This is a really good book on the history of Christian theological battles (in may cases literally, battles) in the 5th and 6th centuries between Christian Popes and Patriarchs over issues like the nature Christ, i.e. was Christ of One Nature (Divine) or was Christ of Two Natures (Divine and Human) and hw these theological issues spilled over into politics in the Eastern and Western Roman Empires.It's a really interesting history, although it is not well known outside specialist academic circles. This author does a very good job explaining the various theological debates, the personalities involved and the political issues resulting from these doctrinal debates between theologians and Churches. He also shows how these debates still surface in modern theology.Overall, a very interesting book.

Whether you are a believer, non-believer, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, or just curious you will get an immense amount of information in a very intelligent and enjoyable way by reading this book. You think we have trouble today with disputes between various Christian denominations? You think we have problems today understanding other faiths so different from our own? This is nothing new! These arguments and fights have been going on since the invention of religion. Religion, the man-made (excuse me for not being politically correct on this) institutions that parade around pretending to be the exclusive way to God, has always been a battle field. Religion, really has nothing to do with God and everything to do with the smallminded individuals that set them up. Philip Jenkins puts all of this into incredible historical detail; none of it boring or sleep inducing. He brings to life the history of early Christianity with warring factions in the new Christian church, battling monks, murder, expulsion and the occasional sex scandal. The disagreements we have today in our churches are as nothing compared to what the beginning looked like. And it sure does explain how Islam got started and spread so quickly.If you have any interest at all in understanding the beginnings of Christianity and all the many problems that seem to accompany this so-called great faith, please read this book. You will begin to understand that what most people hold to be truths directly transmitted from God are really the devious machinations of power hungry men and deceitful women. It's a shocker alright and you will never look upon the so-called "eternal truth" in the same way ever again. That God may act through humble human beings is not in question. That some elements of organized religion may be of some consolation to believers is undeniable. But that Christianity or any religion holds all the truths is just not true.Philip Jenkins has done us all a great service in writing such a highly intelligent and readable book. Your faith will thank you for reading this book.